-
They're talking GGG-Brant now
"Sanchez says Gennady Golovkin vs. Rob Brant possible for early 2019"
Thoughts? GGG haters will shoot holes in this, but is this really so objectionable? GGG after all, was slated to meet Murata in Japan... only Brant got to him first. So now they're targeting the guy who beat Murata. Seems fair to me. Meanwhile, let's not forget Canelo going up to 168 to meet the feared Fielding. The article also talks about a possible timeline for GGG-Canelo III (if it happens) by Sept 2019. I personally have no interest in seeing this again. GGG will be what.... 37 1/2? Ancient for a middleweight, especially one with GGG's miles on his odometer. The only way I'd even consider being interested in the trilogy would be if it happened out of Vegas/Texas/Mexico/California. MSG would be acceptable. With judges NOT appointed by the WBC. Still.... GGG runs the risk of finally hitting the wall..... and Canelo would be vindicated for life.... saying he knew he won all 3 fights all along. Now THAT would be a frigging nightmare. No. I'd rather Canelo earn his DAZN millions the hard way, taking on real competition at either 160 or 168. But as far as GGG taking on Brant next, I got no problem with that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoJSAvQbqc0
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
It makes perfect sense for any top middleweight to fight Brant, who proved himself a top middleweight.
Personally I think Golovkin is slipping a little (naturally with age) but the way some are writing him off is silly. He's still favourite over everyone at 160.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
Why? Maybe just playing devil's advocate but why? Other than having fought the undersized Brook, and his insistence of fighting Canelo again in VEGAS, I see nothing wrong with his record. Why does GGG have to fight one of three fighters of our choosing right now? It seems a different bar than we hold for other fighters. I wish other 160-pounders were held to the same strict conditions. Fight X, Y, or Z right NOW, or retire! Just seems rather double-standardish. Not trying to yank your chain, but GGG gets a lot of hate that should be reserved for those who REALLY do the blatant ducking.
Reasons have been given as to why GGG and Charlo haven't met yet. Charlo is a relative newcomer to middleweight, but the bandwagon wants GGG to fight him NOW. What's the huge hurry and why is GGG the chosen one? All I know is I'd like to see the same level of indignity poured on any other 160 who prances around picking and choosing.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
Why? Maybe just playing devil's advocate but why? Other than having fought the undersized Brook, and his insistence of fighting Canelo again in VEGAS, I see nothing wrong with his record. Why does GGG
have to fight one of three fighters of our choosing right now? It seems a different bar than we hold for other fighters. I wish other 160-pounders were held to the same strict conditions. Fight X, Y, or Z right NOW, or retire! Just seems rather double-standardish. Not trying to yank your chain, but GGG gets a lot of hate that should be reserved for those who REALLY do the blatant ducking.
Reasons have been given as to why GGG and Charlo haven't met yet. Charlo is a relative newcomer to middleweight, but the bandwagon wants GGG to fight him NOW. What's the huge hurry and why is GGG the chosen one? All I know is I'd like to see the same level of indignity poured on any other 160 who prances around picking and choosing.
I never said anything was wrong with his record. but at his age , only meaningful fights should happen. Brant is a champion, so OK that counts , no problem.
But after years of saying he wanted all the belts at MW before doing anything else , he backtracked completely and fought Canelo (who had fuck all belts) for the dollar signs lighting up in his eyes. that's ok , but when you sell your soul to the devil , don't go bleating about it afterwards when it doesn't go your way.
I had no problem with either decision personally, but he knew he wouldn't get a fair shake in Vegas and still signed up ......TWICE!
now they talk about "for the right fight he could go SMW, and that could be Smith." well when Ward wanted him , I was all on GGG's side because it didn't make sense giving up all that size to a class boxer like Ward. But Smith is fucking bigger, a lot bigger, and all of a sudden , they would think about it.
if that's not cherry picking, I don't know what is.
GGG may have earned big money in the last couple of years, but in my opinion , at a cost to his legacy. you can't have it all.
my big problem is that whoever he fights, whoever he beats, it's all with a view to getting Canelo again, and all I see there is another fight that delays the division moving forward. That should not be his priority.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
btw, I don't hate GGG, far from it. But I am disappointed with the way his career has gone and the people around him.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Not that I’m saying that GGG ducked fighters throughout his reign, but he has more legitimate fights to be made now since the division is getting deeper. That’s why I want him to fight the top tier guys instead of someone like Brant. I get that the fight makes some sense, but if he fights Brant, he will probably never fight Charlo, Andrade, BJS, or Jacobs (rematch) because of age.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
Murata was okay because he brought money, not because he was good. Now Brant is okay because he beat Murata. And people don’t see what’s wrong. It’s astounding what people will close their eyes to for this guy. Reminds me of when they built up Gabe Rosado, or the next guy or the next guy or.
It will never stop, every possible opponent is okay because of whatever reason they say now.
It’s fine. But some of us get the chance to sit back and say “this guys career is a disappointment not because he is a bad fight but because of all the weak opponents he chose and the constant double talk”
I can’t think of any fighter who more consistently disappointed me than Gennady Golovkin. Not being remotely sarcastic. He truly is the greatest disappointment I can think of in terms of ability vs what he did with his ability.
Rob Brant, SMDH, I joked about this sarcastically and now here it is. Never stop lowering the bar. Errol Spence’s 2nd best sparring partner is being discussed as Gennady Golovkin’s next opponent and it’s cool with people.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Lmao HUH hate brigade out in full force today
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
Now thats just silly lmao
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Slim the BoxingManiac
Lmao HUH hate brigade out in full force today
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
GGG should either try to fight Charlo , Jacobs or Andrade . If none of these can be made , he should fucking retire.
Now thats just silly lmao
Ok. It’s silly, whatever. I later said Brant is now a champ, so that’s ok. But if it’s not Brant and all the above are silly, go on then, amuse me, who do you think he should fight? And who do you think is acceptable?
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Primo Carnera
btw, I don't hate GGG, far from it. But I am disappointed with the way his career has gone and the people around him.
There's guys for him to fight, he needs to forget making a legacy as a champion right now and focus on legacy as a fighter....PLENTY of people for him to fight, don't know if he'll buzzsaw through them though being older and more battleworn.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
You haven’t caught on Primo? Whoever they suggest is acceptable. All we know for sure is it won’t be someone we want. It will just suddenly be good enough.
Watch,,,,,
Who here called for a Brant fight 3 weeks ago? Who had it in their top 5 most wanted? Who would even say it was in their top 10 most wanted?
Somehow it’s hate to want this guy to realize his potential. Boxing fans have lost their way. Take ODLH, I was a hater because I didn’t think he was as good as everyone said. Really f’n good but not as good as thought. But I recognize dude took on a who’s who in the sport. This guy that should be lauded by fans of the sport is called fishnets more often than Oscar. As if his undergarments are more important than consistently fighting the best. It’s completely warped. We boxing fans are broken
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Somehow it’s hate to want this guy to realize his potential. Boxing fans have lost their way. Take ODLH, I was a hater because I didn’t think he was as good as everyone said. Really f’n good but not as good as thought. But I recognize dude took on a who’s who in the sport. This guy that should be lauded by fans of the sport is called fishnets more often than Oscar. As if his undergarments are more important than consistently fighting the best. It’s completely warped. We boxing fans are broken
As a promoter, the guy who was going to "change the game" he's been a real piece of shit.
I don't call the guy anything other than Oscar...I think he got shafted by the judges a couple times in his career in big fights, and as a promoter he's seen fit to job others in big fights.....kinda shitty.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Somehow it’s hate to want this guy to realize his potential. Boxing fans have lost their way. Take ODLH, I was a hater because I didn’t think he was as good as everyone said. Really f’n good but not as good as thought. But I recognize dude took on a who’s who in the sport. This guy that should be lauded by fans of the sport is called fishnets more often than Oscar. As if his undergarments are more important than consistently fighting the best. It’s completely warped. We boxing fans are broken
As a promoter, the guy who was going to "change the game" he's been a real piece of shit.
I don't call the guy anything other than Oscar...I think he got shafted by the judges a couple times in his career in big fights, and as a promoter he's seen fit to job others in big fights.....kinda shitty.
Nail on head right there. He was prematurely seen as the savior of boxing from the evil promoters King and Arum. New blood for the promoting part of the sport. And all he's done is drive it completely into the toilet. I could care less if he wears fishnets, mascara, has a fetish for kitchen utensils.... whatever. In his private life he can do what he chooses. But he's been a woeful disappointment as a promoter and all the promise to "change the game" has gone down the same toilet. F*ck 'im.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
Somehow it’s hate to want this guy to realize his potential. Boxing fans have lost their way. Take ODLH, I was a hater because I didn’t think he was as good as everyone said. Really f’n good but not as good as thought. But I recognize dude took on a who’s who in the sport. This guy that should be lauded by fans of the sport is called fishnets more often than Oscar. As if his undergarments are more important than consistently fighting the best. It’s completely warped. We boxing fans are broken
As a promoter, the guy who was going to "change the game" he's been a real piece of shit.
I don't call the guy anything other than Oscar...I think he got shafted by the judges a couple times in his career in big fights, and as a promoter he's seen fit to job others in big fights.....kinda shitty.
Nail on head right there. He was prematurely seen as the savior of boxing from the evil promoters King and Arum. New blood for the promoting part of the sport. And all he's done is drive it completely into the toilet. I could care less if he wears fishnets, mascara, has a fetish for kitchen utensils.... whatever. In his private life he can do what he chooses. But he's been a woeful disappointment as a promoter and all the promise to "change the game" has gone down the same toilet. F*ck 'im.
Fair enough. I don’t even think about him as a promoter because there is nothing worthy of thinking about.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
FTR in a vacuum I have no problem with a Brant fight. It’s when you look it it through the scope of years and years of not taking on the very best that it’s bothersome. And I don’t care to hear about who didn’t want to fight him. I only care about who he could fight and chose not to. And I only care about that because I’ve always thought very highly of him as a fighter. My issue with GGG is the endless run of uninspiring opponents. And how it is all explained away. Right now he can choose ANYONE. Right now he should choose the best opponents.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
FTR in a vacuum I have no problem with a Brant fight. It’s when you look it it through the scope of years and years of not taking on the very best that it’s bothersome. And I don’t care to hear about who didn’t want to fight him. I only care about who he could fight and chose not to. And I only care about that because I’ve always thought very highly of him as a fighter. My issue with GGG is the endless run of uninspiring opponents. And how it is all explained away. Right now he can choose ANYONE. Right now he should choose the best opponents.
I have to keep reminding myself of that because your rants are pretty hard. (That's not a criticism, by the way). Because as hard as you rant about GGG not fighting certain people, I rarely see you rant about "the other guy" moving up to fight Fielding. So I tell myself it's because you don't think very highly of him as a fighter. If so, then we're on the same page because I certainly don't. Nor do I respect his own "years and years of not taking on the very best". Most of what you wrote I apply one-million-fold to "the other guy." In all honesty, I'd love to see GGG-Jacobs II, GGG-Andrade, or even GGG-Charlo, although like I said Charlo is a newcomer to the division.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
To your first question, I would like to see a 3rd fight, I wasn't really interested in the rematch as I thought GGG had won the first, but GGG was getting a good payday and the chance to correct the wrong, so I wasn't that fussed.
The 2nd fight was really good and I would like to see a repeat of that. GGG has slipped enough and Canelo has improved enough to where a 3rd fight is 50/50 and has the makings of another exciting gruelling battle. And again it would be another big payday for GGG and Canelo I guess is the 'champion'.
That's not saying that I wouldn't want see GGG fight Jacobs, Charlo, Saunders, Andrade or Brant, but Canelo 2 was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs, Andrade and Brant fights don't strike me as barn burners.
It also depends on what network GGG goes with. ESPN could get him Brant, Showtime could get him Charlo, DAZN gets him closer to Canelo, and could get him Jacobs, Andrade etc.
I would also like to see some of these other guys fight each other as well.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
To your first question, I would like to see a 3rd fight, I wasn't really interested in the rematch as I thought GGG had won the first, but GGG was getting a good payday and the chance to correct the wrong, so I wasn't that fussed.
The 2nd fight was really good and I would like to see a repeat of that. GGG has slipped enough and Canelo has improved enough to where a 3rd fight is 50/50 and has the makings of another exciting gruelling battle. And again it would be another big payday for GGG and Canelo I guess is the 'champion'.
That's not saying that I wouldn't want see GGG fight Jacobs, Charlo, Saunders, Andrade or Brant, but Canelo 2 was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs, Andrade and Brant fights don't strike me as barn burners.
It also depends on what network GGG goes with. ESPN could get him Brant, Showtime could get him Charlo, DAZN gets him closer to Canelo, and could get him Jacobs, Andrade etc.
I would also like to see some of these other guys fight each other as well.
I get all of that, but are you wanting a third Canelo fight only because of judging sake? Because if GGG got the decision in both fights, I would be shocked if you or anybody else would be saying a third fight between the two were anywhere near acceptable over GGG fighting other top fighters.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
To your first question, I would like to see a 3rd fight, I wasn't really interested in the rematch as I thought GGG had won the first, but GGG was getting a good payday and the chance to correct the wrong, so I wasn't that fussed.
The 2nd fight was really good and I would like to see a repeat of that. GGG has slipped enough and Canelo has improved enough to where a 3rd fight is 50/50 and has the makings of another exciting gruelling battle. And again it would be another big payday for GGG and Canelo I guess is the 'champion'.
That's not saying that I wouldn't want see GGG fight Jacobs, Charlo, Saunders, Andrade or Brant, but Canelo 2 was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs, Andrade and Brant fights don't strike me as barn burners.
It also depends on what network GGG goes with. ESPN could get him Brant, Showtime could get him Charlo, DAZN gets him closer to Canelo, and could get him Jacobs, Andrade etc.
I would also like to see some of these other guys fight each other as well.
I get all of that, but are you wanting a third Canelo fight only because of judging sake? Because if GGG got the decision in both fights, I would be shocked if you or anybody else would be saying a third fight between the two were anywhere near acceptable over GGG fighting other top fighters.
No not for judging sake, based off the last fight, I want to see that again. As I said, it was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs. Which is the fight I would like to see GGG take next.
Let's be realistic, if GGG signs to fight 1 of these guys, let's say it is Jacobs. There is no reason that fights between the likes of Charlo, Andrade, Brant, Derevyanchenko, Saunders can't happen. We could at least hope for at least 1 other fight to be made between those guys.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
To your first question, I would like to see a 3rd fight, I wasn't really interested in the rematch as I thought GGG had won the first, but GGG was getting a good payday and the chance to correct the wrong, so I wasn't that fussed.
The 2nd fight was really good and I would like to see a repeat of that. GGG has slipped enough and Canelo has improved enough to where a 3rd fight is 50/50 and has the makings of another exciting gruelling battle. And again it would be another big payday for GGG and Canelo I guess is the 'champion'.
That's not saying that I wouldn't want see GGG fight Jacobs, Charlo, Saunders, Andrade or Brant, but Canelo 2 was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs, Andrade and Brant fights don't strike me as barn burners.
It also depends on what network GGG goes with. ESPN could get him Brant, Showtime could get him Charlo, DAZN gets him closer to Canelo, and could get him Jacobs, Andrade etc.
I would also like to see some of these other guys fight each other as well.
I get all of that, but are you wanting a third Canelo fight only because of judging sake? Because if GGG got the decision in both fights, I would be shocked if you or anybody else would be saying a third fight between the two were anywhere near acceptable over GGG fighting other top fighters.
No not for judging sake, based off the last fight, I want to see that again. As I said, it was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs. Which is the fight I would like to see GGG take next.
Let's be realistic, if GGG signs to fight 1 of these guys, let's say it is Jacobs. There is no reason that fights between the likes of Charlo, Andrade, Brant, Derevyanchenko, Saunders can't happen. We could at least hope for at least 1 other fight to be made between those guys.
I for sure agree that these guys should fight each other too. I’m not disputing that. GGG is at the end of his career and finally has a good crop of MWs to pick from and it will be disappointing if he doesn’t fight them before getting too old. Canelo also should be fighting top MWs instead of going up and fighting a less than stellar fighter.
I also understand that networks are an obvious roadblock for certain fights being made, but it’s just hard to believe you when you say that you would prefer GGG-Canelo 3 (if GGG had officially won both fights) instead of them both facing other MWs. Entertainment is a big part of sports, and I like brawls as much as the next guy, but I would much rather see who the best is rather than seeing two guys keep fighting each other and avoiding the other guys in the division.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I got one wouldn't be happy with a Brant fight, Murata brought big money and a title, which made sense for GGG and his family. Funny thing is, I'd see GGG making the same dollars for a Jacobs, Charlo, or Andrade fight, as he would fighting Brant. Saunders is suspended for 6 months.
I'd love to see him face Jacobs next, then face Canelo in Sep.
Here’s my problem with a third Canelo fight. Let’s say that GGG got the decision in both fights. Let’s pretend that the judges saw it like 85% of the spectators. Would facing Canelo a third time really be a fight you would be calling for?
That’s my problem. They were entertaining fights, but I would much rather see him fight another top middleweight that he hasn’t fought before or even Jacobs who has earned a rematch because of how close the first fight was. I don’t take bad judging into account when I rank who the best fighters are or who they should fight in the future
To your first question, I would like to see a 3rd fight, I wasn't really interested in the rematch as I thought GGG had won the first, but GGG was getting a good payday and the chance to correct the wrong, so I wasn't that fussed.
The 2nd fight was really good and I would like to see a repeat of that. GGG has slipped enough and Canelo has improved enough to where a 3rd fight is 50/50 and has the makings of another exciting gruelling battle. And again it would be another big payday for GGG and Canelo I guess is the 'champion'.
That's not saying that I wouldn't want see GGG fight Jacobs, Charlo, Saunders, Andrade or Brant, but Canelo 2 was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs, Andrade and Brant fights don't strike me as barn burners.
It also depends on what network GGG goes with. ESPN could get him Brant, Showtime could get him Charlo, DAZN gets him closer to Canelo, and could get him Jacobs, Andrade etc.
I would also like to see some of these other guys fight each other as well.
I get all of that, but are you wanting a third Canelo fight only because of judging sake? Because if GGG got the decision in both fights, I would be shocked if you or anybody else would be saying a third fight between the two were anywhere near acceptable over GGG fighting other top fighters.
No not for judging sake, based off the last fight, I want to see that again. As I said, it was more entertaining for me than GGG/Jacobs. Which is the fight I would like to see GGG take next.
Let's be realistic, if GGG signs to fight 1 of these guys, let's say it is Jacobs. There is no reason that fights between the likes of Charlo, Andrade, Brant, Derevyanchenko, Saunders can't happen. We could at least hope for at least 1 other fight to be made between those guys.
I for sure agree that these guys should fight each other too. I’m not disputing that. GGG is at the end of his career and finally has a good crop of MWs to pick from and it will be disappointing if he doesn’t fight them before getting too old. Canelo also should be fighting top MWs instead of going up and fighting a less than stellar fighter.
I also understand that networks are an obvious roadblock for certain fights being made, but it’s just hard to believe you when you say that you would prefer GGG-Canelo 3 (if GGG had officially won both fights) instead of them both facing other MWs. Entertainment is a big part of sports, and I like brawls as much as the next guy, but I would much rather see who the best is rather than seeing two guys keep fighting each other and avoiding the other guys in the division.
Like I said, I didn't really care for the rematch but it happened and here we are. After seeing the 2nd fight, I think a 3rd will be awesome.
Had GGG won both fights, I'd still like to see a third, because it's a good fight between 2 top guys. And I'm sure would still GGG's biggest payday.
I would have preferred GGG to face Jacobs in a rematch, rather than the Canelo rematch, but that didn't happen. Now I'd prefer to see him face Jacobs and then Canelo in September. I don't see anything wrong with that.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
FTR in a vacuum I have no problem with a Brant fight. It’s when you look it it through the scope of years and years of not taking on the very best that it’s bothersome. And I don’t care to hear about who didn’t want to fight him. I only care about who he could fight and chose not to. And I only care about that because I’ve always thought very highly of him as a fighter. My issue with GGG is the endless run of uninspiring opponents. And how it is all explained away. Right now he can choose ANYONE. Right now he should choose the best opponents.
Jacobs
Canelo
Canelo
In three of his last four fights Golovkin has faced top three ranked middleweights, he's done exactly what you're claiming he hasn't.
Now we all know you don't hate Golovkin, don't worry, Ron, we know you DO NOT hate Golovkin, but it seems from the evidence above that even when Golovkin has faced the best guys available you claim he hasn't.
Unfortunately, Ron, there's not a serious boxing fan on earth who can make a case for Charlo being a bigger fight for Golovkin than those two. Swap either for Charlo and Golovkin's resume/status becomes weaker.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
FTR in a vacuum I have no problem with a Brant fight. It’s when you look it it through the scope of years and years of not taking on the very best that it’s bothersome. And I don’t care to hear about who didn’t want to fight him. I only care about who he could fight and chose not to. And I only care about that because I’ve always thought very highly of him as a fighter. My issue with GGG is the endless run of uninspiring opponents. And how it is all explained away. Right now he can choose ANYONE. Right now he should choose the best opponents.
Jacobs
Canelo
Canelo
In three of his last four fights Golovkin has faced top three ranked middleweights, he's done exactly what you're claiming he hasn't.
Now we all know you don't hate Golovkin, don't worry, Ron, we know you DO NOT hate Golovkin, but it seems from the evidence above that even when Golovkin has faced the best guys available you claim he hasn't.
Unfortunately, Ron, there's not a serious boxing fan on earth who can make a case for Charlo being a bigger fight for Golovkin than those two. Swap either for Charlo and Golovkin's resume/status becomes weaker.
I knew you couldn’t resist your chance to try to deceive everyone.
In one argument it’s all what you’ve done at a weight. Well what the f has Canelo done at the weight? Let’s look
Cotto, was never a real MW, win
GGG, lost and got a BS decision
GGG, most feel he lost again
So by most accounts he is 1-2 with exactly 0 wins against a real MW. By your method he clearly is not one of the best MWs.
Everyone here recognizes I am not saying Charlo is the only fight. But again you attempt to deceive. It’s what you do.
Tell us again how good Murata is. Tell us how good Brant is. Or maybe it isn’t about how good they are at all, how completely off the point of sport that is.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
This has turned into a pretty good argument. ;D
Ron, I'd put out there the thought that sometimes it sounds like GGG only has one or two fights left in his future. That's the only way I can comprehend your insistence that GGG fight Charlo NOW. I could understand if GGG were feasting on the old, undersized, weaker members of the herd..... but that's just not the case. Let's not forget that GGG did face Jacobs only a few fights ago, early last year. This all tends to get swept under the rug. Some people, apparently including yourself, get put off by the Canelo dilogy with potential of becoming a trilogy. They were both great fights, particularly the 2nd one, if you excuse the blatant robberies. GGG got a lot more notoriety and recognition (and money) than he would've ever gotten without Canelo in his life. More casuals know GGG now than they ever did before. But back on point. GGG isn't talking about retirement yet. Let him do Brant, then let's see where he goes from there. I'll guarantee you this.... he won't be dredging the bottom of the barrel looking for a "legacy defining" fight.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
Can we justify Centeno or Monroe? Both very far from desired.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
Can we justify Centeno or Monroe? Both very far from desired.
I think the difference is that GGG can basically have his pick because everybody is lining up to fight him. No one is lining up to fight Charlo because he is a high risk low reward fight. I think once Charlo breaks through, he will take big fights.
I just think that GGG is looking at the money at this point in his career (understandably) and that’s why he can take an easy fight (Brant) and stall until a third Canelo fight. I get his reasoning, but as a fan of the sport, I want to see GGG other fighters.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
Can we justify Centeno or Monroe? Both very far from desired.
I think the difference is that GGG can basically have his pick because everybody is lining up to fight him. No one is lining up to fight Charlo because he is a high risk low reward fight. I think once Charlo breaks through, he will take big fights.
I just think that GGG is looking at the money at this point in his career (understandably) and that’s why he can take an easy fight (Brant) and stall until a third Canelo fight. I get his reasoning, but as a fan of the sport, I want to see GGG other fighters.
Your last sentence is bang on, we all would do the same, try to set our families and ourselves up for the future. It's not the easiest way to make a living.
Can I ask who you would like GGG to fight next, if you could make it happen?
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
Can we justify Centeno or Monroe? Both very far from desired.
I think the difference is that GGG can basically have his pick because everybody is lining up to fight him. No one is lining up to fight Charlo because he is a high risk low reward fight. I think once Charlo breaks through, he will take big fights.
I just think that GGG is looking at the money at this point in his career (understandably) and that’s why he can take an easy fight (Brant) and stall until a third Canelo fight. I get his reasoning, but as a fan of the sport, I want to see GGG other fighters.
Your last sentence is bang on, we all would do the same, try to set our families and ourselves up for the future. It's not the easiest way to make a living.
Can I ask who you would like GGG to fight next, if you could make it happen?
Depends on when he fights. If he is waiting for a September fight with Canelo, then he can take a little more of a break. I would rather he fights Charlo (my #1 choice) or Jacobs in April. I would be completely fine with Andrade though. BJS is a good fight too, but he messed himself up. I would also still be happy with Derevyanchenko. Brant is easily behind those fighters.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Swanson
This really is quite simple. Nobody was saying “what I really want to see is GGG vs Murata”, sure it makes sense and can be justified but it wasn’t the fight anyone wanted.
That falls off the table and again we get a name that can be justified but again it isn’t one of the fights anyone wanted.
When you constantly have to defend without consideration to best opponents you have to resort to tricks like Fenster or acknowledge there are fights we want and are not getting, and have not been getting. Brant is an okay fight but it isn’t among the desired fights, Murata was an okay fight but not amongst the desired fights.
Can we justify Centeno or Monroe? Both very far from desired.
I think the difference is that GGG can basically have his pick because everybody is lining up to fight him. No one is lining up to fight Charlo because he is a high risk low reward fight. I think once Charlo breaks through, he will take big fights.
I just think that GGG is looking at the money at this point in his career (understandably) and that’s why he can take an easy fight (Brant) and stall until a third Canelo fight. I get his reasoning, but as a fan of the sport, I want to see GGG other fighters.
Your last sentence is bang on, we all would do the same, try to set our families and ourselves up for the future. It's not the easiest way to make a living.
Can I ask who you would like GGG to fight next, if you could make it happen?
Depends on when he fights. If he is waiting for a September fight with Canelo, then he can take a little more of a break. I would rather he fights Charlo (my #1 choice) or Jacobs in April. I would be completely fine with Andrade though. BJS is a good fight too, but he messed himself up. I would also still be happy with Derevyanchenko. Brant is easily behind those fighters.
I would prefer a Jacobs rematch, they are arguably the 2 best in the division. But again its a guy GGG has fought before.
If it was someone who he hadn't yet fought, then Derevyanchenko would be my preference.
GGG could go with ESPN and fight Ramirez at 168, to add another name to the mix.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
I think GGG would be competitive with anyone at 168 right now. And if he signed to fight Ramirez next, I'd pick GGG to knock him out. Obviously ESPN has been trying to interest him, so they may be trying to dangle Ramirez to entice him. If the $$$ are right why shouldn't he take Ramirez at 168?
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
I think GGG would be competitive with anyone at 168 right now. And if he signed to fight Ramirez next, I'd pick GGG to knock him out. Obviously ESPN has been trying to interest him, so they may be trying to dangle Ramirez to entice him. If the $$$ are right why shouldn't he take Ramirez at 168?
You really think a fighter who spends his entire career at MW can just up and be successful against the best at 168? I think weight jumps are best done in a fighter's prime or close to it. If GGG were to be halfway successful at 168, I'd say it was due partly to the relative lack of talent at that weight versus other divisions. Not knocking GGG, as I'm a big fan.... and there's something to be said for a fighter staying at one weight. But moving to 168 now would seem just weird.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
I think GGG would be competitive with anyone at 168 right now. And if he signed to fight Ramirez next, I'd pick GGG to knock him out. Obviously ESPN has been trying to interest him, so they may be trying to dangle Ramirez to entice him. If the $$$ are right why shouldn't he take Ramirez at 168?
You really think a fighter who spends his entire career at MW can just up and be successful against the best at 168? I think weight jumps are best done in a fighter's prime or close to it. If GGG were to be halfway successful at 168, I'd say it was due partly to the relative lack of talent at that weight versus other divisions. Not knocking GGG, as I'm a big fan.... and there's something to be said for a fighter staying at one weight. But moving to 168 now would seem just weird.
Most fighters these days tend to move up as they age. Don't see why it would be such a huge difference for GGG. I'm not saying he should, or that a Ramirez fight is a fight I'd be interested in, just that it's another option on the table for GGG. I think he needs to go with DAZN, they now have all the 160 titles.
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
I think GGG would be competitive with anyone at 168 right now. And if he signed to fight Ramirez next, I'd pick GGG to knock him out. Obviously ESPN has been trying to interest him, so they may be trying to dangle Ramirez to entice him. If the $$$ are right why shouldn't he take Ramirez at 168?
You really think a fighter who spends his entire career at MW can just up and be successful against the best at 168? I think weight jumps are best done in a fighter's prime or close to it. If GGG were to be halfway successful at 168, I'd say it was due partly to the relative lack of talent at that weight versus other divisions. Not knocking GGG, as I'm a big fan.... and there's something to be said for a fighter staying at one weight. But moving to 168 now would seem just weird.
Most fighters these days tend to move up as they age. Don't see why it would be such a huge difference for GGG. I'm not saying he should, or that a Ramirez fight is a fight I'd be interested in, just that it's another option on the table for GGG. I think he needs to go with DAZN, they now have all the 160 titles.
Golovkins never really been a big middleweight though, has he?
-
Re: They're talking GGG-Brant now
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Slim the BoxingManiac
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
powerpuncher
I think 168 is just too big for GGG. Especially at this age. He will be giving up his power most likely which will be a huge disadvantage for him. I’m not that high on Ramirez, but I think he could turn it into a war and make GGG very uncomfortable.
I agree with this. People seem to forget GGG has fought at MW his entire career. Talking about Canelo going up to 168 vs. GGG going up to 168 is like apples and oranges. GGG is an older fighter. There's no sense in him at this stage of his career to look at anything at 168. Which is why talk years past of him meeting Ward at 168 was nonsensical to me. GGG would be destroyed at 168 by some of the fast, big punchers up there.
I think GGG would be competitive with anyone at 168 right now. And if he signed to fight Ramirez next, I'd pick GGG to knock him out. Obviously ESPN has been trying to interest him, so they may be trying to dangle Ramirez to entice him. If the $$$ are right why shouldn't he take Ramirez at 168?
You really think a fighter who spends his entire career at MW can just up and be successful against the best at 168? I think weight jumps are best done in a fighter's prime or close to it. If GGG were to be halfway successful at 168, I'd say it was due partly to the relative lack of talent at that weight versus other divisions. Not knocking GGG, as I'm a big fan.... and there's something to be said for a fighter staying at one weight. But moving to 168 now would seem just weird.
Most fighters these days tend to move up as they age. Don't see why it would be such a huge difference for GGG. I'm not saying he should, or that a Ramirez fight is a fight I'd be interested in, just that it's another option on the table for GGG. I think he needs to go with DAZN, they now have all the 160 titles.
Golovkins never really been a big middleweight though, has he?
No he hasn't, but I think he's more than capable of beating Ramirez.
