Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
Quote Originally Posted by shza View Post
I'm betting Bute-Hopkins is the fight that will get made. Hopkins has been saying that's the fight he wants ever since the Dawson fiasco. And Hopkins has said throughout that the fight would happen in Montreal. Personally, I'd rather see Bute/Froch (and Hopkins/Dawson -- I'm in that minority), but I think Hopkins/Bute may be the more competitive (if less exciting) fight.
Has everyone read what Ward said about facing Hopkins? He said that it didn't make sense to face Hopkins because if you beat Hopkins, the critics will say that Hopkins was an old man, and thus, the win doesn't mean much. If you loses to Hopkins, the critics say you are overrated and should face a young gun. So, what's the upside to Bute facing him?
1. I disagree with Ward that critics would say a win over Hopkins "doesn't mean much." He just beat Pacal (twice, if the first one had been scored right) and there's a reason Dawson is gunning so hard to try to get a rematch. BHop's certainly past his prime but I'd still pick him to beat Bute at this point -- and would give Bute huge credit if he pulled off what I'd consider an upset; more credit than I'd give him for beating Carl Froch, for sure.

2. If the headline of this thread is true and Showtime won't put up money for Froch/Bute, then the most obvious upside for Bute (in addition to the above) is money -- since Hopkins brings more than any other potential opponent (despite not being a huge PPV king).