In defense of Maidana/PBF

[Beanflicker]

What kind of name value does Maidana have? He's not some famous boxing star. He doesn't do huge ratings on TV. He has never even been an A-side of a fight. Remember when Maidana fought Ortiz, Khan, Broner etc., he was the B-side. So, why is Maidana a less-than-optimal opponent? Because there were better opponents out there for Mayweather above 147 and because we've seen Mayweather beat crude sluggers over and over again. Why should Mayweather move up? Because he's the best by far of the available challengers at 147 and he calls himself TBE -- so prove it. This is a waste of a fight on his legacy. It falls in the group of his sub-par defenses, a group that includes Guerrero, Ortiz, and Baldomir, among others. Let's just say this, the Canelo-Mayweather line opened up at 2-1 (closed higher for Mayweather), this fight's line opnened up at 14-1. That's all that really needs to be said. It's shite, gentlemen. Sorry, but it is.

Maidana has a lot of heat from upsetting Broner. Regardless of what you think of Adrien (you predicted a complete domination by Broner), that was a huge upset that got a lot of publicity, particularly on social media. Is he the B-side to Floyd Mayweather? Of course he is. But he has a lot of momentum and name value off of that win.

You say Floyd should move up: ok, answer my initial question - who should he have fought at 154?

[Rantcatrat]

What kind of name value does Maidana have? He's not some famous boxing star. He doesn't do huge ratings on TV. He has never even been an A-side of a fight. Remember when Maidana fought Ortiz, Khan, Broner etc., he was the B-side. So, why is Maidana a less-than-optimal opponent? Because there were better opponents out there for Mayweather above 147 and because we've seen Mayweather beat crude sluggers over and over again. Why should Mayweather move up? Because he's the best by far of the available challengers at 147 and he calls himself TBE -- so prove it. This is a waste of a fight on his legacy. It falls in the group of his sub-par defenses, a group that includes Guerrero, Ortiz, and Baldomir, among others. Let's just say this, the Canelo-Mayweather line opened up at 2-1 (closed higher for Mayweather), this fight's line opnened up at 14-1. That's all that really needs to be said. It's shite, gentlemen. Sorry, but it is.

Maidana has a lot of heat from upsetting Broner. Regardless of what you think of Adrien (you predicted a complete domination by Broner), that was a huge upset that got a lot of publicity, particularly on social media. Is he the B-side to Floyd Mayweather? Of course he is. But he has a lot of momentum and name value off of that win.

You say Floyd should move up: ok, answer my initial question - who should he have fought at 154?

Anyone who fights Floyd is a B-side.

We've agreed and disagreed on too many boxing topics over the years @Beanflicker to think that I wouldn't completely eat crow for my Maidana-Broner. I was wrong then and I'm sure I admitted as much, if I didn't my apologies. In retrospect, I'm an idiot because I should have seen the signs that Broner was overrated. At the time, I thought they were keeping Broner away from boxers after seeing how Paulie and Rees (for three rounds) did against Broner and picked Maidana for a reason. In any event, it was a great win for Maidana, but that doesn't mean he can win a round against Floyd.

Lara (coming off a complete dismantling of Trout), Kirkland (career is resurrected by reuniting with Wolfe and great win over Tapia), Trout (loss to Lara and Canelo but a southpaw, tall, and decent speed), the better Charlo brother, Andrade (former Olympian, has a belt, beat Vanes), even Molina (tough style, draws against Lara, beat Kirkland really, and beat Floyd's guy Ishe), even go for glory and fight Kid Choc for a middleweight strap. I'm not suggesting these guys beat Mayweather, but they're tougher challenges than Maidana at 14-1, they're not with Top Rank, and there are story lines they could gin up for the fight.

[Beanflicker]

Anyone who fights Floyd is a B-side.

We've agreed and disagreed on too many boxing topics over the years @Beanflicker to think that I wouldn't completely eat crow for my Maidana-Broner. I was wrong then and I'm sure I admitted as much, if I didn't my apologies. In retrospect, I'm an idiot because I should have seen the signs that Broner was overrated. At the time, I thought they were keeping Broner away from boxers after seeing how Paulie and Rees (for three rounds) did against Broner and picked Maidana for a reason. In any event, it was a great win for Maidana, but that doesn't mean he can win a round against Floyd.

Lara (coming off a complete dismantling of Trout), Kirkland (career is resurrected by reuniting with Wolfe and great win over Tapia), Trout (loss to Lara and Canelo but a southpaw, tall, and decent speed), the better Charlo brother, Andrade (former Olympian, has a belt, beat Vanes), even Molina (tough style, draws against Lara, beat Kirkland really, and beat Floyd's guy Ishe), even go for glory and fight Kid Choc for a middleweight strap. I'm not suggesting these guys beat Mayweather, but they're tougher challenges than Maidana at 14-1, they're not with Top Rank, and there are story lines they could gin up for the fight.

I'm not trying to throw you under the bus for a bad prediction - I've made plenty of them myself - just trying to illustrate that the upset over Broner was indeed a big win.

And I get what you're saying, there are a lot of guys out there who are tougher fights for Mayweather. But that's not how boxing works, man. You know that. No champion in the history of boxing fought guys just based on how tough they were. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying champions didn't want to test themselves against tough fighters, but there always had to be a significant amount of reward to go along with the risk.

Austin Trout? You're telling me you think a guy coming off of two losses should get a megafight with the sports #1 p4p? Come on.

Charlo? Come on man. He's a young prospect with less than 20 fights and is only now fighting for a world title against Molina. You mean to tell me you'd throw Charlo in there with Floyd before he had his first 12 rounder? Come on, that's insane.

I love James Kirkland, but he's still on the comeback trail in terms of his career. He isn't even ranked in the top 10. Do you really think Floyd should be fighting a guy not even ranked in the top 10 at 154? Where's the logic behind that. Nobody would give two shits about that fight.

Andrade is very promising but again, another young prospect with no name value who just fought and won his first world title (if you can call the WBO a "world title") against another solid fighter with very little name value.

Lara is the only realistic option out of those, and I agree he's the best test for Floyd at 154, but how do you sell that fight? Lara has no name value.

[Silkeyjoe]

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

[Beanflicker]

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

How do you figure that?

[Silkeyjoe]

I think Lara has as much if not more name value than Guerrero and Ortiz did at the time they were fighting Floyd

How do you figure that?

Well he's the guy who just destroyed the guy Canelo is about to face so is well known through that and also known to get a bad decision against Williams in his comeback fight after Martinez.

Guerrero was relatively unknown to casual fans and only known from his close win over Berto. Ortiz known from the foty with Berto an loss to Maidana but certainly a bigger name since fighting Floyd. I just don't see a huge difference in their name powers at the time of the fights.

[Rantcatrat]

Anyone who fights Floyd is a B-side.

We've agreed and disagreed on too many boxing topics over the years @Beanflicker to think that I wouldn't completely eat crow for my Maidana-Broner. I was wrong then and I'm sure I admitted as much, if I didn't my apologies. In retrospect, I'm an idiot because I should have seen the signs that Broner was overrated. At the time, I thought they were keeping Broner away from boxers after seeing how Paulie and Rees (for three rounds) did against Broner and picked Maidana for a reason. In any event, it was a great win for Maidana, but that doesn't mean he can win a round against Floyd.

Lara (coming off a complete dismantling of Trout), Kirkland (career is resurrected by reuniting with Wolfe and great win over Tapia), Trout (loss to Lara and Canelo but a southpaw, tall, and decent speed), the better Charlo brother, Andrade (former Olympian, has a belt, beat Vanes), even Molina (tough style, draws against Lara, beat Kirkland really, and beat Floyd's guy Ishe), even go for glory and fight Kid Choc for a middleweight strap. I'm not suggesting these guys beat Mayweather, but they're tougher challenges than Maidana at 14-1, they're not with Top Rank, and there are story lines they could gin up for the fight.

I'm not trying to throw you under the bus for a bad prediction - I've made plenty of them myself - just trying to illustrate that the upset over Broner was indeed a big win.

And I get what you're saying, there are a lot of guys out there who are tougher fights for Mayweather. But that's not how boxing works, man. You know that. No champion in the history of boxing fought guys just based on how tough they were. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying champions didn't want to test themselves against tough fighters, but there always had to be a significant amount of reward to go along with the risk.

Austin Trout? You're telling me you think a guy coming off of two losses should get a megafight with the sports #1 p4p? Come on.

Charlo? Come on man. He's a young prospect with less than 20 fights and is only now fighting for a world title against Molina. You mean to tell me you'd throw Charlo in there with Floyd before he had his first 12 rounder? Come on, that's insane.

I love James Kirkland, but he's still on the comeback trail in terms of his career. He isn't even ranked in the top 10. Do you really think Floyd should be fighting a guy not even ranked in the top 10 at 154? Where's the logic behind that. Nobody would give two shits about that fight.

Andrade is very promising but again, another young prospect with no name value who just fought and won his first world title (if you can call the WBO a "world title") against another solid fighter with very little name value.

Lara is the only realistic option out of those, and I agree he's the best test for Floyd at 154, but how do you sell that fight? Lara has no name value.

Unless his opponent his Pacquiao, Canelo, or Cotto, the B-side won't have too much effect on the overall sales of the event. Maidana and Lara versus Mayweather wouldn't do much different in sales.

Khan hadn't fought at 147 and isn't ranked at 147, and he was in the running until the very end for a fight against Floyd. Khan also lost two of his last five fights and both of his most recent fights against big name opponents. Maidana right now is ranked # 9 in the Ring Magazine's welterweight ranking. So, I don't think we can count out junior middleweights because they have lost recently or because they are ranked low or are unranked. Andrade also has a belt, for whatever's that's worth. Molina is in everyone's top five at junior middleweight and has been for a while and he beat Ishe Smith, a TMT fighter.

Let's just ask the easy question though: do you think Molina, Andrade, Kirkland, Charlo, or Lara wouldn't pose more of a challenge to Floyd than Maidana?

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

[Beanflicker]

Let's just ask the easy question though: do you think Molina, Andrade, Kirkland, Charlo, or Lara wouldn't pose more of a challenge to Floyd than Maidana?

I already answered that question: yes, I do think there are guys at 154 who pose more of a challenge to Floyd Mayweather than Maidana (Lara being one of them, I would debate Kirkland and Molina though). Would I pick any of those guys you listed to beat Mayweather? No, but I FULLY concede that a fighter like Lara would be a much more interesting matchup stylistically for Floyd than Maidana. I never argued that Maidana posed the greatest threat to Mayweather at 147-154. My argument was that - with Pac, Bradley, Garcia, and several others with fights already booked, and Floyd having beaten several of the other top contenders at 147 and 154 - Maidana was the best choice, in terms of him having momentum and being a legit opponent.

When you're trying to create a big PPV event, there's more to it than just who boxing geeks like us consider the most risky fight. The fighter needs momentum and there needs to be drama and a good story to captivate a mainstream audience. Maidana brings that to the table. He's a credible opponent with a good name value and fan support, who just handed Floyd's "lil brother" his ass.

I'm not giving an opinion, I'm giving facts. Floyd can do bigger business fighting Maidana than Lara, Andrade, or anyone else at 154. To say any "B-side" will do the same buy rates shows a complete lack of understanding for boxing as a business.

And if anyone here wants to believe in the fairy tale nonsense about some past champion fighting "high risk/low reward" guys over "high or medium risk/high reward" guys, you can live in that fantasy world.

Do I think Maidana will beat Mayweather? No, but I don't think Lara, Andrade, Kirkland, Trout, ect would, either.

[Beanflicker]

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

I don't agree that the fight stinks, like I said I think Maidana has certain attributes that have the potential to make the fight somewhat interesting, but I agree it's less than ideal.

To me, it's a stay-busy fight before the Pac/Bradley winner.

[Rantcatrat]

Any way you cut it, whether Maidana was or wasn't the best available pick for an opponent, doesn't mean the fight doesn't stink, man. It's already decided and the outcome is predetermined. $70 PPV for a fight where the odds are 14-1 is more like WWE than a boxing match.

I don't agree that the fight stinks, like I said I think Maidana has certain attributes that have the potential to make the fight somewhat interesting, but I agree it's less than ideal.

To me, it's a stay-busy fight before the Pac/Bradley winner.

We can agree to disagree, my friend. Maidana is a 14-1 underdog for a $70 PPV. I can't even remember when the last time a PPV had fighters so unevenly matched (oh wait, maybe it was Floyd's Guerrero fight, but was only 7-1). It sucks. I don't really know what else to say. I'm a big fan of Maidana and he gives a lot of welterweights a tough out, but he's a more appropriate opponent for Paulie, Garcia, or Thurman, not Floyd Mayweather. When you make $40MM/fight, only fight on PPVs, and are the consensus number one boxer is the sport, do you get to have stay busy fights without some heavy criticism coming your way? I don't think so. Any crap Floyd gets on this fight, he's earned in my opinion.

And I agree with your boxing geeks comment, fights usually don't get made because they are the most compelling match-ups-high risk/low reward fights. Then again, Cotto is going up to 159 to face Martinez...but, that's a different discussion.