Floyd Mayweather vs Conor McGregor confirmed for August 26th in Vegas

[Strongside]

This is going to make a STUPID amount of money.

https://sports.yahoo.com/floyd-maywe...205101486.html

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

I'd have to argue otherwise on the first part. I think there's a group that actually enjoys the technical side, but that group is much smaller. A large majority says hurr this guy gon get ****d up lmbo

Ken Shamrock did a lot for the sport by being in the WWF during that era.

Let me know if you need any help getting down off your high horse

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by vailpass

I grew up watching boxing in the 70sand 80s when it was exciting. The sweet science has been on the decline ever since and is being replaced by the MMA. Some boxing purists don't want to hear that but it's fact. I'd love to see boxing get fun again but until it does it will continue to languish.

It comes down to star power.

Boxing has suffered since the turn of the century while the UFC was overflowing with marketable stars. Boxing needs a real, money long time feud and it'll be right back in the saddle.

Originally Posted by Easy 6

Let me know if you need any help getting down off your high horse

I'm good. Thanks for your concern.

[New World Order]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I think there is a significant portion of the MMA fanbase that appreciates the skill behind the sport, but a sizable portion of that fanbase (and I'd argue, a large majority) seems to be transplanted wrestling fans from the Attitude Era that loved it for the blood and garbage matches, and MMA offers the closest analogue to that violence without the artifice of booked matches.

But everyone loves to see a good fight; it doesn't matter if it's boxing or mma.

I mean why have the boxing heads praised the Ward/Gatti trilogy and trashed Mayweather/Pac?

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I'm saying that boxing is a sport with rules, not a street fight. MMA also has rules, but many in here seem to want a fight where the rules (low blows, rabbit punches) don't apply. If that's what you want, watch a street fight.

Meh, I'd just say MMA more closely resembles the "fights" people have been involved in or watched. The fact that the boxing industry/community has always called itself a "fight" ("Friday night at the fights"), well, maybe they should have been more clear and reminded people that they aren't associated with fighting.

I'm not lost on your point, but to suggest that MMA doesn't have a shit-ton of rules that keep it separate from a street fight in ridiculous. Who in a street fight wouldn't punch a guy in the back of the head if he were stupid enough to lay on his tummy? Who wouldn't knee a guy on the ground in the temple in a street fight. And who would honor a tap-out in a street fight? (Very few wouldn't at least get one more punch in, or finish putting the guy he's fighting to sleep)

But yes, MMA closer to a fight, and it's much more fun to watch IMHO.

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

MMA is for people who think they are too cool for wrestling and douchebags in Affliction shirts.

I coach wrestling and wear Scuba shirts (and hockey t-shirts, and scout t-shirts, and football t-shirts, and football t-shirts, and wrestling t-shirts), but thanks for playing..

All from teams I've coached...

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by vailpass

When boxing was popular is it your opinion that all fans were connoisseurs of the sport and none just wanted to see two guys beat the hell out of each other?

Of course not. But who flocked to Tyson fights? Who flocked to Mayweather-Pacquiao for the wrong reason?

Casuals. Casuals flocked to Tyson fights because of the explicit violence and the way he broke down heavyweights in spectacular fashion. Casuals were disappointed with Mayweather-Pacquiao because it was a defensive fight, which is why no-one ever bought Bernard Hopkins fights, despite him being one of the three best fighters of the last generation.

Hagler-Hearnes was a technically poor fight that everyone loved for the violence of it.

The difference is that modern boxing is followed by connoisseurs, the same guys that appreciated RJJ throughout his career, or Terrence Crawford now. The draw of violence flowed from boxing to pro wrestling to MMA.

[Demonpenz]

The people that watch UFC don't know anything about wrasslin exept for like Hogan and Macho man. It is mostly engineers that are interested in street fights mixed with actual disciplines.

[Demonpenz]

I know boxing has fallen off from a real attraction, but shit man the money yesterday it can't be that shitty right?

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Of course not. But who flocked to Tyson fights? Who flocked to Mayweather-Pacquiao for the wrong reason?

Casuals. Casuals flocked to Tyson fights because of the explicit violence and the way he broke down heavyweights in spectacular fashion. Casuals were disappointed with Mayweather-Pacquiao because it was a defensive fight, which is why no-one ever bought Bernard Hopkins fights, despite him being one of the three best fighters of the last generation.

Hagler-Hearnes was a technically poor fight that everyone loved for the violence of it.

The difference is that modern boxing is followed by connoisseurs, the same guys that appreciated RJJ throughout his career, or Terrence Crawford now. The draw of violence flowed from boxing to pro wrestling to MMA.

Ah, got ya. That rings true.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by GloryDayz

Meh, I'd just say MMA more closely resembles the "fights" people have been involved in or watched. The fact that the boxing industry/community has always called itself a "fight" ("Friday night at the fights"), well, maybe they should have been more clear and reminded people that they aren't associated with fighting.

I'm not lost on your point, but to suggest that MMA doesn't have a shit-ton of rules that keep it separate from a street fight in ridiculous. Who in a street fight wouldn't punch a guy in the back of the head if he were stupid enough to lay on his tummy? Who wouldn't knee a guy on the ground in the temple in a street fight. And who would honor a tap-out in a street fight? (Very few wouldn't at least get one more punch in, or finish putting the guy he's fighting to sleep)

But yes, MMA closer to a fight, and it's much more fun to watch IMHO.

I didn't say that MMA lacked rules. I explicitly said, "MMA has rules."

Yes, boxing is referred to colloquially as a fight, and it's still sanctioned violence with an extreme level of danger, but it's also a much older fighting form that has had decades to evolve into its current form. It's called the "sweet science" for a reason.

It will be interesting to see how MMA evolves. Historically, it's still in its infancy. Right now, as a boxing fan, it's hard for me to appreciate the striking aspect given the footwork and chins of the competitors. An old Floyd was never once worried by McGregor's power in that fight.

Over time, and if boxing continues its decline, you may see MMA fighters that spend more time on proper footwork and learn how to move with a punch to lessen its effect. Then again, maybe there are so many aspects you have to defend in MMA that the fighters just won't have time to learn and master that component.

[jspchief]

At least boxing fans aren't pretentious or anything. Do they just watch during polo's offseason?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[thegame214]

"Casuals" didn't watch for Mayweather. They watched for McGregor. The same WWF fans who watched Brock Lesnar in UFC and vice versa. The high horse boxing fans don't have to worry anymore. The "trashy" McGregor fans can go back to not caring about boxing.

[Red Dawg]

Boring from start to finish. Waste of time.

[jspchief]

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

I'd have to argue otherwise on the first part. I think there's a group that actually enjoys the technical side, but that group is much smaller. A large majority says hurr this guy gon get ****d up lmbo

Ken Shamrock did a lot for the sport by being in the WWF during that era.

Nothing says class like walking out in a gimp costume...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[GloryDayz]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Of course not. But who flocked to Tyson fights? Who flocked to Mayweather-Pacquiao for the wrong reason?

Casuals. Casuals flocked to Tyson fights because of the explicit violence and the way he broke down heavyweights in spectacular fashion. Casuals were disappointed with Mayweather-Pacquiao because it was a defensive fight, which is why no-one ever bought Bernard Hopkins fights, despite him being one of the three best fighters of the last generation.

Hagler-Hearnes was a technically poor fight that everyone loved for the violence of it.

The difference is that modern boxing is followed by connoisseurs, the same guys that appreciated RJJ throughout his career, or Terrence Crawford now. The draw of violence flowed from boxing to pro wrestling to MMA.

I was on submarines and I'll admit that while we engaged in very calculated, slow, mathematical, multi-week, and rather scientific engagements, especially when it's fast attack v. fast attack, so I really grew to admire the guys who did their engagements at mach 2+, hanging upside down in their straps, and had engagements that really couldn't last more than a few minutes. Don't get me wrong, subs are awesome, but you have to be very patient and have a different kind of stamina to appreciate the engagement, so maybe that's why I appreciate the fights that aren't quite the same chess match.