Because weve got more world champion boxers it doesnt mean the quality of boxing and standard has improved.Take for instance Froch vs groves at wembley.If they were fighters from 20 years ago they wouldn't have filled a telephone box,especially groves who is an average fighter.The majority of americans and fighters from the west are turning to MMA and the Ufc.Boxing barely gets a mention in the states these days.What Hearn has managed to do with sky is make their fighters massive amounts of money,many of whom wouldnt live with the boxers from 20 years ago.

It's simply called hype. The Hearns are very good at it, and they have a paying public who are more than willing to lap it up, seemingly at any cost.

Didn't argue otherwise but it's up for debate about the standard but that's beside the point. What can be generated through those Champions in today's world is hype though and people are buying into it big style through Social Media arguments that the media are quick to jump all over and other match up's that the Country are keen to see because they are quality fighters, Aj v fury for example.
No doubt the Hearns have done a great job of turning the talent we've produced of recent times and made people want to see the fights, even when they're not for World titles, people have bought into them and filled big stadiums like Haye v Bellew.
The issue for me is that all transferable to RL. Boxing like darts and Snooker are individual sports where you hire an arena do all the build-up and put on the event. Will their skill set translate to RL. We'll see if they get involved.

As for boxing barely getting a mention in the States, I don't totally agree, it does, but not to the extent when the USA ruled the HW division and that for me and others is the reason why boxing over there isn't ruling like it once was. Give them a dominant HW Champion, like a Tyson or Ali and I bet we'd see the sport suddenly come back to life.

When I grew up and took Karate and then Kickboxing classes it was just for the love of it, how things have changed. Kids go to gyms thinking they may actually make a career as sorts out of it if they're any good and have good training.
I'm actually involved in training guys for MMA and what you say is true, MMA is seen as an actual way to earn a good living, where it wasn't just 10/15 years ago and has definitely made a dent on boxings hold of fighting & they actually have to compete with something similar nowadays. Whereas 20/30 years ago Boxing was it, as far as someone wanting to watch a PPV fight.

Over in the US Collegiate wrestlers only had the Olympics and WC to turn their hand to after University but now MMA is where many turn to. Similarly, former Golden glove champions are getting to their local MMA gym, learning a bit of takedown defense etc and working their way up to the UFC. Even American football players who haven't made the grade or got injured are equally turning to it. Similarly over here I've got guys that have played RU and RL that are athletes and are wanting to learn all the different bases of MMA.

Are we really gonna continue this myth that MMA is taking over from boxing. I must have heard this for like 15 years now. It's simply not true at all.

MMA is a niche sport. Its niche in the states and even less popular in Europe. Both MMA/UFC and boxing co exist and do good business.

Essentially both sports need stars. UFC numbers are down and that's because they have one PPV star and that's Connor McGregor. Outside of him it's a struggle. You let me know when UFC can sell 80,000+ tickets in Wembley at least once.

Anthony Joshua sells out huge stadiums and does 1m+ PPV buys.

When you see an MMA fighter generate the money Floyd Mayweather did we can start having a serious debate.

I have been watching MMA since the 90's. It's a great sport, just hate seeing this anti boxing fans come out with rubbish how it's this huge sport which will kill boxing.

Also froch would have lived and competed with any super middleweight from 20 years ago.

Time to say thank you and goodbye (please stand down) to the RFL Board. (Barwick has a job overseeing the 2021 RLWC anyway).

Then appoint an RFL board of Eddie Hearn (Executive Chairman) and Barry Hearn & Robert Elstone as non-execs (& Sally Bolton if she'd be a non-exec). Rimmer to go back to being Chief Operating Officer of the RFL.

Then scrap the salary cap and away we go.

No thanks. If the Hearns have a magic wand why don’t they take over a club and show everyone how it’s done. Marwan K is a successful horse racing owner but I wouldn’t want him running our sport either.

Away we go to what?

To flourishing again, rather than being held back by under achieving clubs

Regards

King James

Some clubs find themselves having money troubles with a salary cap. How long would these clubs survive without a salary cap

Well here we go, the same old gullible wanna bees on here backing yet another snake oil salesman.

Just ask yourselves fir once what the hell is into for him and if you find the answer you'll steer well clear.

I don't get this kind of snobbery, isn't this what we used to bash RU for? RL certainly isn't relevant at the moment. How is our sport which is currently playing in front of sub 10k crowds most weeks, more relvant and credible than boxing which has multi-million TV deals, personalities, and sells out arenas for domestic fights?

Ask joe bloggs which is more relevant and credible, boxing or RL?

Interestingly the SKY tb coming up, hasn't Hearn just signed a $1billion contract for a boxing streaming service called DAZN?

But lets keep our flat caps, play in front of 5k fans, because that way, we're definitely.more relevant and credible than boxing...

The Hearns have a pedigree in "single player" events.
Darts revolves around alcohol and basically the audience are "on one" with the arrows secondary.
Boxing, no matter your stance on the pro's and con's of the sport, has always appealed. I remember Benn and Eubank going it at it, the tragedy of Watson nearly 30 years ago, I remember Barry McGuigan uniting Ireland in the 1980's.......Boxing has always had a following and has always been a jingoistic sport, so the production line from the investment in amateur boxing for the Olympics was always going to produce talent....the Hearns have just jumped on it. They also list clients in Pool, 10 pin Bowling, fishing and Table Tennis.......

When it comes to Team Sports......how are Leyton Orient doing these days?

Why would we let a bloke/organisation with no pedigree in team sports tell us how to run our sport? It's not snobbery....it's pragmatism. They either control the sports they're involved in or they don't bother, so Mr Hearn.....don't bother!

Rather than just dismiss them and say no thanks, why not give them an event to market? The upcoming series with NZ would have been good or maybe next year's Magic Weekend. Let them prove themselves before signing over power of attorney of the whole of RL

For context, I don't think turning RL into the circus that large elements of boxing has become would do us any favours and I think holding that view is neither snobbish, nor insisting that remain a sport with 5k flatcappers watching it.

I come back my point about "the wrong answer to the wrong question". People looking to Hearn are asking "who can save us?", and see Hearn as that saviour. But so many of the answers are right there in front of us. The problem is not that we don't have a Hearn (who, as others have mentioned, doesn't have the unblemished record that some would have you believe, especially in team sports), but that we don't have enough clubs willing to explore those answers.

Like I said, across the 12 Super League clubs there are [iat least [/i12 people responsible for marketing, for reaching new audiences, for merchandising, for media relations and PR and for attracting sponsors. The first question to ask is why they aren't doing their jobs effectively enough. Look at how clubs like Bristol RU have turned themselves around in a relatively short space of time - now pulling in crowds of 15-20k simply by promoting themselves in the right places, in the right way, to the right people. They haven't needed Eddie Hearn, so why do we?

We have clubs insisting that we retain loop fixtures - fixtures that we know supporters are tired of and don't want - rather than looking at ways to improve the quality of the product and to grow the game. I genuinely think that Nines has the potential to be to RL what T20 has been to cricket, but the clubs seem to be willing to ignore this opportunity. Again, this isn't an issue that we need Hearn to fix - the clubs are more than capable with coming up with something more interesting than loop games.

When there are clubs blaming a structure for not being able to sell hospitality, yet those clubs don't even have a web page for their hospitalty offer, I think it's quite symptomatic of the problems that this sport has. Hearn doesn't change any of that.

I don't disagree with your oft-repeated point about clubs doing a better job of marketing themselves; they absolutely should, and that would drive an uptick in income through gate receipts, sponsorship, corporate shindigs etc - no doubt about that.

But your focus is too narrow - marketing managers at SL clubs can't be expected to have any meaningful whole-sport effect on broadcast deals, sponsorship, national media profile for players and clubs etc; that's a job that quite rightly sits with a central function - absolutely propped up and underpinned by what individual clubs do - but with a much wider focus on the entire sport. The RFL has singularly failed in that mission - which I guess is why when a big player like Hearn expresses an interest, some people see it as the solution?