Jump to content

Amir Khan Set to Announce McCloskey as Next Opponent


The_budweiser
 Share

Recommended Posts

Amir Khan has revealed that he hopes to arrange another defence of his world title in the “next few days”, with Northern Irish fighter Paul McCloskey touted as his likely opponent.

 

The WBA light-welterweight champion vowed to take his next fight on home turf, after bouts against Paulie Malignaggi and Marcos Maidana in the United States.

 

Whilst Khan insisted that he is “looking at all the options”, he indicated that McCloskey has “approached” his management.

 

“He's an undefeated fighter,” Khan stated. “I'm happy to take the fight on."

 

Khan is still desperate to unify the division, with the Bolton-born fighter keen on facing the winner the upcoming clash between Timothy Bradley and Devon Alexander on January 29.

 

However, before looking ahead to such a clash, Khan has switched his focus to European champion McCloskey, who he will look to fight in Manchester on January 29.

 

"The next level for him is world title and I'm to take the fight on. He's a good fighter," Khan revealed.

 

McCloskey was similarly upbeat about the possibility of a showdown between the two Brits, after a potential showdown with Lamont Peterson fell through.

 

"They want the fight so it will be easy enough for me to take it,” McCloskey said.

 

"My style against Amir's could lead to an exciting fight. I am a European champion and I am ready to jump onto the next level."

 

http://www.sportsvibe.co.uk/amir-khan-set-to-announce-mccloskey-as-next-opponent/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with a bout against McCloskey. He's 22-0, has beaten some good British/European level fighters, he's been British and European champion. Also, this is Khan's "homecoming" bout and will no doubt be held at a venue not far from his home in Bolton so his fans can see him. The fight doesn't have to be an extravaganza. He's 24 and just fought two World title bouts in the USA. He's entitled to now fight a 22-0 European level hungry fighter.

 

What would bother me is if he "Did a David Haye". Which means reaches 30, having only fought a handful of World class opponents and then blab on about other contenders... But, Khan is 6 years away from being 30.

 

As for HBO, i don't like how some TV companies seem to be able to call the shots on fights: "We don't like that fight, we want you to fight this fight instead".

 

A TV company is not a manager, trainer, family member etc... They're a bloodsucker. They want money and nothing else. A trainer, family member and manager (not all managers, some are parasites) want what's best for a fighter and his career. A TV company doesn't.

 

So i don't like how a TV company gets to choose what is the best fight for a boxer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd prefer him to face the likes of the guys he skipped over as he was developing like Murray, over McCloskey who wasn't really in the picture.

McCloskey is just too fragile imo, to make it an interesting fight.

He's shaky offensively and defensively, and that only really spells one outcome for me.

Bear in mind that this has already been confirmed as a PPV event for April 16th....

 

Khan vs McCloskey on PPV??? Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McCloskey's a poor man's Junior Witter. And I didn't think I'd compliment Witter like that.

 

He picks his punches well at times but Khan will be too busy for Paul to think about his punches.

 

The speed will make all the difference. A quick stoppage for Khan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LaMont wanted too much dough.

 

Secretly I dont think he wanted it, Bradley Ortiz then Khan maybe he wants to rebuild, a loss to Khan could put him out the picture completly after having 3 shots in a row.

 

Joe-

I think your both right. He doesn't want that third defeat, and the best way to opt out of a fight with a guy with a major network contract is to OVERPRICE yourself. It sounds a whole lot better than admit your avoiding somebody........and they might just shock the hell out of you and decide to meet your asking price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with a bout against McCloskey. He's 22-0, has beaten some good British/European level fighters, he's been British and European champion. Also, this is Khan's "homecoming" bout and will no doubt be held at a venue not far from his home in Bolton so his fans can see him. The fight doesn't have to be an extravaganza. He's 24 and just fought two World title bouts in the USA. He's entitled to now fight a 22-0 European level hungry fighter.

 

What would bother me is if he "Did a David Haye". Which means reaches 30, having only fought a handful of World class opponents and then blab on about other contenders... But, Khan is 6 years away from being 30.

 

As for HBO, i don't like how some TV companies seem to be able to call the shots on fights: "We don't like that fight, we want you to fight this fight instead".

 

A TV company is not a manager, trainer, family member etc... They're a bloodsucker. They want money and nothing else. A trainer, family member and manager (not all managers, some are parasites) want what's best for a fighter and his career. A TV company doesn't.

 

So i don't like how a TV company gets to choose what is the best fight for a boxer.

 

i see what you're saying about TV calling the shots... but in most cases the network (if its HBO or showtime) is putting up by far the bulk of the money to make the fight, so i think that gives them the right to buy what they like. the network is responsible to its subscribers not the sport of boxing.

 

just a side thought, how dumb is sky?... they may be getting khan-mccloskey when they could have had klitschko-haye, but they didnt want to move the dates. (of course, that is assuming that haye didnt pull out at the last moment)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with a bout against McCloskey. He's 22-0, has beaten some good British/European level fighters, he's been British and European champion. Also, this is Khan's "homecoming" bout and will no doubt be held at a venue not far from his home in Bolton so his fans can see him. The fight doesn't have to be an extravaganza. He's 24 and just fought two World title bouts in the USA. He's entitled to now fight a 22-0 European level hungry fighter.

 

What would bother me is if he "Did a David Haye". Which means reaches 30, having only fought a handful of World class opponents and then blab on about other contenders... But, Khan is 6 years away from being 30.

 

As for HBO, i don't like how some TV companies seem to be able to call the shots on fights: "We don't like that fight, we want you to fight this fight instead".

 

A TV company is not a manager, trainer, family member etc... They're a bloodsucker. They want money and nothing else. A trainer, family member and manager (not all managers, some are parasites) want what's best for a fighter and his career. A TV company doesn't.

 

So i don't like how a TV company gets to choose what is the best fight for a boxer.

 

i see what you're saying about TV calling the shots... but in most cases the network (if its HBO or showtime) is putting up by far the bulk of the money to make the fight, so i think that gives them the right to buy what they like. the network is responsible to its subscribers not the sport of boxing.

 

just a side thought, how dumb is sky?... they may be getting khan-mccloskey when they could have had klitschko-haye, but they didnt want to move the dates. (of course, that is assuming that haye didnt pull out at the last moment)

 

 

This isn't them being dumb though. This is exactly the outcome they wanted.

They'll get a pointless Khan fight being paid for, a second rate Haye defense being paid for and THEN, just maybe, they might manage to milk a couple of more before they actually make the bigger fights, which might risk their PPV cash cows.

 

The Sky paymasters are not stupid.

They know that they can bleed some more money out of unwitting punters before their hand is forced, and I think this is what was meant above, when it was mentioned that TV networks have too much of a hand in what fights to make, because 9 times out of 10, particularly on these shores, their decision making is based on income not entertainment....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with a bout against McCloskey. He's 22-0, has beaten some good British/European level fighters, he's been British and European champion. Also, this is Khan's "homecoming" bout and will no doubt be held at a venue not far from his home in Bolton so his fans can see him. The fight doesn't have to be an extravaganza. He's 24 and just fought two World title bouts in the USA. He's entitled to now fight a 22-0 European level hungry fighter.

 

What would bother me is if he "Did a David Haye". Which means reaches 30, having only fought a handful of World class opponents and then blab on about other contenders... But, Khan is 6 years away from being 30.

 

As for HBO, i don't like how some TV companies seem to be able to call the shots on fights: "We don't like that fight, we want you to fight this fight instead".

 

A TV company is not a manager, trainer, family member etc... They're a bloodsucker. They want money and nothing else. A trainer, family member and manager (not all managers, some are parasites) want what's best for a fighter and his career. A TV company doesn't.

 

So i don't like how a TV company gets to choose what is the best fight for a boxer.

 

i see what you're saying about TV calling the shots... but in most cases the network (if its HBO or showtime) is putting up by far the bulk of the money to make the fight, so i think that gives them the right to buy what they like. the network is responsible to its subscribers not the sport of boxing.

 

just a side thought, how dumb is sky?... they may be getting khan-mccloskey when they could have had klitschko-haye, but they didnt want to move the dates. (of course, that is assuming that haye didnt pull out at the last moment)

 

 

This isn't them being dumb though. This is exactly the outcome they wanted.

They'll get a pointless Khan fight being paid for, a second rate Haye defense being paid for and THEN, just maybe, they might manage to milk a couple of more before they actually make the bigger fights, which might risk their PPV cash cows.

 

The Sky paymasters are not stupid.

They know that they can bleed some more money out of unwitting punters before their hand is forced, and I think this is what was meant above, when it was mentioned that TV networks have too much of a hand in what fights to make, because 9 times out of 10, particularly on these shores, their decision making is based on income not entertainment....

 

Very good points. To Sky the sport is just a business and its all about maximising profits. They don't have any real rival now with Setanta gone. (ok, they've comeback but its an uphill climb)

 

Haye vs Harrison was a cynical money making scheme that was pushed for by Barry Hearn, who brings different sports to Sky. Sky knew it was a mismatch but the hype machine made it a financial success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with a bout against McCloskey. He's 22-0, has beaten some good British/European level fighters, he's been British and European champion. Also, this is Khan's "homecoming" bout and will no doubt be held at a venue not far from his home in Bolton so his fans can see him. The fight doesn't have to be an extravaganza. He's 24 and just fought two World title bouts in the USA. He's entitled to now fight a 22-0 European level hungry fighter.

 

What would bother me is if he "Did a David Haye". Which means reaches 30, having only fought a handful of World class opponents and then blab on about other contenders... But, Khan is 6 years away from being 30.

 

As for HBO, i don't like how some TV companies seem to be able to call the shots on fights: "We don't like that fight, we want you to fight this fight instead".

 

A TV company is not a manager, trainer, family member etc... They're a bloodsucker. They want money and nothing else. A trainer, family member and manager (not all managers, some are parasites) want what's best for a fighter and his career. A TV company doesn't.

 

So i don't like how a TV company gets to choose what is the best fight for a boxer.

 

i see what you're saying about TV calling the shots... but in most cases the network (if its HBO or showtime) is putting up by far the bulk of the money to make the fight, so i think that gives them the right to buy what they like. the network is responsible to its subscribers not the sport of boxing.

 

just a side thought, how dumb is sky?... they may be getting khan-mccloskey when they could have had klitschko-haye, but they didnt want to move the dates. (of course, that is assuming that haye didnt pull out at the last moment)

 

 

This isn't them being dumb though. This is exactly the outcome they wanted.

They'll get a pointless Khan fight being paid for, a second rate Haye defense being paid for and THEN, just maybe, they might manage to milk a couple of more before they actually make the bigger fights, which might risk their PPV cash cows.

 

The Sky paymasters are not stupid.

They know that they can bleed some more money out of unwitting punters before their hand is forced, and I think this is what was meant above, when it was mentioned that TV networks have too much of a hand in what fights to make, because 9 times out of 10, particularly on these shores, their decision making is based on income not entertainment....

 

ahh thats a good point. does anybody know what % sky gets from its PPVs? because i know over here in the USA that HBO only gets a very tiny %, basically making nothing on PPVs after production costs (though i think some is made off of international rights and such)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As BB says above, TV companies aren't stupid. If SKY charges its viewers £15 or whatever it was for Haye vs Harrison and promote it (they mentioned it on their website everyday as the fight approached) and they know people will buy it, they'll continue to charge excessive amounts for bland PPVs. As long as people are willing to pay they'll do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's bad for boxing having TV companies dictate to a sport what fights they can have.

 

The Premiership (top league in English soccer) has the most lucrative TV deal in soccer. It's worth well over a billion dollars.

 

But, it doesn't affect the teams' fixture lists before the start of the season. The fixtures get sorted, they get sent to all the clubs and then the TV companies decide who shows what.

 

What makes TV companies think they can call the shots in boxing?

 

The best bouts to be made are those that trainers and managers think are best for their fighters.

 

If fans or a TV company think those bouts aren't "good enough" for them (arrogant), they can sod off! Go support another fighter.

 

That's what i do: I liked Haye, Naseem, Floyd etc... and then i didn't like how they stopped fighting proper challenges and i stopped watching. I don't need a TV company to decide what i like or don't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's bad for boxing having TV companies dictate to a sport what fights they can have.

 

The Premiership (top league in English soccer) has the most lucrative TV deal in soccer. It's worth well over a billion dollars.

 

But, it doesn't affect the teams' fixture lists before the start of the season. The fixtures get sorted, they get sent to all the clubs and then the TV companies decide who shows what.

 

What makes TV companies think they can call the shots in boxing?

 

The best bouts to be made are those that trainers and managers think are best for their fighters.

 

If fans or a TV company think those bouts aren't "good enough" for them (arrogant), they can sod off! Go support another fighter.

 

That's what i do: I liked Haye, Naseem, Floyd etc... and then i didn't like how they stopped fighting proper challenges and i stopped watching. I don't need a TV company to decide what i like or don't like.

 

The Premiership analogy may be true, but if you think about it, it's already been developed into a "product" by Sky, and the influx of huge stars on obscene wages has dramatically weakened other European leagues, outside of La Liga, which it also supports.

Bottom of the rung teams from England and Spain with absolutely no history can now pay 5-10 times the wages and transfer fees that even the likes of the Italian and French leagues, which have generally always been pretty strong.

Sky DO actually get to go as far as making the fixture list...before they took over football was at 3.30pm every Saturday and that was it for over 100 years.

They started with lunchtime kickoffs, then evening kickoffs, then midweekers.

Now, they've had such a hand in it, there's football on nearly every night of the week, and that is ALL Sky's doing.

Not necessarily saying it's a bad thing, but believe me, they're already the puppetmaster standing behind the EPL and La Liga.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...