There's an ugly and vocal subsection of boxing that will work to destroy any fighter who exercises any degree of self-determination over his career. This is the not-so-subtle scourge of classism in the sport we love.
Boxing "purists" often harbor a stubborn prejudice against any fighter or business entity not in line with the old guard business philosophy that all money and power should flow through the promoter and around the fighter. The case can so clearly be made that it really goes beyond opinion. The anti-labor, pro-indentured servitude bias is clear.
Clean cut, God-fearing Olympic gold medalist Andre Ward would be a no-brainer choice for stardom in other eras of the sport where career self-determination wasn't even a possibility. In this era, though, where fighters at least have a fighting chance of being their own men, Ward's freeman status has come at a high cost.
Not only has his professional legacy taken nasty, unfair hits from media and fans, but his bottom line marketability has been adversely affected by counter-punches to his efforts at professional independence.
Ward, who had already riled up the lynch mob for hinting at the need for a professional prizefighter union, further enraged the prejudiced masses by fighting a public war against good ol' boy Dan Goossen. Forget the reason behind the contractual dispute with Goossen (although it shouldn't be forgotten that it was, by all accounts, not a push for more money via re-worked terms, as is the impression given by the less-than-friendly media), messing with the bossman's contract was an unforgivable act in the eyes of many.
The battle with Goossen turned a fighter who had rightfully earned his place among the elite of the sport into one who would find obstacle after obstacle stacked in front of career acceptance. In media reports, he went from old school, physical battler to a cheater who mugged his way to cheap, boring victories. He was an entitled prick who was wasting his career away by trying to weasel out of a binding contract. And when he finally came back to full-time active duty, he was blasted for fighting bums-until he fought and beat light heavyweight kingpin Sergey Kovalev. Then, the story was that Ward didn't really beat him and was given a gift home country decision over the Russian KO artist (as if there ever was a wave of patriotism washing over Ward's efforts in the ring or even a real financial interest in him beating the much more marketable and network-friendly Kovalev.)
And, of course, in America, where there is classism, there often tends to be more than a hint of racism as well.
"U know who say Ward won [vs. Kovalev].. insecure black men w/a racial agenda" – Angry troll via Twitter
Floyd Mayweather Jr., in his own run towards independence, was attacked even more viciously than Ward, incurring the wrath of hardcore purists and compromised media from the very moment he left promoter Bob Arum. Certain media members were not even trying to hide the overtly classist/racist overtones to their rage, utilizing the loaded word "uppity" more than once to describe the fighter who was, perhaps unwittingly, laying the groundwork for boxing's equivalent to free agency.
Advisor Al Haymon, the architect behind Mayweather's success as an independent entity, may or may not be succeeding with his vision for the Premier Boxing Champions (PBC) project, but the target on his back was there long before he raised his first dollar in the effort to bring boxing back to national TV.
As a boxing outsider who actually had the wherewithal to confront and beat old guard promoters at their own game, Haymon made enemies fast. Even earnest, honest, and likeable fighters like Vernon Forrest and Paul Williams became media targets simply for the fact that they worked with him.
As Haymon moved on to bigger, more ambitious projects, the attacks amplified and became non-stop. He was no longer the outsider facilitating freeman thinking to a select few fighters, he was a full-fledged predator literally looking to change the sport's business dynamic. A successful Haymon meant a successful shift in power away from the now-omnipotent promoter to the fighter, himself.
Clearly, Haymon's vision was not in line with the bottom line interest of old guard boxing promoters or certain networks which have invested time and energy into working directly with the promoter when it comes to filling their boxing schedule.
Major media voices, who earn much of their livelihood (and all of their privilege) through deals with the sports' promoters, are also not in line with diminishing the promoters' death grip on every aspect of the business. So, not surprisingly, the vast majority of boxing's media has been hyper-critical of all things PBC, even before its first show had been announced. To this day, stories emerge poking at the financial stability of the Haymon project and predicting its eventual and soon-to-be-realized doom. Notice that these same media-types never seem to care one bit about any other boxing entity's bottom line financial viability.
Call it classism or racism or, more optimistically, short-sighted prejudice against change, the reality is that boxing and its media don't take kindly to "uppity" fighters who refuse to "stay in their lane." Neither do they tolerate outsiders who aim to stir up trouble by messing with the way business usually goes down.
Blue collar fans, who would normally applaud the working man's fight for independence, blast fighters who refuse to just smile, shut up, and fight when told to fight. Even bleeding-heart bloggers, who get all weepy-eyed by hacky noir-style tales of the plight of 50's palookas, will go out of their way to treat "troublemakers" with the class shown to runaway slaves.
Instead of making steps towards progress, boxing has stubbornly embraced an outdated and detrimental mindset that leans more towards indentured servitude than free market business. In the American landscape, networks, media, and "hardcore" fans have embraced foreign fighters who question very little and seem more than happy with any size slice of the pie tossed to them. Way too many in boxing have equated respectability with a willingness to behave like a blindly loyal house pet.
It's reprehensible that in a sport where athletes can literally die from their efforts, disrespect and derision are the "go to" responses when fighters and their reps aim for greater control.
Some apologists for the old guard will say that giving too much power to the fighters is tantamount to letting the inmates run the asylum; that fights will be next to impossible to make should boxers have power of full self-determination over their careers. This logic, however, loses much of its merit when stacked up against examples set by entities such as the NFL, NBA, and MLB, which have prospered from treating athletes as working professional rather than "owned" properties.
No, the unwillingness to tolerate freemen in boxing has nothing to do with concerns for the health of the sport.
Boxing's powerbrokers are desperately trying to hold on to their power in a sport where they now run everything and deal in revenue as greedily as allowed by the (un)watchful eyes of commissions. While some things have changed over the years, boxing is still very much a sport where two money men get together and force their "boys" to have at one another for the amusement of fans and the benefit of their own bank accounts. Most fighters don't have the leverage to inquire about whether what they're earning is what they're getting or why their careers are being guided a certain way.
Another problem is with many of the fans, themselves, who seem more than happy to lash out at fighters who don't live up to the macho fairytale narratives they've built up in their own minds. These are the fans who "slum" in boxing and get a vicarious thrill from the seedy side of the business, who tolerate a business structure that would be taken down immediately by the Labor Department if it wasn't "just boxing." These "hardcore" purists, who scream the loudest about loving the fighters and respecting their sacrifice, tend to be the first ones to diminish and demean those who have run afoul of the sport's powerbrokers and their attack dog media.
The idea that fighters should be dumb farm animals willing and ready to sacrifice their well-being for the mere "glory" of competition comes straight from an earlier, uglier chapter in our culture. Boxing is still very much an endeavor where poor men and women fight for the amusement of the middle class and rich. Forget that some fighters make large sums of money for their efforts, the reality is that the vast majority don't have any power over the business and can't call any of the shots regarding their own careers.
Six and seven-figure paydays aside, fighters under the current business structure are still little more than highly-paid servants, easily replaceable when the time is right to toss them aside.
If you don't believe that classism and racism are very real things in this business of fighting, just look at how personally people seem to take it when the boxing "working class" lashes out at the boxing "ruling class." Look at who becomes an enemy of the people and how often that shift to villain status coincides with a threat to the boxing status quo. It's not a coincidence.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: FightHype.com would like to welcome the talents of Paul Magno to the staff. Paul is the Owner and Editor in Chief of theboxingtribune.com, has served as a licensed official in the state of Michoacan, Mexico, and has worked with Mexican stars such as Ruben Olivares and Lupe Pintor. His work can also be found on The Boxing Tribune, FOX Sports, Yahoo, Bleacher Report, and various other media outlets. Paul is also the author of Notes from the Boxing Underground, available in Kindle and Paperback from Amazon.]