Why we should want Hennessey's boys to do well

Hennessy's stable gets a lot of slating on this board. Common complaints include poor show presentation, questionable talent stable, and bad matchmaking. I'm not suggesting that his stable are obviously admirable or charismatic enough to warrant the undivided affection of the British boxing public, but I do believe there is one good reason why we should all want them to do well. That reason is simply the fate of boxing on terrestrial t.v. Nationally televised boxing has seen some fallow years in recent times, with subscription channels and pay per view fights increasingly dominant. This commercial model has lead boxing to become an increasingly niche sport, fading in the public sporting conciousness where nationally televised stars like Eubank and Benn once burned bright. Personally, I feel that the healthier the sport of boxing on terrestrial t.v, the better for boxing fans in the u.k. Although fighters like Degale and Galahad may not capture the imagination of many, their competitive and commercial success can help to keep boxing in the view of the wider British public by prompting reinvestment in boxing shows by channel 5, as well as a renewed interest by other terrestrial channels. Like it or not, Hennessy's stable of underdog upstarts is the flag bearer for the terrestrial broadcasting of British boxing. Their present quest for glory might not have captured our imaginations, but their success can lead to a better future for British boxing fans.

Yeah but problem is, just like Fury, the money isn't there in terrestrial, once they get to a certain size in order to get the big fights they need to be bringing good revenue, Channel 5 doesn't provide that, unfortunately.

Bit of a chicken/egg situation, isn't it? For boxing terrestrial boxing to be attractive, you need the big names. For the big names to find Terrestrial boxing attractive... you need the finance... Which came first? The finance or the boxers?

Does it matter?? To be honest some of the cards channel 5 run make me wish they would give up on showing boxing.

Burns vs Crawford was on Sky sports and it was the 3rd most discussed topic on twitter. DeGale vs the Flying Dutchman wasn't even in the top 10.

So that to me show many are still tuning into the fights even though they are not on terrestrial .

Tbh another point is with ITV they showed big time boxing which was popular. These shopping centre cards are dire and many people laugh at the lack of quality .

Also one last thing...the fighters on terrestrial tv years ago had charisma, where interesting characters.....DeGale, Haskins, Galahad, Eubank Jr aren't . Tyson Fury is a character but not on Nasseem, Eubank Snr, Benn's level.

So I don't think boxing needs Channel 5, plus Strongy posted the viewing figures the other week from when they started showing boxing and the numbers are still pretty weak for a channel that shows it free

AlexHuckerby wrote:Yeah but problem is, just like Fury, the money isn't there in terrestrial, once they get to a certain size in order to get the big fights they need to be bringing good revenue, Channel 5 doesn't provide that, unfortunately.

Pay per view remains the most commercially viable option for a huge fight or 'event' because of the automatic revenue per viewer it generates. However, it is well within the capabilities of a major terrestrial network to afford the associated costs of British and European title fights, as we have seen in the case of Degale and Galahad. Do you not think it would be better if there was more domestic and continental boxing on the terrestrial platform?

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:Does it matter?? To be honest some of the cards channel 5 run make me wish they would give up on showing boxing.

Burns vs Crawford was on Sky sports and it was the 3rd most discussed topic on twitter. DeGale vs the Flying Dutchman wasn't even in the top 10.

So that to me show many are still tuning into the fights even though they are not on terrestrial .

Tbh another point is with ITV they showed big time boxing which was popular. These shopping centre cards are dire and many people laugh at the lack of quality .

Also one last thing...the fighters on terrestrial tv years ago had charisma, where interesting characters.....DeGale, Haskins, Galahad, Eubank Jr aren't . Tyson Fury is a character but not on Nasseem, Eubank Snr, Benn's level.

So I don't think boxing needs Channel 5, plus Strongy posted the viewing figures the other week from when they started showing boxing and the numbers are still pretty weak for a channel that shows it free

I think you might have missed my point slightly, I am not trying to claim that channel 5 and Hennessy's fighters are currently doing well or being successful. Obviously the reason that people were talking about Burn's fight is because it was a major fight, whilst Degale's tussle with the unpronounceable Armenian-Dutchman will rightly fade quickly from the memory. The shopping centre cards aren't great, channel 5's overall presentation isn't great, and some of the fighters seem to be fairly short on greatness as well. My point is not that boxing 'needs' channel 5 or Hennessy's fighters, it is that we are unlikely to see renewed investment from terrestrial networks in the near future unless channel 5's experiment with boxing is successful. If you are happy with boxing remaining on subscription channels and pay per view networks then fine, but there are a significant number of fans who are essentially priced out of watching boxing for the most part, myself included.

If Hennessey's boys do well the major drawback will be it gives Hennessey free rein to make high profile but still skull crushingly sh!t fights

sittingringside wrote:

AlexHuckerby wrote:Yeah but problem is, just like Fury, the money isn't there in terrestrial, once they get to a certain size in order to get the big fights they need to be bringing good revenue, Channel 5 doesn't provide that, unfortunately.

Pay per view remains the most commercially viable option for a huge fight or 'event' because of the automatic revenue per viewer it generates. However, it is well within the capabilities of a major terrestrial network to afford the associated costs of British and European title fights, as we have seen in the case of Degale and Galahad. Do you not think it would be better if there was more  domestic and continental boxing on the terrestrial platform?

Of course I'd love to see boxing on terrestrial all the time, but there has been 2 intriguing fights made, Chisora Vs Fury and Galahad Vs. Dickens, in 3 years or whatever thats not great.

AlexHuckerby wrote:

sittingringside wrote:

AlexHuckerby wrote:Yeah but problem is, just like Fury, the money isn't there in terrestrial, once they get to a certain size in order to get the big fights they need to be bringing good revenue, Channel 5 doesn't provide that, unfortunately.

Pay per view remains the most commercially viable option for a huge fight or 'event' because of the automatic revenue per viewer it generates. However, it is well within the capabilities of a major terrestrial network to afford the associated costs of British and European title fights, as we have seen in the case of Degale and Galahad. Do you not think it would be better if there was more  domestic and continental boxing on the terrestrial platform?

Of course I'd love to see boxing on terrestrial all the time, but there has been 2 intriguing fights made, Chisora Vs Fury and Galahad Vs. Dickens, in 3 years or whatever thats not great.

Hennessy isn't a great matchmaker, his stable aren't all good fighters. I'm looking at the mid term really, if 5's boxing falters and dies then it will probably mean boxing comes off terrestrial for a couple of years, if it succeeds then it could mean increased interest from other channels and promoters in staging nationally televised cards.

Yeah, like I said Sittingringside, would be great for it to happen, however all of the best fighters appear to be with Matchroom at Sky SPorts and are being paid more.