Pay-Per-View isn’t what it used to be


Floyd Mayweather - Oscar De La HoyaBack in the day pay-per-view used to mean something. It meant that you were paying for a quality show whether it last for 30 seconds of the main event or lasted a full two rounds. You would have two quality fighters laying it all on the line and every cent that you spent was well worth it. Sadly, those days where an event was spectacular and well worth your hard-earned dollars are gone and boxing fans get left with one sided fights that are not worth the money. On occasion, we get treated to something amazing.

Yesterday, Showtime and Floyd Mayweather Jr. officially announced that Mayweather will be facing Andre Berto September 12th on Showtime Pay-Per-View. The fight itself has many boxing fans and members of the media asking why Berto and why is it pay-per-view.

Shane Mosley once fought Mayweather and he had his moments early on in the fight. Since then, he has gone on to win a few, lose a few, and retire. Mosley is currently preparing for a comeback fight slated to take place later this month in a rematch against Ricardo Mayorga of Nicaragua. Mosley took to Twitter last night asking fans why they would pay to watch Mayweather “dance” around his opponent and states that they should instead pay to watch Mosley knockout a “lunatic.”

“Why pay $74.99 to watch Mayaweather dance in HD when u can pay under $50 to watch me KO a shit talking lunatic. Plus, I have a surprise announcement,” stated Mosley.

While the first fight between Mosley and Mayorga was entertaining both fighters are old, past their prime and have not had a significant fight for quite time. Their rematch could be interesting but is not pay-per-view worthy. The only reason Mayweather-Berto is pay-per-view is because of Floyd and this being his last possible fight. Mosley may be right about Mayweather-Berto, but his fight has no reason at all to be pay-per-view and can be added to the list of events not worth buying.