By Charles Jay

If Saturday's fight between Oscar De La Hoya and Floyd Mayweather can't capture the imagination of the casual sports fan, nothing will. After all, the match pits the sport's biggest box office attraction against the consensus No. 1 pound-for-pound fighter in the world. That in itself is a rare occurrence.

True, it may lack some of the political intrigue of Muhammad Ali's first fight against Joe Frazier, or the racially-charged atmosphere that dominated much of the buildup to Larry Holmes-Gerry Cooney or Jack Johnson-Jim Jeffries. The glamour of Sugar Ray Leonard's marquee fights with Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns or Marvin Hagler may be missing. The raw appeal of Mike Tyson's brutality (and some may argue, buffoonery) is not an inducement.

But pay-per-view television has matured, and there is a bigger universe than ever before — perhaps more than 60 million homes, according to some estimates — and fans are able to access PPV events through both analog and digital cable, as well as satellite delivery. Foreign pay-per-view also becomes more of a factor with each passing year.

As such, in terms of sheer dollars, Saturday's WBC super welterweight title bout could become one of the biggest fights in the history of the sport. The live gate figure at the MGM Grand Garden is a reported $19 million. HBO is expecting that it will become the second non-heavyweight fight in history to record over 1,000,000 PPV purchases, with what they are terming an "outside shot" to break two all-time records — the 1.99 million buys generated by Evander Holyfield's rematch with Lennox Lewis in 1997, and the $106.9 chalked up by Lewis' fight with Tyson in 2002 (source: Kagan Associates, an industry research firm).

It would seem on the surface to be a boom for boxing. And there is indeed a high level of excitement among some of the sport's insiders.

But there is also an underlying concern.

You see, Saturday's big event may also serve as a signal that the end of an era is approaching. Both fighters have hinted at retirement, and although sport finds itself with its share of popular fighters, no pay-per-view attraction approaches the 34-year-old De La Hoya's status. Not by a long shot. His departure from the scene would leave boxing in a position where it may no longer be much of a priority with cable operators. The fear is that there won't be a truly bankable star left in boxing, who can produce guaranteed major events than can cross all ethnic and demographic boundaries.

Mayweather's departure would mean something as well, at the very least from an aesthetic standpoint. After Roy Jones' two-round knockout loss to Antonio Tarver in 2004, the mythical "pound-for-pound" title passed to Mayweather. In the opinion of many, there is a wide gap between him and the rest of the field.

Boxing, as a pay-per-view attraction, has always been star-driven. In the boxing industry, there is legitimate question as to where the next generation of real stars will come from. So rather than ride Saturday's "showcase" event into new levels of popularity, boxing may soon find itself in a place that has become all too familiar in recent years — one disaster away from being completely marginalized; relegated to a place where its biggest draws are overseas, as well as dominated and primarily patronized by the Latin market here in the U.S.

True aficionados don't particularly mind that, but boxing, at its highest levels, will never thrive and grow solely on the basis of support from its "cognoscenti."

Latins have become boxing' most reliable audience, and promoters like Bob Arum of Top Rank and De La Hoya's Golden Boy Promotions (the lead promoter for Saturday's show) have had tremendous success in cultivating it. But this is a double-edged sword. Boxing has always been known for strong ethnic identification on the part of its fans. As more and more Latins find their way onto televised cards to accommodate that sizable audience, it may have neglected — and subsequently turned off — the Anglo crowd.

Even Arum admits this to be the case. As he told reporter Steve Kim of Maxboxing in a story earlier this year, "There has to be a well thought-out plan to bring the young Anglo demographic back to boxing."

Into that vacuum has stepped the sport of mixed martial arts (MMA), and the industry leader, the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC). It is an insurgency, and boxing people feel the footsteps.

A major difference between boxing and mixed martial arts organizations such as the UFC is that, even though stars are developed and nurtured to an extent by the UFC, the brand is marketed above all else.

Conversely, if the consumer is considering a boxing "purchase," especially one of the pay-per-view variety, a main consideration will be the name value of the participants. With the UFC, for example, admittedly those with bigger names will produce bigger numbers, but essentially it is the brand that sells, and consequently the fan will buy because he or she trusts the brand to produce a certain level of quality.

Such brand identification is not nearly as prevalent in boxing. Fans may recognize Don King, but they don't buy to see him in the act of promoting. They are looking for a name and/or story they can latch onto.

Also, and just as importantly, MMA organizations — not just the UFC but also Elite XC, Bodog Fight and others — have filled a void that boxing hasn't, catering to the young, predominantly white audience. In fact, it has grabbed the 18-34 demographic of mostly white males by the throat, and shows no signs of letting go.

Case in point: An installment of the UFC's weekly program on Spike TV last Oct. 10, featuring a match between fan favorites Ken Shamrock and Tito Ortiz, bagged an average viewing audience of 4.2 million viewers, 1.6 million of which fell into the 18-34 category. That figure actually outdrew the competing American League Championship Series game between Oakland and Detroit, among the same demographic, by a whopping half-million viewers.

The effects are seen in pay-per-view performance. In 2006, the UFC had back-to-back shows that drew 1.4 million subscribers and $53 million in revenue, according to figures furnished by Kagan Associates, and its Dec. 30 card, featuring Ortiz against Chuck Liddell, had an estimated 1.1 million buys, which would have made it the top-selling pay-per-view event of the year (the UFC does not divulge its PPV figures).

At least De La Hoya stands as a potential bulwark against the UFC's charge. He has consistently performed on pay-per-view for the cable operators, and in fact can become the all-time champion in gross PPV dollars after Saturday's fight. His fight against Felix Trinidad in 1999 represented the fifth-highest gross revenue for any pay-per-view boxing event, and was the first non-heavyweight fight to top a million buys.

De La Hoya's rematch with Shane Mosley and his middleweight title fight against Bernard Hopkins both fell just short of the million mark, according to estimates. His first fight with Mosley and a 1997 title fight against Hector Camacho drew slightly less than 600,000, and his last bout, a stoppage of Ricardo Mayorga a year ago, was, with 925,000 buys (according to Kagan Associates) the highest-grossing boxing event of 2006, by far.

But perhaps one of De La Hoya's more impressive showings in the PPV arena took place in 2001, when he fought relatively unknown Javier Castillejo in a 154-pound title match. That fight had to go up against an important bout between Kostya Tszyu and Zab Judah that aired on Showtime the same night, yet De La Hoya's fight, which he carried literally all by himself, produced between 375,000-400,000 subscribers.

What will they do without him?

One of De La Hoya's employees, Golden Boy Promotions CEO Richard Schaefer, figures Saturday's show will provide some answers, and a new springboard. He has told reporters, "May 5 will bring an opportunity for the sport, and also a big responsibility. We want this to go down as the night that saved boxing."

Saving boxing — that appears to be a theme to which several members of the press have hitched their wagons. But is it really that dramatic? Are things that bad? And if they are, can one event come to the rescue?

Those who think there is a magic short-term panacea may be in for quite a revelation.

Boxing has inherent problems that are difficult to remedy. The infrastructure is faulty; the multitude of sanctioning bodies leaves most potential fans confused as to who the genuine championship-level fighters are. To compound this confusion, the WBA, for example, may at any one time have three recognized champions in the SAME weight division — a "unified" champion, formerly known as a "super" champion (who has unified two or more world titles), an "interim" champion, who might, from time-to-time be named as a stand-in for the "regular" champion (for lack of a better word). Last year they even cooked up a "Champion in recess" designation, ascribed to 154-pound titleholder Travis Simms.

In addition, there is inconsistency in medical standards among the various state and tribal commissions, and the alarming level of incompetence and corruption in state regulatory bodies has supplied ammunition for many a scandal. The result has been a gradual erosion in public confidence, manifesting itself in resistance on the part of sponsors to be involved.

The business model boxing has operated under has also contributed to its difficulties. For years, most of the major and mid-level players in the industry grew comfortable with a formula where their shows were subsidized by two entities — the TV carriers and the casinos. Those were the customers, and selling tickets became a lost art.

Consequently, a disconnect developed with fans. As promotional contracts became more and more prevalent, and promoters assumed a quasi-managerial role, protecting their "property" took priority over providing competitive fights to the consumer. And premium networks HBO and Showtime have struck deals with individual performers that have given them a stake in the fighter's career, sometimes produced bouts that were somewhat less than competitive.

Promoters have all too often fallen under the illusion — a solipsistic one — that the fan is as emotionally involved in watching a feature fighter's ascension as they are, and might tolerate predictable matchups that might serve as "stepping stones" toward that end. But with very few exceptions, fans don't care about building a fighter's record gratuitously; they just want to be entertained.

At the grassroots (or "club fight") level, excessive costs imposed by regulatory compliance have made it difficult for promoters to survive, because fans have either become generally turned off to boxing as a live event or can get their fill watching it on cable television.

This is not a model that is easily changed, and many in the industry don't see De La Hoya-Mayweather making a significant difference.

"I hope it's good for boxing," says Mike Acri, a Pennsylvania promoter who directs the career of former lightweight champion Paul Spadafora, among others. "But it's an individual event. It's good for De La Hoya and Mayweather, but it's not going to necessarily create more business for anyone else."

Acri is not being intentionally pessimistic. He hopes that if Mayweather wins, he can one day put Spadafora in the ring with the "Pretty Boy," as the two have been fierce sparring rivals in the past.

But he's just being honest. As far as income is concerned, this is not an industry where the wealth is too widely distributed.

Evidence would not seem to indicate that there is a logical connection between the success of boxing's mega-events and long-term viability across the board in the marketplace. Patrons who tune into these events have a tendency to jump in, then jump out, as they are generally more a fan of the spectacle than of the sport itself. A sports fan, for instance, may watch the Indy 500, the Kentucky Derby, or the Masters, but that doesn't mean he or she is going to be a dependable viewer of Indy Car racing, horse racing or golf throughout the year.

Sure, the fight will find its curiosity-seekers, and boxing will get a fair chance to retain them, but how they will do it is very uncertain.

There are undoubtedly some people in the television end of boxing who would like for Acri to be wrong. Assuming a strong performance from Saturday's fight, there will be a lot of talk about "momentum." Indeed, a major success with De La Hoya-Mayweather will leave promoters and network executives hopeful of putting together more mega-events.

But once again, the problem is the lack of major stars, and a crucial part of the development process is missing from the equation — exposure on the broadcast networks. Because of the unsavory reputation of boxing, these outlets have not been willing to do anything more substantial than to broker airtime to promoters over the last 10 years or so, with the exception of some NBC fights a few years back. Recently a brokered time buy which would have put ex-light heavyweight champion Antonio Tarver on ABC fell through, due, some say, to lack of sponsor support.

When CBS, NBC and ABC were showing cards on a regular basis in the late 1970s and '80s, prominent fighters who had come from the cable ranks were developed into bona fide attractions and moved upward from there into premium cable networks like HBO and Showtime (as they emerged), then on to closed circuit television for boxing's biggest events. That paradigm does not exist now.

That is not to say HBO and Showtime have done a bad job as the principal carriers of the sport. Boxing can point to some nice pay-per-view successes in recent years featuring fighters other than De La Hoya (obviously, everything is relative to cost).

Trinidad's 2005 fight with Winky Wright drew over 500,000 buys, similar to the buy rate of his bout against Fernando Vargas in 2000. A matchup between super featherweights Erik Morales and Manny Pacquiao drew over 350,000 subscribers last year. Mayweather's fight with Arturo Gatti had about 350,000 the year before. The two fights between Mosley (a two-time victor over De La Hoya) and Vargas in '06 both garnered more than 400,000 buyers. These are all very respectable numbers.

Still, there have been mixed signals. Roy Jones' return to the ring against Prince Badi Amaju last year drew about 66,000 buys, according to sources. In 2005, an ESPN pay-per-view show featuring Mosley, Antonio Margarito and heavyweights Calvin Brock and Jameel McCline drew a figure of roughly 150,000 as it was originally reported, but ESPN has not made a return to pay-per-view boxing since.

And even though it is highly optimistic about the prospects for Saturday, there are no indications HBO is making a major commitment to diving back into the action. The network will reportedly run only six PPV events in 2007 (De La Hoya-Mayweather is the second), compared to 11 last year.

Certainly though, Saturday's fight can pick up a lot of that slack, as it is expressed in real dollars. In '06, HBO's 11 PPV events brought in $177 million in revenue, not far off their all-time record for one year; if things go well, De La Hoya-Mayweather should produce at least one-third of that figure and possibly as much as one-half.

Historically, boxing biggest events have sold pretty well; it's just that there has been a dearth of them recently. Only one of the top five pay-per-view boxing telecasts has taken place in the last seven years, and that was the Lennox Lewis-Mike Tyson heavyweight title bout back in 2002. If nothing else, the performance of De La Hoya-Mayweather may serve as a barometer as to how much potential boxing can have at its "mega-level."

That's because the promoters and HBO Pay-Per-View have put their best foot forward in hyping the event, using promotional tie-ins with the HBO, ESPN, AOL and BET websites, as well as promotional partners like Tecate, Cazadores, Bally Fitness, 7-Eleven and Epana (a phone card distributor) among others. HBO has rolled out the reality series, "De La Hoya-Mayweather 24/7," with four installments having aired in advance of the bout, giving three premier episodes of that series optimum placement following "The Sopranos" and "Entourage" on Sunday nights.

If there is something people may wind up disappointed in, however, it is the full package for the May 5 spectacular. If Golden Boy Promotions perceives this as a true showcase event — one that expects to maximize its exposure to the casual sports fan — it doesn't seem to have exercised much strategy in supporting the feature attraction. Instead of providing a launching pad for other potential stars, the fights are relatively weak in their marquee value.

And the undercard is dominated with Latin fighters. No one can argue with their inclusion, since the Latin audience, as we've pointed out, is both loyal and reliable. But overloading a program in that manner goes a long way toward reaffirming the notion on the part of boxing's critics that it is drifting more and more toward status as a niche sport.

To "save boxing," as Schaefer put it, the business has to not only acquire the broadest audience possible but be able to keep it.

With the largest captive mainstream viewership it is likely to have for quite some time, this was an opportunity to make another incremental gain, however small it may seem, It was a chance to make a good faith gesture, even if it is only symbolic, toward the Anglo demographic that might normally be available to it, but instead has gravitated toward the UFC and mixed martial arts. As it stands, it looms as an opportunity at least partially squandered.

That is not something boxing should take lightly if it is serious about its future growth prospects. It needs to address the real problem; the long-term dilemma. One only needs to attend a UFC event to understand that young white males dominate the audience. And as illustrated, the UFC has succeeded greatly in mining the valuable 18-34 demographic. This is a no-nonsense crowd — wise to technology, having many entertainment options and preferring quick gratification, with little patience for "alphabet soup," predictable matches, or a promoter's self-serving agenda.

Right now they may be 18-to-34, but in 10 years they'll be 28-to-44. And boxing will want them. But they may not be able to have them, because MMA got there first and got there strongest, while boxing kept making the wrong moves.

Therein lies the great challenge for boxing, and it probably goes way beyond the ability to sell one superfight.