Oscar De La Hoya, a former boxing champion and promoter, has expressed strong disapproval of Canelo Alvarez's recent career choices. In this week's episode of "Clap Back Thursday," De LaHoya criticized Alvarez for prioritizing financial gain over fan engagement and loyalty. The criticism stems from Alvarez's decision to sign a four-fight contract with Turki Al-Sheikh instead of facing Jake Paul. Additionally, DeLaHoya highlighted Alvarez's choice to fight William Scull on Cinco de Mayo rather than David Benavidez, whom many fans believed should be his opponent. DeLaHoya argued that these decisions reflect Alvarez's lack of commitment to providing exciting matchups and supporting the Mexican community.

DeLaHoya emphasized that Alvarez's actions have led to a shift in the boxing world, creating what he calls the "diva era." He pointed out that Alvarez's reluctance to face challenging opponents like Benavidez undermines the sport's integrity. According to DeLaHoya, Alvarez's refusal to engage in potentially risky fights shows a preference for securing lucrative contracts over delivering memorable bouts for fans. This stance was further exemplified by Alvarez's decision to fight Scull, an opponent who many considered less formidable compared to Benavidez.

The controversy surrounding Alvarez's choices extends beyond just one match. Fans and critics alike have noted that Alvarez's upcoming bout with Terence Crawford, a 38-year-old veteran, raises questions about the fighter's true motivations. Many view this as another instance where Alvarez opts for a financially advantageous match rather than a more competitive one. DeLaHoya also mentioned Alvarez's history of changing allegiances, including leaving Golden Boy Promotions in 2015, which adds to the perception of a lack of loyalty.

DeLaHoya drew comparisons between Alvarez and past boxing legends, emphasizing how previous champions embraced challenges and elevated their opponents. He lamented that Alvarez's approach contrasts sharply with the warrior spirit of fighters like Julio César Chávez, Mike Tyson, and Sugar Ray Leonard. By consistently avoiding tougher matches, Alvarez has contributed to what DeLaHoya describes as the "softest era" in boxing. The criticism highlights concerns about the future direction of the sport and the impact of Alvarez's influence on younger fighters.

Ultimately, DeLaHoya's comments underscore the broader implications of Alvarez's career decisions. His critique not only targets Alvarez's individual choices but also reflects on the evolving nature of boxing. As the sport moves forward, it faces challenges in balancing financial incentives with the need to deliver compelling and meaningful matchups for fans. DeLaHoya's perspective offers a critical reflection on the importance of maintaining the sport's integrity and honoring its rich history.