Keith Connolly pitches Benn vs Eubank Jr. trilogy at 168 — BoxingNews24 raises doubts

The pitch

Connolly calls for a 168lb trilogy: ‘No excuses’

Keith Connolly told talkSPORT Boxing he expects a trilogy between Conor Benn and Chris Eubank Jr. at 168 pounds, saying the fight would be a stadium event that “will sell out” and that a third meeting would settle their one-all series. Connolly named Eddie Hearn and Dana White as likely backers on opposite sides, and framed the proposed bout as a clear-cut neutral weight — "168 pounds, no excuses," was his phrase, as reported by BoxingNews24. The idea remains a pitch from Benn’s camp, not an announced fight.

Medical and performance concerns

BoxingNews24 questions Benn’s readiness after stoppage by Ryan

BoxingNews24 cautioned that rushing Benn back into a high-profile rematch raises medical and sporting concerns. The site noted Benn suffered a second-round knockout by Ryan, with the stoppage occurring at 1:25 of round two, and argued Benn’s chin now requires serious scrutiny. The report said a standard recovery programme would avoid heavy sparring and include a controlled confidence-builder before a major return — steps it suggested would be bypassed by fast-tracking a stadium trilogy.

Weight and stylistic factors

Why 168lb could favour Eubank Jr., the report argues

BoxingNews24 argued that a move to 168lb would give Chris Eubank Jr. a physical edge and put Benn at a disadvantage. The site pointed to Benn’s fight-night weight of 178.4lb in his loss to Ryan, describing that figure as rapid fluid retention rather than proven super-middleweight muscle. BoxingNews24 suggested heavier, sluggish pounds could blunt Benn’s hand speed — the attribute that troubled Eubank in earlier meetings — while giving a bigger, seasoned operator more scope to press and punish in the pocket.

Money and commercial feasibility

Saudi backing, not traditional promoters, seen as key to a stadium trilogy

BoxingNews24 emphasised the commercial hurdle facing a Benn–Eubank Jr. rubber match. The site argued the first two encounters were made possible by Saudi-level purses that absorbed exceptionally high demands, and that without similar funding from Riyadh Season or equivalent backers, promoters such as DAZN, Boxxer or Sky Sports could struggle to meet the price for another stadium event. The piece warned that absent big-money underwriting, the economics of another high-profile UK stadium show would be difficult to reconcile with standard broadcast and pay-per-view revenues.