Andre Ward or Adrien Broner?

Ward is much more seasoned and polished, an obvious HOFer in the making. As for Broner, we have yet to see.

Ward is the most complete fighter in boxing and fights the best competition available. Easy question, and a dumb one. It doesn't ask who's better now, it asks who'll be better in the future. Broner will be able to face many name fighters, it's slim pickings for Ward

I'll say this though. If Broner were to beat Rios, Garcia, and Matthyse... then he probably will surpass Ward based on his hype and attention he brings also.

Ward is the most complete fighter in boxing and fights the best competition available. Easy question, and a dumb one.

He's more talented, more of a warrior and will become more popular. A FAIR question would be: Who accomplished more by age 23, Ward or Broner? Obviously Broner. I don't understand why anyone other than a very nationalistic person would like Ward. He's AWFUL to watch, he won't fight outside his home state and won't take a fight at light heavyweight. He fought Froch outside his home state. This pretty much discredits your whole post, do us a favor and log off the forum and come back when you know your shit.

C'mon man. Yall are making people hate Broner even more with comparisons like this. Ward cleaned out a division and is way more proven against much stiffer competition. Broner's career just started basically. If he cleans out 35, great. He's on the right track. He cleans out 140 (even without the Top Rank fighters), ok, we officially got ourselves a new star. Let the man continue his career and do the talking in the ring.

He's more talented, more of a warrior and will become more popular. A FAIR question would be: Who accomplished more by age 23, Ward or Broner? Obviously Broner. I don't understand why anyone other than a very nationalistic person would like Ward. He's AWFUL to watch, he won't fight outside his home state and won't take a fight at light heavyweight. At this point its nothing more then pure speculation on your part..... Last I checked Ward has fought outside the US more times then Broner

Broner is a lot younger than Ward, so it's not a fair comparison. Ward gets sh1t ratings, Broner broke records on Saturday for the highest HBO ratings. He's a more entertaining fighter. Broner doesn't hold a lot. Broner doesn't need to foul to win and need shady referees to allow it. Broner isn't afraid to travel. Broner isn't afraid to move up a weight division and win world titles in more than one division. When all is said and done, Broner will have accomplished much more than Ward. How do you know???

Is this a joke? Theres a universe of a difference between Ward's skill, and Broner's skill. Ward can adapt to anybody. At the same weight, Ward would dominate that guy.

I'd rather Ward he's an excellent fighter and a very classy guy.

Ward Bradley>Broner..... That can change but at the moment it is what it is

Ward's been a pro much longer So? He's 26-0 and Broner is 25-0. Ward accomplished much more in nearly as many fights.

So Demarco was NOT recognized as the #1 LW? I'm not hailing Broner's win over Demarco as some P4P performance. I am saying that Broner could have played it safe and fought lesser ranked fighters to pad his record like some other fighters have shamelessly done. Instead, Broner fought the best in class. When was the last time that Bradley did that? I seem to remember Bradley dodging Khan for quite some time. Khan was the man at 140 to beat. Bradley wanted nothing to do with that fight. When was the last time Pacquiao fought the best in class .. meaning a #1 in a weight class? We'd have to go back to 2008!! So while Broner is less accomplished than both fighters, he's starting off right by seeking the best .. which is the #1, 2 and 3 in any division. Pacquiao had 40 fights before he even fought someone on the world stage you'd even recognize. That's a hell of a lot of padding. not really and that division was weak. beating the number 1 guy just sounds nice. like floyd over baldomir even though baldomir sucks. and if you want to be honest demarco didn't deserve to be 1. he beat linares who did nothing at 135 and got clobbered in 2 rounds in his very next fight. then he beat the #9 guy. that equals #1? ricky burns beat the #5, #7, and katsidis. shouldn't he be #1? but demarco beat a hyped guy in linares so he was #1. if someone beat gary russell would they be #1? makes no sense. the rankings were garbage. bradley beat a bunch of more accomplished guys in a much tougher division. bradley beat 3 guys who were #2 before or after he fought them and all were better than demarco. don't be fooled by weak divisions and cushy favoritism by the ring.

Neither Froch or Kessler are elite fighters. You can be at the top of your division and not be an elite fighter. Skills and ability make you elite, not what you have accomplished. Bute had amassed a very impressive record in some eyes ... and he even had so fooled into believing that he was elite .. that is until he stepped up competition. Froch is still virtually young in his career. Broner is almost in the same position that Froch was when he entered the Super Six. Broner IMO is 10 times the technician that Froch or Kessler could ever be. That isn't to say that Froch and Kessler don't have their strengths as well. But elite? No sir. They are not. Was Gatti or Mickey Ward elite? No sir. They gave us one of the most memorable trilogies in boxing history. They were two guys willing to lay it all out on the line. But elite? Hell no. Maybe you should research the term elite and discover why so few fit the criteria. Its a pretty exclusive club to be in. You're not comparing Froch's resume to Gatti and Ward's are you? I think a case can be made for Froch being in the top 10 P4P and some people have him in there, I think he's at 12 or 13 personally. I think Froch is an elite fighter. You don't have to have insane speed and defense to be elite. Froch has underrated boxing abilitiy and pretty good power. He beats anyone at 168, except Ward of course. Of course, this is a matter of opinion.

They have nearly the same amount of fights though. Ward's been a pro much longer

Ward is MUCH further along in is career and accomplished s a fighter at the moment. Maybe we can compare 28 yr old Bronerto a 28 yr old Ward. They have nearly the same amount of fights though.

Did I really seem upset? Is that what you see? LOL ... I did dispute that statement based on the fact that aside from Pacquiao, Bradley hasn't really done anything P4P worthy. Personally, I don't think Broner has either but its a loaded statement because honestly neither man has done enough to be regarded P4P at this point. And my mind is made up: I am ranking Broner's win over all of Bradley's wins because none of them were #1. NONE. Rank is how one determines the value of a win. It isn't determined by "what people were saying" or "what you thought the other guy could do". The only other element at play would be quality of opponent at the time of the fight. This is especially important because certain boxers wait until their potential opponents lose to someone else, and then swoop in to capitalize on the fallen foe's name recognition. Those kinds of situations must be factored in. demarco was ranked #1 by default because he was in a terrible division. demarco's best win was over a guy ranked #9.

Not making weight and intentionally stipulating that your opponent must make a weight that suits YOUR AGENDA are two very different things. Not making weight is a part of the game. Always has been. Always will be. Pretending that you cannot make a weight that you have been making for years so that you can justify demanding that your opponent be further weakened is a cowardly move. Apples and oranges, my man. Sure but what Broner did was worse by any measure. You're ambushing the opponent who can't even say no, it's his only chance at 6 figures. And then the next day thing he pulled, that's what makes it indefensible. Check out those pics of Rios at Abril and Murray weighin for a guy who tried making weight.

Ward is MUCH further along in is career and accomplished s a fighter at the moment. Maybe we can compare 28 yr old Bronerto a 28 yr old Ward.

Some will bring up the Deleon fight, and one could counter by mentioning that Bradley looked much worse winning against Holt. So there's that. This is not a good comparison. Bradley Holt was a 50/50 fight, green champ vs top contender. Broner DLH was a showcase. Bradley got dropped twice, once very hard, but unlike Broner he won crystal clear. Which was exhibit A in "What makes Bradley so tough to beat?"