Kell Brook's biggest flaw that prevented him from achieving greatness

Having 5H!T for brains fighting Golovkin. Could've been a welterweight kingpin.

The problem was that outside of Shawn Porter, Kell hadn't fought anybody. That wasn't only an issue for his development and progression as a fighter, but it also meant that he hadn't secured any of the big money fights he was chasing, and fast approaching 30 he was understandably keen to do so. Just look at his first 3 fights after winning his world title: Jo Jo Dan, Frankie Gavin and Kevin Bizier. So the GGG fight comes up and he jumps at it, because it's massive if he can win, but at least he finally gets paid regardless. Looking back though, it's hard to say whether his career pans out much differently if he didn't take that GGG fight. Of course the eye injury was a factor, but Spence was still his mandatory either way, so much depends on whether the pre-GGG Brook could have beaten Spence. I'm not sure he would have. If he spent the vast majority fighting bums, going up 2 weight classes and fighting GGG wasn't the answer. He could've fought any top fighter at 147 (Danny Garcia, Jessie Vargas or Keith Thurman) but he tried to touch the sun, His team f***ed up for letting him think he could.

Moving up in weight then moving back down doesn't seem to be a good idea. Roy Jones, Oscar De La Hoya, Kell Brook...

His biggest flaw? Letting Golovkin cave his face in, he was never the same after that. I commend him for the effort but it was a bad move. Im pretty sure everyone knew that but him and his team.

His biggest flaw was he fought fighters who were better than he

He just wasnt that good to begin with. His best win is over an overrated Shawn Porter.

Really? you don't think it was his team letting him move up 2 weight classes to fight the most dangerous puncher in boxing (at the time)? Kell's biggest problem was his ego. I've have never, til this day ever met or spoke to anyone who thought Kell would win that fight. Shame we will never see how great he could've become, he had a solid career overall. The problem was that outside of Shawn Porter, Kell hadn't fought anybody. That wasn't only an issue for his development and progression as a fighter, but it also meant that he hadn't secured any of the big money fights he was chasing, and fast approaching 30 he was understandably keen to do so. Just look at his first 3 fights after winning his world title: Jo Jo Dan, Frankie Gavin and Kevin Bizier. So the GGG fight comes up and he jumps at it, because it's massive if he can win, but at least he finally gets paid regardless. Looking back though, it's hard to say whether his career pans out much differently if he didn't take that GGG fight. Of course the eye injury was a factor, but Spence was still his mandatory either way, so much depends on whether the pre-GGG Brook could have beaten Spence. I'm not sure he would have.

Fought weak opposition for too long, before in my opinion a great win over Porter. He faced Golovkin when Golovkin was somewhere near his peak, and had his moments, but ultimately was smashed to bits. Great fight with Spence, I, and many others had it 4-4 after 8, he lost round 9, then unfolded in r10. Now, he's just falling apart, if he fights Khan, it's a case of what smashes first, Khan's glass chin, or Brook's eye.

They killed him with the Golovkin fight.

Really? you don't think it was his team letting him move up 2 weight classes to fight the most dangerous puncher in boxing (at the time)? Kell's biggest problem was his ego. I've have never, til this day ever met or spoke to anyone who thought Kell would win that fight. Shame we will never see how great he could've become, he had a solid career overall.

One thing that often gets overlooked is that on the whole, the US has superior trainers and coaches to the UK - especially when you're talking about the very top guys. You don't produce fighters with the all-around skillsets of Mayweather, Ward, Hopkins, Toney, Crawford, Whitaker, etc. by accident - these guys are trained in methods and techniques handed down through generations. You just don't see that kind of slickness in UK fighters. I watched almost all of Brook's fights and always liked him. Very good jab and great timing. But he was never a particularly good inside fighter or good defensively. And nor was he able to consistently adjust during a fight. Fighting GGG clearly didn't help, but I'm pretty sure he was a rung below Spence/Crawford regardless. Somewhere around Porter/Thurman/Danny Garcia level.

Brook never lived the life. His private life really DID affect his boxing life, he drinks too much, known to swing the other way and not focus fully on the sport. He is well known to have a few demons outside of the sport.

His handlers/matchmakers messed up by moving him too slowly. He fought almost all nobodies for the first 10 years of his career which is ludicrous.. kinda like what Lucian Bute did until he ran into a real one.

I think Kell's biggest weakness was his penchant for the odd pen1s between training camps...

Happens with a lot of "British slicksters", Junior Witter another example. Josh Kelly a more recent one. They are on-top fighters. They look great when they can unload and move around the ring freely. If someone hits them back and cuts the ring off it all goes to pot.

You dont think it was him jumping 2 weight classes to fight GGG (and lose badly), and then jump down 2 weight classes (and low again badly)? That was a big factor but GGG and Spence showed he can't fight off the ropes, he just shells up and freezes, no countering off the ropes whatsoever.

You dont think it was him jumping 2 weight classes to fight GGG (and lose badly), and then jump down 2 weight classes (and low again badly)?