Comments Thread For: Eddie Hearn Views Francis Ngannou As "Easy" Work For Anthony Joshua

[Apollo7]

Wouldn't surprise me if he was easy work. I'm not gonna get too carried away just because he did better than expected against Fury.

[Jab jab boom]

AJ was overhyped based off what? He was a unified heavyweight champion with multiple title defences, that's impressive not many heavyweights can claim those feats. Furthermore, for being mental fragile he's overcome the obstacles put in front of him something many people wouldn't. Do I believe he's the most mentally tough boxer around? No, but the narrative of him being mentally weak is overblown.

I agree, Ryder beat Smith but so what he's not the first fighter to get the benefit of the doubt. Plus, a first ballot hall of famer who's a multiple weight world champion in Alvarez did dominate Smith. However, all of this said does this make Smith unworthy of facing the champions at 175? No, because he's moved up and looked impressive. I don't see Smith as any worse than Yarde or Richard's who challenged the champions at 175.

With Aj, it looks good on paper but who has he really beaten? This is a weak heavyweight era and along with Aj, the only other ones who developed any credibility have been fury, wilder and Usyk. Aj has only faced one of them and lost twice. Before that he was stopped by a fat underdog who took the fight on short notice. As far as his mental instability, he quit vs Ruiz. He stopped trying to win in the first fight vs Usyk and then d****d himself over the ropes as if he were dying after that fight. After losing the second fight he had a mental breakdown and went on a weirdo rant. Since the Ruiz fight he seems extremely passive.

With Callum Smith, again, he deserved to lose to Ryder who is C level at best. Losing to Canelo is one thing, losing and not even trying to offer any kind of resistance is another. Beating a couple of low level guys at 175 doesn’t change that and while I agree that his name isn’t worse than a Yarde, at least we know Yarde will fight his ass off and go out on his shield if he needs to. Callum has not shown that type of grit. That’s why I don’t see him as a credible threat to the two elite guys in that division.

[Frede6]

Lucky Francis Everyone is sucking his ****

[M312]

AJ can win only on points. I can only see Nggnnou KO AJ if we talk about KO.

Because YDKSAB.

It's heavyweight boxing.

[crimsonfalcon07]

Apparently Hearn was just running his mouth because he's now had to say that he talked to AJ, and AJ has no interest in fighting Ngannou.

[unknowledgeablepugilist]

With Aj, it looks good on paper but who has he really beaten? This is a weak heavyweight era and along with Aj, the only other ones who developed any credibility have been fury, wilder and Usyk. Aj has only faced one of them and lost twice. Before that he was stopped by a fat underdog who took the fight on short notice. As far as his mental instability, he quit vs Ruiz. He stopped trying to win in the first fight vs Usyk and then d****d himself over the ropes as if he were dying after that fight. After losing the second fight he had a mental breakdown and went on a weirdo rant. Since the Ruiz fight he seems extremely passive.

With Callum Smith, again, he deserved to lose to Ryder who is C level at best. Losing to Canelo is one thing, losing and not even trying to offer any kind of resistance is another. Beating a couple of low level guys at 175 doesn’t change that and while I agree that his name isn’t worse than a Yarde, at least we know Yarde will fight his ass off and go out on his shield if he needs to. Callum has not shown that type of grit. That’s why I don’t see him as a credible threat to the two elite guys in that division.

How do you define who has credibility and who doesn't? In my view, Wladimir, Povetkin, Parker, and Whyte all had credibility because of there consistency at a high level. I agree, the heavyweight era is not of the standards of the 90s or 70s, but the vast majority of heavyweight eras could be considered weak. The 50s, 2000s, 80s, and 40s could all have arguments for being average or below average eras yet there's still plenty of credible talent in them. Joshua was soundly beaten by Andy Ruiz but won an immediate rematch but I would ask is Joshua the first boxer to lose to an underdog? people put a massive emphasis on the loss as if nobody in the hall of fame has been in a similar predicament. Now I am not arguing against critiquing him about it but it is simply over-blown in the grand scheme of things. I am not arguing against Joshua having mental instability but against the notion of him being being mentally weak or fragile; he's prone to moments of weakness like the vast majority of boxers. Do you think Fury and Wilder have never shown any mentally fragility/weakness? Because I think they have but it isn't made there whole personality like it is with Joshua.

How do you decide what a C, B or A level fighter is? what is the criteria you set. I will agree, Smith didn't do enough against Alvarez but similarly to Charlo does that automatically take away the credibility of there previous and future achievements? Vitali quit against Byrd but showed immense grit against Lewis a more formable opponent. Smith credibility in my view cannot be defined by two performances when he has showed a willingness to fight the best; plus he's a talented fighter in my view. Underperforming or quitting in one single fight does not indicate you will do the same in a different scenario; that's my view.

Finally, a hype job to me is someone who's put into a position there talent or ability cannot meet. Joshua one of the best heavyweights or Smith being a top contender a light heavyweight does not fulfil that criteria in my opinion.

[Rockenator]

Hearn is full of ****. What a joke of a promoter. And his organization is the future of boxing? Joshua would kiss the canvas against Ngannou. He wouldn't be able to handle his size, strength and punching power. Ngannou is a world champion with great pedigree, determination, drive and skill. Joshua is a body builder turned boxer, a creampuff puncher with a glass jaw chin who won't fight any of the top heavyweights for the next few fights he has left in him. OK Hearn - - make the fight with Ngannou! Let's see how quickly Joshua can dispel Ngannou and show the world what a great talent AJ is. Pure, unadulterated horse ****.

[Jab jab boom]

How do you define who has credibility and who doesn't? In my view, Wladimir, Povetkin, Parker, and Whyte all had credibility because of there consistency at a high level. I agree, the heavyweight era is not of the standards of the 90s or 70s, but the vast majority of heavyweight eras could be considered weak. The 50s, 2000s, 80s, and 40s could all have arguments for being average or below average eras yet there's still plenty of credible talent in them. Joshua was soundly beaten by Andy Ruiz but won an immediate rematch but I would ask is Joshua the first boxer to lose to an underdog? people put a massive emphasis on the loss as if nobody in the hall of fame has been in a similar predicament. Now I am not arguing against critiquing him about it but it is simply over-blown in the grand scheme of things. I am not arguing against Joshua having mental instability but against the notion of him being being mentally weak or fragile; he's prone to moments of weakness like the vast majority of boxers. Do you think Fury and Wilder have never shown any mentally fragility/weakness? Because I think they have but it isn't made there whole personality like it is with Joshua.

How do you decide what a C, B or A level fighter is? what is the criteria you set. I will agree, Smith didn't do enough against Alvarez but similarly to Charlo does that automatically take away the credibility of there previous and future achievements? Vitali quit against Byrd but showed immense grit against Lewis a more formable opponent. Smith credibility in my view cannot be defined by two performances when he has showed a willingness to fight the best; plus he's a talented fighter in my view. Underperforming or quitting in one single fight does not indicate you will do the same in a different scenario; that's my view.

Finally, a hype job to me is someone who's put into a position their talent or ability cannot meet. Joshua one of the best heavyweights or Smith being a top contender a light heavyweight does not fulfil that criteria in my opinion.

I respect your stance and how you’ve verbalized your point. With Aj, I just feel like he has shown repeated moments of mental weakness and has done so in the ring. Fury has done so outside of the ring with his hiatus from the sport and allowing some of his prime to be taken away due to addiction. Wilder has also shown weakness out of the ring, especially with his ridiculous excuses for his losses to fury. But in the ring, they both have shown no tendency to quit and give it all they’ve got.
for Smith, being willing to fight a top opponent is one thing because nobody is turning down a canelo pay Day but not showing up for it is inexcusable.
I consider a hypejob to be someone whose popularity exceeds their in ring performances and I think that applies to both, especially Aj as he is immensely popular but has underperformed for years now. IMO

[SN!PER]

I'm guessing he believes AJ can do the same thing to Ngannou that he did in the Ruiz rematch... maybe, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[4truth]

Depends on Ngannou's chin. Fury wasn't much of a chin test but at some point Joshua is going to land a bomb.