Is Froch HOF worthy?

[New England]

Carl Froch HOF? LMFAO the ****...

this is why we dont vote guys into the hall of fame the day after they get a nice win


i'm out of it for a while, man
people calling froch a hall of famer
building the guys he beat into these great quan******



i think you guys need a refresher on just how good a great fighter is
carl froch is not that


i am sorry, but these guys he is beating are not that good.

[Rome-By-Ko]

on the "young" part..
bute is 32.
abraham was 30

again, i'll literally repost my reply from earlier


froch lost to the two best fighters he fought

faded kessler and andre ward

glen johnson is ancient. he's been old for years
abraham SUCKS. he sucks. the guy's claim to fame is getting his jaw broken by edison miranda and knockout out jermain taylor's corpse.
other than beating the most one dimensional fighter to win a MW championship (abraham,) dirrel has done next to nothing. and he almost beat froch.
taylor was never the same after losing to kelly pavlik and fighting a bigger man (JT is fighting at MW today. he's clearly a smaller man than froch.)


were you watching miguel cotto pre margarito 1?
i dont want to dig, but i dont think you guys remember just how good he was.

he was one of the planet's best fighters. you have boxrec. look at the resume for yourself. cotto's a borderline hall of famer in my book, but was a better and more accomplished fighter than carl froch.

Bute maybe 30,but he has not fought anybody and was fresher then Carl..Bute 30 is like a boxing 27...

Yes I've followed Cotto's whole career,how was he more accomplished then Froch??He was on the canvas in most of his fights at 140lb..Let's be real,he did not fight none of the top ranked fighters at 140lb..No Hatton,no Mayweather no Witter(believe it or not Witter was ranked high at this point)..Just saying bro,I remember Cotto,it was nothing to rave to much about..Froch win or lose has fought everyone..Who has he not fought at 168lb??

[-Lowkey-]

on the "young" part..
bute is 32.
abraham was 30

again, i'll literally repost my reply from earlier


froch lost to the two best fighters he fought

faded kessler and andre ward

glen johnson is ancient. he's been old for years
abraham SUCKS. he sucks. the guy's claim to fame is getting his jaw broken by edison miranda and knockout out jermain taylor's corpse.
other than beating the most one dimensional fighter to win a MW championship (abraham,) dirrel has done next to nothing. and he almost beat froch.
taylor was never the same after losing to kelly pavlik and fighting a bigger man (JT is fighting at MW today. he's clearly a smaller man than froch.)


were you watching miguel cotto pre margarito 1?
i dont want to dig, but i dont think you guys remember just how good he was.

he was one of the planet's best fighters. you have boxrec. look at the resume for yourself. cotto's a borderline hall of famer in my book, but was a better and more accomplished fighter than carl froch.

You need to stop being condescending look at boxrec? wtf like most people haven't seen most of Cottos big fights.

Cotto has always been vulnerable even in his "prime" Judah and Torres proved that Cotto also lost to the two best fighters he fought and arguably lost to Mosley and Clottey I think its you who needs to watch more of Cottos career to be frank.

[IronDanHamza]

this is why we dont vote guys into the hall of fame the day after they get a nice win


i'm out of it for a while, man
people calling froch a hall of famer
building the guys he beat into these great quan******



i think you guys need a refresher on just how good a great fighter is
carl froch is not that


i am sorry, but these guys he is beating are not that good.

Do you think Joe Calzaghe is a HOF'er?

If he's a HOF'er, I don't see how Froch isn't.

I still think it's arguable he's a HOF'er but he's one win away from being a lock.

[New England]

What did Miguel Cotto do pre Margarito 1 to say he's greater than Carl Froch?

Miguel Cotto lost to the 2 best fighters he fought. Hell, he lost to the 3 best fighters he fought.

Like I said in an earlier post;

How many fighters have fought top ranked opposition, 5 years in a row, back to back, and won all but 2 of them? 3 of those wins being the clear underdog?

I can't think of another fighter in history who you can say that about.

Cotto's resume is hardly superior to Froch's, and the more I think about it, the more I think that Froch's resume is probably better.

he was a much better fighter than carl froch, dan.

you know it and i know it. that cannot be lost here. he was a better fighter.



how long have you been calling froch ****?
seriously brother, lol




i dont care thaty much about the "ranking" of a fighter
you know that
i use my eyes.
i used to fight. i was a good athlete in my youth so i like to think i see things well. i've been wathcing boxing for 15-20 years now.
by the eyes cotto was a much better fighter in his prime than carl froch

froch has a nice little resume. he has fought everybody.
still not a great fighter.


i've got to get going, but i'll revisit the thread

[New England]

Do you think Joe Calzaghe is a HOF'er?

If he's a HOF'er, I don't see how Froch isn't.

I still think it's arguable he's a HOF'er but he's one win away from being a lock.

do i htink he will get in?

yes

would i vote him in?
i dont know. ii dont have that kind of power. it's like signing a big check. it's only paper if you dont have the money to cover it.

initially i would not. its all about who else is on the ballot that year, anyway, but you know that.

i probably would down the road after feeling bad for him for years. he was a good to very good to maybe even great fighter who did next to nothing in terms of a great fighter's resume.

[IronDanHamza]

he was a much better fighter than carl froch, dan.

you know it and i know it. that cannot be lost here. he was a better fighter.



how long have you been calling froch ****?
seriously brother, lol




i dont care thaty much about the "ranking" of a fighter
you know that
i use my eyes.
i used to fight. i was a good athlete in my youth so i like to think i see things well. i've been wathcing boxing for 15-20 years now.
by the eyes cotto was a much better fighter in his prime than carl froch

froch has a nice little resume. he has fought everybody.
still not a great fighter.


i've got to get going, but i'll revisit the thread

Cotto is the better fighter. He is more skilled and is better.

But his resume is hardly better, to be honest, Froch's resume could be better.

And that's what matters, when ranking a fighter.

I've been calling Froch **** since about 2006. Everyone knows I hate the guy.

But as **** as he is, he manages to win, and win, and win. And beat the best fighters in his division, one after the other.

He lost to Ward, who hasn't? Ward's arguably the best fighter in the world. No shame in that.

He lost a tight to Kessler.

Other than that, he's beaten everyone. Been the clear underdog in 3 of those fights.

I can't remember the odd's for the Dirrell fight but he might have been the underdog in that fight aswell.

He's had a great career.

[New England]

You need to stop being condescending look at boxrec? wtf like most people haven't seen most of Cottos big fights.

Cotto has always been vulnerable even in his "prime" Judah and Torres proved that Cotto also lost to the two best fighters he fought and arguably lost to Mosley and Clottey I think its you who needs to watch more of Cottos career to be frank.

i watched every fight of consequence that cotto has been in when it happened


froch too.

i was ringside when froch knocked out taylor


i am sorry if i came off as condescending.

[-Lowkey-]

Right hes a better fighter because you say so i have seen little/nothing put forward to back up your argument.

I think its just a case of you appreciate Cotto's style more so somehow in your mind that equates to him being "the better fighter".

[Rome-By-Ko]

he was a much better fighter than carl froch, dan.

you know it and i know it. that cannot be lost here. he was a better fighter.



how long have you been calling froch ****?
seriously brother, lol




i dont care thaty much about the "ranking" of a fighter
you know that
i use my eyes.
i used to fight. i was a good athlete in my youth so i like to think i see things well. i've been wathcing boxing for 15-20 years now.
by the eyes cotto was a much better fighter in his prime than carl froch

froch has a nice little resume. he has fought everybody.
still not a great fighter.


i've got to get going, but i'll revisit the thread

I feel that most don't want to give Froch any respect because he does not fit their model of what a boxer is suppose to look like..He's not fast,he does not have great movement..But guess what he wins,he beat Pascal(the guy who clearly beat Dawson who Ward is trying to make a fight with)and Pascal is a very athletic fighter...He beat Taylor and Dirrell both are very athletic fighters..Most thought he would loses both,I like Cotto and feel he has had a very good career..But he does not have a stronger resume then Froch,and tho his style may seem better to you,does not make it the more effective style..I've been very impressed with what Froch has accomplished with very minimal talents...