Froch's resume - nothing legendary

[nomadman]

Don't go overboard

Good resume but some of the **** I'm reading here is embarrassing and the people who say it must have only been watching boxing for 3 years.

OK then, name me a fighter of the last four years with a better string of fights and wins on his resume. No tune ups allowed.

[catalinul]

You can nit pick into virtually anyone's resume.

Froch has a very solid resume.

[Chuckguy]

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with u buri would like to know your opinion on qhat would be a great rezy

Don't go overboard

Good resume but some of the **** I'm reading here is embarrassing and the people who say it must have only been watching boxing for 3 years.

Lets break it down.

Jean Pascal - Went on to win 175 lbs title (top win), Lost to 46 year old Bernard Hopkins comfortably after Calzaghe beat Hopkins 3 years earlier
Jermain Taylor - Lost 2/3 fights before Froch including a crushing knock out, ahead on scorecards and stopped late due to his typical stamina problems. KOed badly once again in fight after Froch - Past prime
Andre Dirrell - Obviously a good fighter but who the hell has he beat? Can someone tell me please? does he have any distinctions? Never a champion or anything - Unproven
Arthur Abraham - Beat 1 guy at 168 and that was Jermain Taylor who had lost 3/4 fights with 2 by KO, way too small from the weight and really hasn't done anything at 168, no real notable wins at 160 either.
Glen Johnson - 43 years old... yes I know he beat Roy Jones like 6 years ago but the guy hasn't beat a good fighter in years. Lost 4 of last 6 with only wins being Yusaf Mack and Allan Green - Past prime
Lucian Bute - Champion in his prime but as many are saying.. untested really, never went in with the best and it showed.

Losses
Kessler - Close but clear loss (IMO) to a guy who has been fighting injuries for a while now, not in his prime anymore. Calzaghe beat prime undefeated Kessler.
Ward - Top fighter in the division by a mile, top 10 p4p.. no shame here.


So what we have is a guy who has beat

2 Past prime fighters (Johnson, Taylor)
2 Unproven (Dirrell... Bute to a degree)
1 Too small in reality with no real notable wins (Abraham)
1 Prime top class fighter (Pascal)

The super 6 convinced a lot of people that these guys are Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Duran etc.. Truth is some of them were untested going into the super 6 and some still don't have any real top class wins to generate the hype they get.

[Light_Speed]

I haven't seen anyone say his resume is legendary. We praise that he fought these guys all in a row, and that he'll fight anyone. That's about it.

Some people are talking about HOF status and greatest resume in the history of the division. They're confusing respect with greatness, you can give Froch a lot of respect for his opposition but that doesn't make him greater, you have to win the fights and avoid lopsided losses.

[black.ink]

Some people are talking about HOF status and greatest resume in the history of the division. They're confusing respect with greatness, you can give Froch a lot of respect for his opposition but that doesn't make him greater, you have to win the fights and avoid lopsided losses.

So tell me, if you constantly face the best fighters in your division over a number of years, you are supposed to be unbeaten?

It's people like you that get fooled by undefeated records. Every true great takes a loss. Why? Because they face the best.

[nomadman]

Some people are talking about HOF status and greatest resume in the history of the division. They're confusing respect with greatness, you can give Froch a lot of respect for his opposition but that doesn't make him greater, you have to win the fights and avoid lopsided losses.

Huh?

He is winning the majority of his big fights. And so what if he has a few close calls? He's taking on the best. When you do that, things like losses and close fights are going to happen you know?

And thus far, his only one-sided loss is to Ward, who's a top talent with perhaps the makings of one of the best SMWs of all time. Does that bar him for being a future HOFer himself? If so, why?

[-Lowkey-]

Some people are talking about HOF status and greatest resume in the history of the division. They're confusing respect with greatness, you can give Froch a lot of respect for his opposition but that doesn't make him greater, you have to win the fights and avoid lopsided losses.

Name someone who has a better resume at 168 throughout the divisions history?

[SirTomJones]

So tell me, if you constantly face the best fighters in your division over a number of years, you are supposed to be unbeaten?

It's people like you that get fooled by undefeated records. Every true great takes a loss. Why? Because they face the best.

Carl is a credit to the support.

Bute should already had a loss on his record before the Froch fight. Look at the way he bounced back from that. Bute would have learnt something last night about himself even if he was involved in an devastating loss.

[IronDanHamza]

Some people are talking about HOF status and greatest resume in the history of the division. They're confusing respect with greatness, you can give Froch a lot of respect for his opposition but that doesn't make him greater, you have to win the fights and avoid lopsided losses.

He does argubaly have the greatest resume in the History of the Super Middleweight Division as it stands

The Super Middleweight Division is argubaly the least prestigious Division in the History of the sport. It's not difficult to be the greatest of all time in that Division.

If Froch doesn't have the best resume of all time at 168 as it stands, he's atleast Top 3.

This doesn't make him an ATG either. He isn't an ATG.

I don't see where anyone has said that.

[IronDanHamza]

Name someone who has a better resume at 168 throughout the divisions history?

He'll say Ward.

Who has an argument, with his 2 wins over Kessler and Froch. But then there's Abraham, and who else?

Froch has the more depth than Ward, as it stands.

But then after Ward, who else is there?

Not many.