Sports Illustrated puts Adrien Broner ahead of Carl Froch in P4P rankings

[The Gambler1981]

Would ranking Fonfara p4p be a success also? It'd get some discussion as well.

Going out on a limb gets people talking~ they think Broner is that good a fighter on his abilities. Broner looks the part and has shown a lot of talent.

If Broner and Froch were the same size I would pick Broner to win~ point blank period on that fact alone I could have Broner ahead if that is how I make my list.

[WolfGirl]

Going out on a limb gets people talking~ they think Broner is that good a fighter on his abilities. Broner looks the part and has shown a lot of talent.

If Broner and Froch were the same size I would pick Broner to win~ point blank period on that fact alone I could have Broner ahead if that is how I make my list.

It depends on what you think p4p means.
Some people think 'p4p' means what if they were the same size and everything was equal.

If that's what people consider p4p, than it's perfectly resonable to have David Haye above Vitali.

Does anyone think a 6'7 Haye will lose to the current 6'7 Vitali? Lol
Or a 6'3 Vitali vs current Haye?

If that's what p4p means to some people, their rankings will be very differnent from people who don't think that way.


To other people 'p4p' means recent resume/achivements. To yet some others it means simply 'most skilled'.

It's all opinions.

[KnockUTheFukOut]

Don't Matter...it is no such thing as a "OFFICIAL P4P LIST" it is all based on peoples opinion(s) so who cares

Broner likely will break 10 real soon on most P4P List though if he keeps doing that he is doing

When you don't have an opinion of your own then yes you do get sensitive to OTHERS OPINION(S) because you need others to tell you how you should feel about certain fighters (these are the worse type of fans, a lot of you Pacquiao and Mayweather fans fall under this category, you need things like Yahoo and ESPN and SI to kiss your favorite fighters A$$ )

If I had a List Froch would likely be in my Top 10-15 FOR SURE!

[UglyPug]

Froch is 7-2 vs these guys

Yusaf Mack
Lucian Bute
Andre Ward
Glen Johnson
Arthur Abraham
Mikkel Kessler
Andre Dirrell
Jermain Taylor
Jean Pascal

This. . . Going .500 against these 9 guys (especially fighting them consecutively) would be impressive. . . Froch could easily be 8-1, seeing as how many people had him beating Kessler, or had the fight dead even.

I've got Froch/Kessler a draw. . . I think Froch landed the harder, cleaner shots over the course of the fight, although Kessler was being aggressive, and kept pressing the action, landing beautiful body shots. If Froch hadn't taken his foot off hte gas in the middle rounds, he might have stopped him (which I think he might do in the rematch).

[BennyST]

they also have johnathon banks in the top 10. wtf!

What? As ridiculous as it is to have Broner over Froch already, this takes the cake.

Are you sure that's right though? No one in their right mind, and I mean no one, could possibly have Banks anywhere near the top ten, let alone in it!

Freedom: as usual, you're a moron. Why don't we just rank amateur prospects above the top pro guys based on their future potential? Why should they have to even fight? Beating top, good fighters is so overrated these days.

[illmaticfighter]

definitely american bias here froch is a top 15 p4p fighter imo top 10 ,broner is top 20 maybe based on skills.

[slimshandy69]

The only two REALLY good fighters Froch was ever in with, he LOST to. Let's not forget, Froch lost to Ward and a past-best Kessler.

- Abraham didn't have the height & reach for 168, although he was decent at 160
- Pascal was beaten by an old man
- Johnson was good but he's old, he was beaten more clearly by Bute and Fonfara
- Taylor was beating Froch until he gassed in the late rounds
- Froch had all kinds of trouble against Dirrell and was getting dominated in the late rounds, if Andre had behaved more maturely he'd have won
- Mack is not very good.

Baloney. Firstly froch beat dirrell easily, all the top pundits and punch stats agreed with that. Plus if i remember you scored it to froch, so your "if and buts analysis doesnt wash.

Taylor was actually winning on a split decision, a 10 7 round would have given froch the win, if i remember the showtime American pundits had it a draw going into the last round against taylor.

Froch beat kessler imo and many other peoples opinions, a below par froch still beat kessler and the rematch will end all debate.

[Brother Jay]

My only comment would be to ask how many #1's in ANY division has Froch beaten?

I'm not saying that Demarco was some super talent or ATG, but he was #1 in an entire division.

When a fighter takes the initiative to face the #1 and then actually wins, he should be rewarded for it.

This is Broner's second title and he captured this one from a consensus #1.

I like Froch but his whole career is the Super Six and he didn't come out on top.

In fact Froch lost twice in that tournament. So, going by some of the reasoning found on this site, Kessler should be in the top 10 as well as he holds a win over Froch and only lost to the winner of the Super Six.

Kessler doesn't belong in the top 10 and neither does Froch.

Don't get me wrong: I like Froch.

I think he's got more heart and toughness than many of the guys in the P4P top 10. He's done more in a couple of years in his career than many. He stepped up his competition and took full advantage of the super six tourney.

Still, his skills are lacking, and I really don't see him as a top level boxer. He makes up for what he lacks in skills with heart, but as Ward showed that will only get you but so far.

Broner has all the potential in the world and unlike some boxers who chase vacant belts in order to SEEM legitimate and pad their records with 40 fights before they step up to real challenges on the world stage, Broner's progress is much better than average.

I don't see Adrien closing in on any top spots just yet but as he is the #1 LW champion of the world, its not unrealistic for him to be rated over Froch.

[#1Assassin]

complete bull**** but what would you expect from sports illustrated? boxing knowledge is so low these days even within the boxing community, you cant expect ppl and magazines who arent directly involved with it to know anything at all.

[slimshandy69]

My only comment would be to ask how many #1's in ANY division has Froch beaten?

I'm not saying that Demarco was some super talent or ATG, but he was #1 in an entire division.

When a fighter takes the initiative to face the #1 and then actually wins, he should be rewarded for it.

This is Broner's second title and he captured this one from a consensus #1.

I like Froch but his whole career is the Super Six and he didn't come out on top.

In fact Froch lost twice in that tournament. So, going by some of the reasoning found on this site, Kessler should be in the top 10 as well as he holds a win over Froch and only lost to the winner of the Super Six.

Kessler doesn't belong in the top 10 and neither does Froch.

Don't get me wrong: I like Froch.

I think he's got more heart and toughness than many of the guys in the P4P top 10. He's done more in a couple of years in his career than many. He stepped up his competition and took full advantage of the super six tourney.

Still, his skills are lacking, and I really don't see him as a top level boxer. He makes up for what he lacks in skills with heart, but as Ward showed that will only get you but so far.

Broner has all the potential in the world and unlike some boxers who chase vacant belts in order to SEEM legitimate and pad their records with 40 fights before they step up to real challenges on the world stage, Broner's progress is much better than average.

I don't see Adrien closing in on any top spots just yet but as he is the #1 LW champion of the world, its not unrealistic for him to be rated over Froch.

correct me if im wrong but froch beat bute whom at the time was ranked number 1.

Also he beaten pascal who went on to be number 1 in the light heavies...