After froch vs groves 2 i think we can all agree that

[IST-ra-GLEr2]

LOL!

no, but they are clearly much better than groves. both world champions, both with far better wins than groves.

baldomir beat judah who was undisputed WW champ and a top 10 p4p fighter at the time. mitchell defended a world title about half a dozen times.

groves has a controversial decision over degale and.. nothing. his only real claim to fame was getting stopped by froch in a better than expected performance. thats the only top 10 fighter he ever fought, only two title fights hes had he got knocked out.

the undeserved elevation in reputation he has got is absurd.

I think I may have made a minor mistake in the title. Groves didn't singlehandedly elevate frochs resume overnight it was mad underrated. The ko just made it much more sweeter?

[BennyST]

I find it highly amusing that Jermain Taylor always gets listed by people citing Froch's resume as great, yet he was basically coming off two back to back losses, including a brutal knock out loss, and never again did anything in his career, but those same people will cry like little girls about every little detail to put down wins of Floyd's that are clearly greater.

Urgh, it gets so boring. If one of Floyd's opponents was coming off back to back losses, including a brutal knock out, he'd be called the worst fighter in history. For Froch he's an epic win that puts him into ATG territory...

Next we have a contender, not a champion, not a proven veteran of title quality, not an experienced, crafty, top ranked title contender, but just a fringe contender that did better in his first ever title fight than anyone ever thought possible. That win, a win over a young contender that himself hasn't beaten a single former champion or current title contender, is the reason for this thread?

So, you want to talk resume? Ok.

Mikkel Kessler
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Jermain Taylor
Arthur Abraham
Andre Dirrell
George Groves
Glen Johnson

That's Froch's entire resume. Out of that, Taylor was done at the top level, Johnson wad done at the top level, and neither Groves or Dirrell has ever won one of the 5 titles available in each division so far. So two contenders, not even champions.

Kessler was excellent, particularly as Froch was also beaten by Kessler not long before. Bute was excellent and Pascal was excellent. Abraham...meh, so so.

You're going to tell me that that resume beats this: Taking into account that I am not even going to list the top contenders that Floyd beat like I did for Froch. I am only listing the champions that Floyd beat
Oscar
Cotto
Marquez
Corrales
Castillo
Hatton
Alvarez
Maidana
Chavez
Gatti
Manfredy
G. Hernandez
Vargas
C. Hernandez
Guerrero
Ortiz
Mosley
Baldomir
Judah
Mitchell
Corley

That's only the champions. No contenders like George Groves or Andre Dirrell listed at all. So, if we take out those two, we have left:
Bute
Kessler
Abraham
Johnson, a 43 year old Johnson mind you.
Pascal
Taylor

You still think they have comparable resumes?

[#1Assassin]

I think I may have made a minor mistake in the title. Groves didn't singlehandedly elevate frochs resume overnight it was mad underrated. The ko just made it much more sweeter?

like i said before, the KO didnt do jack **** but clean up the embarrassing mess he created in the first fight. before that fight he said groves didnt belong in the ring with him, remember? which is true btw, groves is a nobody at world level.

it was a sweet KO, entertaining fight, great event.. all that and more. but in terms of resume and legacy it does nothing for froch other than salvage the way he was humiliated by his inability to dispose of a domestic level fighter the way he should have. he set the record straight in style, no more no less.

edit: and no, frochs resume isnt anywhere near as good as mayweathers. BennsyST breaks it down better than i ever could above.

[BennyST]

I think I may have made a minor mistake in the title. Groves didn't singlehandedly elevate frochs resume overnight it was mad underrated. The ko just made it much more sweeter?

No, it's become mad overrated. He has faced consistently good opposition over the last 5 years. But, the only truly top, proven fighters he's faced in that time is Kessler, Ward, Bute, Pascal, and Abraham. He was beaten by two of those five. The rest have been contenders that haven't done anything in their careers.

You're trying to compare that to 17 years at the same level for Floyd.

Let's not pretend that fighting Groves is as good as moving up to your 6th division and fighting an undefeated Canelo Alvarez, yes, even two pounds under the limit.

The difference is that Froch will get praise for fighting a young, largely untested contender in Groves, while Mayweather would literally have to move up two more divisions and face Martinez, Golovkin, or Ward to get the same recognition that Froch gets for beating a fringe contender. Can you imagine the backlash if Floyd fought Jessie Vargas? ****, he fights a proven, tested, champion at his peak coming off one of the biggest wins of that year and gets ten times the flack just for taking the fight that Froch got for beating a young contender. It's pretty hilarious and the guys that argue against it will simply never be able to see their bias.

[IST-ra-GLEr2]

No, it's become mad overrated. He has faced consistently good opposition over the last 5 years. But, the only truly top, proven fighters he's faced in that time is Kessler, Ward, Bute, Pascal, and Abraham. He was beaten by two of those five. The rest have been contenders that haven't done anything in their careers.

You're trying to compare that to 17 years at the same level for Floyd.

Let's not pretend that fighting Groves is as good as moving up to your 6th division and fighting an undefeated Canelo Alvarez, yes, even two pounds under the limit.

The difference is that Froch will get praise for fighting a young, largely untested contender in Groves, while Mayweather would literally have to move up two more divisions and face Martinez, Golovkin, or Ward to get the same recognition that Froch gets for beating a fringe contender. Can you imagine the backlash if Floyd fought Jessie Vargas? ****, he fights a proven, tested, champion at his peak coming off one of the biggest wins of that year and gets ten times the flack just for taking the fight that Froch got for beating a young contender. It's pretty hilarious and the guys that argue against it will simply never be able to see their bias.

Here we go again. With them mayweather propaganda. Fact is froch continuosly face fight constant threats and overachieves while Floyd hides, weithdrains and pillowfy his opponents. i give froch the props.

[Divine Hammer]

i agree with this. froch's resume is better than ward, pacquiao, and floyd combined.

kessler, bute, groves >>>>> anything floyd, pacquiao and ward has done

[M Bison]

I find it highly amusing that Jermain Taylor always gets listed by people citing Froch's resume as great, yet he was basically coming off two back to back losses, including a brutal knock out loss, and never again did anything in his career, but those same people will cry like little girls about every little detail to put down wins of Floyd's that are clearly greater.

Urgh, it gets so boring. If one of Floyd's opponents was coming off back to back losses, including a brutal knock out, he'd be called the worst fighter in history. For Froch he's an epic win that puts him into ATG territory...

Next we have a contender, not a champion, not a proven veteran of title quality, not an experienced, crafty, top ranked title contender, but just a fringe contender that did better in his first ever title fight than anyone ever thought possible. That win, a win over a young contender that himself hasn't beaten a single former champion or current title contender, is the reason for this thread?

So, you want to talk resume? Ok.

Mikkel Kessler
Jean Pascal
Lucian Bute
Jermain Taylor
Arthur Abraham
Andre Dirrell
George Groves
Glen Johnson

That's only the champions. No contenders like George Groves or Andre Dirrell listed at all. So, if we take out those two, we have left:
Bute
Kessler
Abraham
Johnson, a 43 year old Johnson mind you.
Pascal
Taylor

You still think they have comparable resumes?

Okay so... If you want to dissect it?

Glen Johnson - 41/42yo coming off losses
Yusaf Mack - coming in after two wins over two unranked opponents and a loss to Antonio Tarver
Bute - Legit good win
Kessler - beat in first and imo he had a very competitive rematch with him when Kessler was being spoke of as a fighter who is past his best I believe even Froch said he was.
J.Taylor - I still think this is a legitimate good win but he somewhat didn't look the same killer he use to be after fighting Bhop
A.Abraham - Good win against a tough but limited opponent.
A.Dirrell - Thought Dirrell schooled Froch
J.Pascall - Another great win

I think we can all agree that Carls career is more exciting than Mayweathers that should be easy.

[HarvardBlue]

INStantGRiTs is a funny guy!

[_original_]

Here we go again. With them mayweather propaganda. Fact is froch continuosly face fight constant threats and overachieves while Floyd hides, weithdrains and pillowfy his opponents. i give froch the props.

i agree with this. froch's resume is better than ward, pacquiao, and floyd combined.

kessler, bute, groves >>>>> anything floyd, pacquiao and ward has done

[Queen_Leia]

You sound ****** by just referring to people by their nicknames

I'm sorry DarkSpyder....what is your real name again?