Calzaghe: "Froch has not matched my legacy and doesn't have ability to go to the US"

[champion4ever]

As I've stated in an earlier post, Joe comes across as a very envious and bitter old man. I wonder why he feels so insecure about his own legacy and career achievements in the ring to the point of denigrating Carl Froch's career achievements?

Furthermore, Calzaghe had his time to shine. Now it's Froch's time to shine. It must really burns him that he didn't take on the stiffest challenges in his career and now history is judging him because of it.

However, make no mistake about it, he is yet one of the best P4P Super middleweights the sport has ever produced but next to Carl Froch he doesn't come close.

[Mr. Philadel]

Calzaghe didn't conquer Amreeka at all. He only finished his last two fights by losing to a fading legend and beating a washed up legend.

Froch is restoring the reputation of Europe, which Calzaghe had damaged so much by being such a p*ssy.

[-Kev-]

Yes, I recall. Joe thought Froch was a horrible fighter and had no business in the ring with him. As it turns out he was wrong. Froch knew what he was going to do with his career and to be explicitly honest I had higher expectations for him than most and envisaged him at the time to giving Calzaghe a good stiff challenge. This is the reason I'm commenting to begin with incidentally.

Joe needed more solid wins on his resume before he retired. Would fighting Dawson, "the guy" at the time have been better than Froch? Yes, then. No, now. We have to make decisions in life all the time that involve guess work and projecting an accurate picture of how the future might turn out.

Joe lost out there. He had a chance to fight this guy. Instead he wants to talk **** and we're supposed to respect that? He shouldn't speak. Then nobody would have anything to say.

Yes he was wrong but Calzaghe was 36 years old and had no time to play psychic and hope a win over Froch would grow in time, he didn't know that, you didn't know that, I didn't know that. He was thinking about big American names and big events, not fights against fighters with one good win on their resume and just over 20 pro fights. When you are on your way out, you fight other guys who are on their way out and together you bring big money to the table.

And to the poster who said Calzaghe-Froch would have been bigger than Calzaghe-Taylor had Taylor beaten Froch, are you serious? Taylor was a household name on HBO and had way more name recognition than Froch.

Now if we are talking about now in 2014, let's say Calzaghe could be 36 years old all over again in 2014, yes now as far back as after the Abraham win it would have been a very popular fight, that's what Calzaghe was looking for, popular names and Froch didn't have that, he looked like Joe's ex wife asking for a handout or looking for child support in 2008 with absolutely no worthy win at the time.

[l1ght]

This is actually pretty sad. Joe and Enzo are doing their best to discredit Carl right now because they know that public opinion globally as well as in the UK is that Froch has surpassed Calzaghe in terms of legacy and fight record against in prime elite fighters of their relative eras. All i have to say is **** OFF JOE! You had your day as Britains best fighter but now its over. You should be supporting Carl as he represents the UK on the world stage but you all can do is try to drag him down? Go **** yourself you sour Welsh C*nt. I've always been a fan of your boxing ability but you have just proven that you are a basically an ignorant sheep shagging bell end from the valleys of Wales who doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut.

[A-Wolf]

Yes he was wrong but Calzaghe was 36 years old and had no time to play psychic and hope a win over Froch would grow in time, he didn't know that, you didn't know that, I didn't know that. He was thinking about big American names and big events, not fights against fighters with one good win on their resume and just over 20 pro fights. When you are on your way out, you fight other guys who are on their way out and together you bring big money to the table.

And to the poster who said Calzaghe-Froch would have been bigger than Calzaghe-Taylor had Taylor beaten Froch, are you serious? Taylor was a household name on HBO and had way more name recognition than Froch.

Now if we are talking about now in 2014, let's say Calzaghe could be 36 years old all over again in 2014, yes now as far back as after the Abraham win it would have been a very popular fight, that's what Calzaghe was looking for, popular names and Froch didn't have that, he looked like Joe's ex wife asking for a handout or looking for child support in 2008 with absolutely no worthy win at the time.

What "worthy win" did Groves have to earn a shot with Froch?

What "worthy win" did Calzaghe have to earn a shot with Eubank?

What "worthy win" did Marciano have to earn a shot with "Louis?"

(and the countless other examples I cannot list).


That aside, try not to focus too heavily on how much you felt Froch was worth at the time. Focus on the fact that Calzaghe needed more credible achievements in the sport of boxing before pulling the escape hatch. Have you read my posts in this thread? Calzaghe didn't fight anybody at that point. He ducked out. And he still feels compelled to jack his jaw about fights he was - in his mind - overqualified for. Just what his legacy needs..

[TheBoxingfan101]

Why would he? Why wouldn't he? Froch was calling him out. Incessantly. Froch was a worthy challenge. Clearly. For some people that's all the provocation needed. You're talking about money. Why didn't he rematch Hopkins then? That would have been a big money fight and Bernard was willing to do it in the UK.

No need for excuses, bro.

good point

Froch was the mandatory to Calzaghe at the time. An undefeated and untested fighter who if you may recall was alot like Groves when he fought him.

We all know how big that fight got don't we. A fight between Froch and Calzaghe would have been way bigger than any Taylor fight that's for damn sure.

exactly but if froch didnt fight groves peeps would have been like froch is ducking him,
but calzaghe does that with froch and its all good

[A-Wolf]

Best part; all this posting in a thread where Calzaghe is impudently deriding the achievements of Carl Froch and we have people trying to argue that there's a loose connection. Why is a guy who is too good for somebody needing to publicly trash them? Oh, right.

[b00g13man]

Loooooooooooooool. No.

[PurePugilist216]

Who cares about Punch output when youre not hitting anything. Im not even a Hopkins fan and I know he won that fight, and the fact he was about 44 years old makes it even worse.

Who cares if the fight was in the U.S., over here we dont have that same bias europe and other countries have not saying we dont have out corruption as well, but most of comes from the promoters. Americans tend to not pick fighters based on where theyre from. Look at Mayweather vs Hatton, Broner vs Maidana, Pac vs Mosley etc…

Historically Hopkins always came on the wrong side of a decision, and that crowd was pro Calzaghe. Hopkins veteran tactics and acting didnt help either.

The man has one REAL win, and thats against Kessler, a fighter that wont be remembered 10 years from now. Lacy I give him credit for exposing, and thats it. The rest of the fighters on his resume were a joke, or a joke at the time he fought them. Joe was also notorious for ducking out of fights against serious competition, and decided to fight shot Roy, instead of Pavlik of Froch, two younger more live fighters. If he wanted the payday, then fine, but to retire on that fight, and to act like it was a legendary win is insane.

Imagine what a 36 year old Hopkins would do to a 36 year old Calzaghe, or a 28 year old Roy Jones would do to a 28 year Calzaghe?

[yoz]

good point



exactly but if froch didnt fight groves peeps would have been like froch is ducking him,
but calzaghe does that with froch and its all good

It's the sniping at Froch's achievements that riles most fans.