Froch's resume - nothing legendary

[Jcsuper]

Get out of here hater, you can do that with every fighter in history.

Froch has the best opposition in boxing in the last 5 years, give the man some respect

[ИATAS]

this is comedy.

at 168 pounds calzaghe fought two good fighters in ten years in lacy & kessler.

Froch has fought nothing but solid opponents back to back. No tune ups, no stay busy fights, no peter manfredo's in-between.

If calzaghe fought such a tough schedule of opponents back to back I'm sure he would have lost a fight or two as well.

Or I'm sure if froch fought bums for 10 years then say, beat abraham & Bute he could have been a GOAT. But nope, froch fought all the best fighters, back to back. That's the difference between the two. In addition Froch wasn't "scared" to fly overseas and took on challenges across the globe.

Calzaghe pound 4 pound is the better fighter, but Froch is the bigger man taking such challenges and his resume imo is better than Calzaghe's 168 resume.

Overall you gotta give Joe the nod head up since he has a victory over a lineal champ at 175 in hopkins, even if he looked terrible. But at 168 I give it to froch based on resume and level of opposition.

[-Kev-]

I thought he lost to Andre Dirrell and he should have 3 losses.

Still, Pascal, Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Johnson is a very good resume. I hate when people bunch up his entire resume of who he's fought, to make the resume look great. Just name his wins and that's it.

We can name who De La Hoya has fought, Whitaker, Mayweather, Hopkins, Pacquiao, Mosley, Chavez, Camacho, Quartey, Trinidad, Hernandez, Sturm, Vargas, Mayorga, Gatti, Molina, Leija, Ruelas, just a crazy, name after name filled resume. Okay, but he didn't beat them all.

[ИATAS]

I hate when people bunch up his entire resume of who he's fought, to make the resume look great. Just name his wins and that's it.
.

I think it most certainly matters when he fought them all back to back. This is a day and age when so many fighters take multiple tune up fights or some easy opponent so they can look good against to set up the next big fight, froch didn't do that he fought them all in a row and he deserves credit for that.

When a fighter fights nothing but top fighters back to back like that he's gonna lose one or two fights.

[Spacey1991]

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.

The fact of the matter is hes fought the best in his division and always wanted the best out there to be the best he can be, you have to respect him for that. After winning a title last night a lot of people would contemplate taking easy fights (even more so after the schedule hes had over the past 3 years) but all hes talking about is redeeming his losses... so basically he still wants the best out there.

You can tell he wants to be the best he can be, which is all you can ask for... he is not afraid to fight anyone.

[Spacey1991]

Hes definitely faced harder opposition in the last three years than anyone else, and done it in other peoples countries and what not. Win, lose or draw, the amount of top ranks contenders hes fought is impressive.

[Daddy T]

its pathetic to be slagging froch, nobody is claiming he's the best in the world, he's just fought more top guys than anybody else in recent years. If every top boxer fought against the quality that froch has imagine how alive the sport would be. And whats more he doesn't seem to be letting up ... I mean talk of kessler next then maybe ward. The guy deserves nothing but respect.

[Weebler I]

Froch will always have more respect than Calzaghe.

In the USA, I believe that's true but neither are from there. Both are respected in the UK, Calzaghe is currently better known.

let's all talk about the greatness of sir chris eubank.

i reckon eubank would've beaten froch, calzaghe and ward.

Possibly, a prime Benn also.

I thought he lost to Andre Dirrell and he should have 3 losses.

Still, Pascal, Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Johnson is a very good resume. I hate when people bunch up his entire resume of who he's fought, to make the resume look great. Just name his wins and that's it.

We can name who De La Hoya has fought, Whitaker, Mayweather, Hopkins, Pacquiao, Mosley, Chavez, Camacho, Quartey, Trinidad, Hernandez, Sturm, Vargas, Mayorga, Gatti, Molina, Leija, Ruelas, just a crazy, name after name filled resume. Okay, but he didn't beat them all.

The reason they do that is because he fought them back to back and often away from home, that's so rare in the modern era. He was also never stopped and only really well beaten by one opponent who is some people's pfp #1.

[Blue Heffner]

I think it most certainly matters when he fought them all back to back. This is a day and age when so many fighters take multiple tune up fights or some easy opponent so they can look good against to set up the next big fight, froch didn't do that he fought them all in a row and he deserves credit for that.

When a fighter fights nothing but top fighters back to back like that he's gonna lose one or two fights.

Agreed.....

[_original_]

What a biased and fallacious argument, man get off the Cobra's nuts and let the modern day warrior breath. GREAT resume!

And to the sheep shagging, yellow teeth having OP

Cobra >> Calslappy