IPB  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> CARL FROCH says he passed Calzaghe's legacy, Do you agree??
mgrover
post Apr 5 2013, 04:49 PM
Post #21


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,396
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Apr 5 2013, 09:27 PM) *
forget their comp...or lack thereof...i'm looking at how they match up. dirrell is the closest thing to joe cal that froch has faced. that was the biggest gift decision of his career. i had dirrell winning that 8-4. joe cal would have schooled froch easily. their one similar opponent....kessler...joe cal looked brilliant against him. froch lost to kessler. to me, it's not even close. froch can be a big prick and hate on joe all he wants. he's 2nd class to joe cal.


JC should of fought him then shouldn't he
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Apr 5 2013, 09:23 PM
Post #22


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,823
Joined: 20-May 11
From: killa kali
Member No.: 12,336



QUOTE (mgrover @ Apr 5 2013, 04:49 PM) *
JC should of fought him then shouldn't he


froch wasn't even on the radar when that was possible. it would have been a step backwards for joe cal. froch has a chance to build his legacy. with his 2 (should be 3) losses...he's not making a good case for himself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mgrover
post Apr 6 2013, 05:12 AM
Post #23


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,396
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Apr 6 2013, 03:23 AM) *
froch wasn't even on the radar when that was possible. it would have been a step backwards for joe cal. froch has a chance to build his legacy. with his 2 (should be 3) losses...he's not making a good case for himself.

Too late to call it now I guess, I just hate how he took the important fights late into his career when other fighters were washed up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bnoles4life
post Apr 6 2013, 09:08 AM
Post #24


Welterweight


Group: Members
Posts: 1,575
Joined: 5-October 11
From: Dayton, OH
Member No.: 13,299



I think Carl has a point and a pretty accurate one. To caveat on daprofessor, JC did well by playing on the fact Roy wasn't going to leave U.S. soil to fight ANYONE. I remember the interview, "If Roy wants to be the best (mind you, RJJ is the #1 P4P fighter at this time), he needs to come to England and fight me." Considering how Hatton brought loooooooaaaads of British here for his fight w/ Floyd, we'd have to deduce the Calzaghe camp didn't come over b/c:

A. His promoters were THE dumbest businessmen on Earth. Period. They had no foresight and/or business acumen whatsoever.

B. They are allergic to money. They didn't believe in living in excess, so they wanted to keep Joe humble and live among the meager.

C. They KNEW what was going to happen in fighting a closer to prime, if not IN prime, RJJ. I mean, after Roy's chin suffered consistently from PTSD (thanks Tarver...dick), dropping him faster from the rankings than the Dow in '07, why did they NOW see the need to come across the pond w/ less money to be made?

This post has been edited by bnoles4life: Apr 6 2013, 09:13 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Franchize
post Apr 6 2013, 09:42 AM
Post #25


Junior Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 2,149
Joined: 28-December 11
Member No.: 13,419



I think some people are mistaking what I believe was the original point of the post. I don't think it's supposed to be about who was better. I think it's supposed to be about who proved more. Joe didn't prove shit to me except that I should never root for Jeff Lacy ever again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BrutUalBK
post Apr 6 2013, 11:15 AM
Post #26


Junior Welterweight


Group: Members
Posts: 1,068
Joined: 20-June 12
From: Texas
Member No.: 13,708



QUOTE (Franchize @ Apr 6 2013, 09:42 AM) *
I think some people are mistaking what I believe was the original point of the post. I don't think it's supposed to be about who was better. I think it's supposed to be about who proved more. Joe didn't prove shit to me except that I should never root for Jeff Lacy ever again.



CF is simply saying his legacy is better because he is facing the best of the fighters in his division in their primes and JC only faced his best when they were old/older or past it, thereby he feels that he has done more by beating his comp while young/viable as opposed to Cal waiting/maybe even Cherrypicking his more well-known opponents at a time when he felt it was best for him and not his opponents.

I agree with CF about the timing but still; having BHop & RJJ alone is worth more than anyone on his resume despite the timing his choose to fight them and let's not forget that Nard is still on top.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mgrover
post Apr 6 2013, 01:04 PM
Post #27


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,396
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



Carl proved to be made of stronger stuff, after the Andre loss people were saying that he should retire yet he came back, against Bute who sure wasn't proven, but he didn't roll over and die
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
checkleft
post Apr 7 2013, 12:38 AM
Post #28


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,256
Joined: 18-August 11
From: Golden State of Mind
Member No.: 13,079



QUOTE (BrutUalBK @ Apr 4 2013, 11:37 PM) *
Well the record still stands whether you agree with it or not, all i did was highlight the type of comp they've both faced and CF's record doesn't have the level of superior fighters that JC's does, that is a fact!!

Hopkins and Jones name alone is worth more than all of the names of CF's resume.

???

QUOTE (mgrover @ Apr 5 2013, 10:56 AM) *
Is this a joke? People are giving JC credit for the wins vs Hopins and RJJ? and Eubank? A washed up Eubank, a washed up RJJ, and he didn't win vs Hopkins but whatever. Talk about double standard


+1
QUOTE (BrutUalBK @ Apr 5 2013, 10:59 AM) *
I agree!! Not to mention that JC waited until both BHop & RJJ were in their 40's to face them, beating up on JLacy wasn't anything special either.

At least Froch are facing his opponents while they're still in their primes.


???????
QUOTE (Musashi100 @ Apr 5 2013, 12:53 PM) *
it debatable, i side with froch.

This pretty much
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
checkleft
post Apr 7 2013, 12:43 AM
Post #29


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,256
Joined: 18-August 11
From: Golden State of Mind
Member No.: 13,079



QUOTE (daprofessor @ Apr 5 2013, 10:23 PM) *
froch wasn't even on the radar when that was possible. it would have been a step backwards for joe cal. froch has a chance to build his legacy. with his 2 (should be 3) losses...he's not making a good case for himself.

Almost everybody on cals record was off the radar! Lmao, those two losses on carls record are more notable fighters than 95 percent of joes record

This post has been edited by checkleft: Apr 7 2013, 12:45 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MaxPayne
post Apr 7 2013, 03:52 AM
Post #30


Featherweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 555
Joined: 30-September 11
Member No.: 13,282



I think Carl Froch is an excellent fighter. I also think that Carl had a reasonably good chance of beating Calzhage if they had ever fought.

Regardless, the concept of a fighter's "legacy" is set in the court of public opinion.

By that standard, people will unfortunately remember Calzhage's resume more than they remember Froch's.

So Froch is a little off, although I do adore him as a fighter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st August 2014 - 02:18 AM