QUOTE (mgrover @ Jul 11 2012, 10:49 PM)
a name doesn't mean shit, it's the age, and RJJ was past it, same with Hopkins, and I still had Hopkins winning that fight. While Calzaghe fought nobodies in his home town, and nobody relevant from his division, Froch had been fighting everybody thanks to the super six. That arguement is like me finding Mayweather in 40 years, when he's all old, and he's slow and half crippled, and I beat him and say, I beat Mayweather, cause I didn't I beat a shadow of Mayweather, same with RJJ and Calzaghe
I agree with the fact that Hopkins really beat Calzaghe. As a matter of fact MG, I watched that fight again last night (along with Pavlik/Taylor 1) and I actually scored it 114-113 in favor of Hopkins. Why did I have it so close? I believe we all know the answer to that...it was a nasty fight, and in all actually, there wasn't much going on.
Joe's slapping punches barely did enough to impress. His straight left landed on the button quite a few times from the middle rounds on. Hopkins on the other hand, wasn't doing shit but landing one punch at a time, and reaching for Joe's left arm and clinching...nasty fight, Hopkins style of course.
As for the point about names not meaning shit, names actually hold weight nowadays...it just has to be the right names. Joe just happened to fight the right "names" at the right time of his career (the end), and he was victorious, that's how people will remember him. In the eyes of the casual fan: Who is Kessler? Manfredo? Lacy? Bika? Skeika? Nobody knows. Who is Roy Jones Jr.? Who is Bernard Hopkins? "Ooh! He beat those two dudes? Man that dude is
a HOFer!" - Casual fan
Froch still has some work to do in that department, in terms of fighting the "right" names. I agree that Froch's resume is better than Joe's, hands down, but in the eyes of the public (or the people that want to believe it), Joe has the better resume. Im not sure many people would've known him to the extent that they do, had he not fought Roy and Bernard.