Eubank: Froch couldn't hold candle to Calzaghe

[coghaugen11]

"I think, that Joe thinks, he (Froch) couldn't hold a candle to him. That's what I think... that Joe thinks. Joe himself doesn't see it as a challenge, has no points to prove, (and) doesn't need money."

"Me, personally, I'd love to see it. I know David Haye will obliterate Wladimir Klitschko if he gets him. I don't know if Carl Froch can do Joe Calzaghe.

"Put it this way: I wouldn't want millions of people seeing egg on my face. That alone would make me dangerous! That alone would give me the fortitude to take the punches if need be, you know?

"Though I always used integrity, because with integrity, you can't go wrong."


Eubank thinks he himself over-achieved as a boxer... "I grossly over-achieved, hideously. I was never spotted as a particularly good talent as a youngster in America.

"But we're looking at 47 wins, knocking out Nigel Benn and knocking out the man who knocked out Nigel Benn.

"Champion from 1990 to '95. I maximized myself, in audience, viewers, in earnings - one maximized oneself.

"I couldn't have achieved anymore... But I came back and achieved more! No other former champions have come back and gone out on losses they were close to winning, taking beatings without quitting and on that level."


He didn't go back to America, because, "The reason couldn't be simpler - I didn't have the offers."

[alexpaterson]

I do think J.C would beat Froch from post to post but Eubank doesnt have talk rubbish does he

[Cannibal]

Says the same man that argued Calzaghe couldn't be considered a great fighter because he never lost.

[Autobarn]

Eubank is very articulate isn't he?

I still can't tell what he's on about.

[Finn]

to me froch couldnt beat kessler so why he thinks he stands a chance against calzaghe is beyond me. why call out a retired champion when theres champs that can beat you waiting for a fight.

Eubank is right he over acheived mainly due to the way he marketed himself and his ringcraft.

Calzaghe could have beaten any fighter but didnt fight alot of them for one reason or another.

[Autobarn]

to me froch couldnt beat kessler so why he thinks he stands a chance against calzaghe is beyond me. why call out a retired champion when theres champs that can beat you waiting for a fight.

Eubank is right he over acheived mainly due to the way he marketed himself and his ringcraft.

Calzaghe could have beaten any fighter but didnt fight alot of them for one reason or another.

that's your opinion.

froch has beaten top fighters in taylor and pascal, so i don't see why kessler is beyond him.

[teddy007]

to me froch couldnt beat kessler so why he thinks he stands a chance against calzaghe is beyond me. why call out a retired champion when theres champs that can beat you waiting for a fight.

Eubank is right he over acheived mainly due to the way he marketed himself and his ringcraft.

Calzaghe could have beaten any fighter but didnt fight alot of them for one reason or another.

that's your opinion.

froch has beaten top fighters in taylor and pascal, so i don't see why kessler is beyond him.

[whiskey]

Froch vs Calzaghe would be the biggest fight in this country in years and years..

Calzaghe was fresh as a daisy when he retired, yet he'd rather walk away than beat a guy in 3 rounds (Calzaghe's predicition if he fought Froch).

If you ask me, it's because Froch's right hand and awkward style off the back foot would give him grief and maybe even a loss.

Froch is one of the most iron-willed boxers around and if he got his wish and managed to get Calzaghe in the ring, he would be like a demon on him and would throw bombs for 12 rounds solid.

Froch is better going backwards - and Joe loves to come forwards.

Tremendous fight.

[Finn]

to me froch couldnt beat kessler so why he thinks he stands a chance against calzaghe is beyond me. why call out a retired champion when theres champs that can beat you waiting for a fight.

Eubank is right he over acheived mainly due to the way he marketed himself and his ringcraft.

Calzaghe could have beaten any fighter but didnt fight alot of them for one reason or another.

that's your opinion.

froch has beaten top fighters in taylor and pascal, so i don't see why kessler is beyond him.

the fact that your saying taylor and pascal are top fighters is a joke. taylor had lost 2 of his previous 3 fights to kelly pants pavlik and pascals never faught anyone worth waking up to watch. the fact that the froch v taylor fight was on some obscure tv channel only viewed in some little town called pigsville in the usa just goes to show that froch is still a nobody.

Beat one of the legit champs and then it might be worth calzaghe getting out of bed to do some training.

[gobbles]

Stop it, stop it, stop it! It won't happen.

[whiskey]

Nobody is disputing Calzaghe's worth in boxing. But it's not as one sided as you think.

Froch's last two fights have been Fight Of Year candidates.

Infact Froch vs Pascal was boxingnews's FOTY i believe.

In Froch's last two fights he has provided more thrills and spills than Joe's career to date.

And with 9 knockouts from his previous 10 fights - compared to just 1 knockout (Manfredo lol) to Joe's previous 8 fights, over the last 4 years, also says something else too.

Say what you like Kingfinn, but most of Joe's fights have been very one sided points affairs.

And with your comment about Froch on obscure TV - well Calzaghe vs Jones was one of the worst PPV sellers in quite some time, whilst Froch vs Taylor was shown on 16 hours after the event on ITV to the masses.

[Autobarn]

to me froch couldnt beat kessler so why he thinks he stands a chance against calzaghe is beyond me. why call out a retired champion when theres champs that can beat you waiting for a fight.

Eubank is right he over acheived mainly due to the way he marketed himself and his ringcraft.

Calzaghe could have beaten any fighter but didnt fight alot of them for one reason or another.

that's your opinion.

froch has beaten top fighters in taylor and pascal, so i don't see why kessler is beyond him.

the fact that your saying taylor and pascal are top fighters is a joke. taylor had lost 2 of his previous 3 fights to kelly pants pavlik and pascals never faught anyone worth waking up to watch. the fact that the froch v taylor fight was on some obscure tv channel only viewed in some little town called pigsville in the usa just goes to show that froch is still a nobody.

Beat one of the legit champs and then it might be worth calzaghe getting out of bed to do some training.

jermain taylor - a decorated former middleweight champion, gunning for 2nd world title. brought plenty of speed and boxing ability.

taylor had plenty of close scrapes - but guess what? the defeats were fights that he only just lost, also. he clearly doesn't like fighting bigger men; that's why it was great risk-reward for froch.

taylor is an amazing opponent for a 1st title defence.

pascal had dominated kingsley ikeke - a former world class middle who couldn't do the weight anymore. pascal got careless, looked bad in a couple of US fight to hype up pascal-miranda. he risked his neck over here in war with froch. then jumps up to light heavy, beats diaconu in the fight of the year, winning WBC crown in front of over 13,000 screaming fans.

these 2 opponents are hugely credible, especially for the first 2 world title fights of froch. a massive, hard learning curve. you could see him struggling at times in there, vs a higher level of opponent. but he did the job and froch must be 1 of the most honest of british world champs. 2 of the best super middle fights since benn fought. perhaps the 2 best.


pascal & taylor not legit? what was joe's excuse when he took on giminez & jiminez, tucker puc and will mac, egypt's finest (salem) and african worrier (ashira)

[bigjack]

Nobody is disputing Calzaghe's worth in boxing. But it's not as one sided as you think.

Froch's last two fights have been Fight Of Year candidates.

Infact Froch vs Pascal was boxingnews's FOTY i believe.

In Froch's last two fights he has provided more thrills and spills than Joe's career to date.

And with 9 knockouts from his previous 10 fights - compared to just 1 knockout (Manfredo lol) to Joe's previous 8 fights, over the last 4 years, also says something else too.

Say what you like Kingfinn, but most of Joe's fights have been very one sided points affairs.

And with your comment about Froch on obscure TV - well Calzaghe vs Jones was one of the worst PPV sellers in quite some time, whilst Froch vs Taylor was shown on 16 hours after the event on ITV to the masses.

Froch's last two fights maybe contenders for fight of the year simply because of his ability to block punches with his head,do you think the fights would be as good if he could slip punches like herol graham,no of course not.Every body knows that calzaghe has bad hands and cannot hit anywhere near as hard as he used to,but you could gaurantee he would not be able to miss that stationary head of frochs,yes joe would get hit by the right,but he has a great chin and can change tactics to suit,anyway thats my opinion for what it's worth.

[Finn]

at least calzaghe v jones jr was on ppv.

U froch lovers do my head in, he's done sod all and he's got no skill. if taylor is such a great fighter why wasnt the fight aired properly.

Yes the fight was shown to the masses a day later, on ITV4 a channel that half of england doesnt even have.

I wish froch all the best but he's going to get wiped out as soon as he fights kessler, heart and the ability to throw a big bomb is good enough against 2nd raters but it wont stand up against skill, speed and power.

[bigjack]

at least calzaghe v jones jr was on ppv.

U froch lovers do my head in, he's done sod all and he's got no skill. if taylor is such a great fighter why wasnt the fight aired properly.

Yes the fight was shown to the masses a day later, on ITV4 a channel that half of england doesnt even have.

I wish froch all the best but he's going to get wiped out as soon as he fights kessler, heart and the ability to throw a big bomb is good enough against 2nd raters but it wont stand up against skill, speed and power.

x2

[whiskey]

Errr but Kessler is busy fighting binmen.

He aint taking a risk ever again, as he has a cushy pad in Monaco with a Ferrari in the underground car park.

Hence he pulled out of the Edison Miranda fight and nearly got his ass sued by Seminole Warriors as a result.

So much for his power and skill.

[Finn]

Errr but Kessler is busy fighting binmen.

He aint taking a risk ever again, as he has a cushy pad in Monaco with a Ferrari in the underground car park.

Hence he pulled out of the Edison Miranda fight and nearly got his ass sued by Seminole Warriors as a result.

So much for his power and skill.

yeh apart from anyone who has any knowledge of boxing will tell you he's not fighting anyone decent because he's stuck in a contract with some moron promoters at the moment which is why calzaghe's is trying to sign him.

[Autobarn]

Nobody is disputing Calzaghe's worth in boxing. But it's not as one sided as you think.

Froch's last two fights have been Fight Of Year candidates.

Infact Froch vs Pascal was boxingnews's FOTY i believe.

In Froch's last two fights he has provided more thrills and spills than Joe's career to date.

And with 9 knockouts from his previous 10 fights - compared to just 1 knockout (Manfredo lol) to Joe's previous 8 fights, over the last 4 years, also says something else too.

Say what you like Kingfinn, but most of Joe's fights have been very one sided points affairs.

And with your comment about Froch on obscure TV - well Calzaghe vs Jones was one of the worst PPV sellers in quite some time, whilst Froch vs Taylor was shown on 16 hours after the event on ITV to the masses.

Froch's last two fights maybe contenders for fight of the year simply because of his ability to block punches with his head,do you think the fights would be as good if he could slip punches like herol graham,no of course not.Every body knows that calzaghe has bad hands and cannot hit anywhere near as hard as he used to,but you could gaurantee he would not be able to miss that stationary head of frochs,yes joe would get hit by the right,but he has a great chin and can change tactics to suit,anyway thats my opinion for what it's worth.

if froch fought like herol graham, froch would not be having fights on showtime.

TV situation is shit over here. ITV can't afford to show fights with big names. Setanta have folded. Boxing is the first to get the drop from TV and fans, boxing in general boxing lets us down. Froch is a one off in the UK, fighting Pascal and Taylor in FOTY candidates back-to-back.

joe blocked punches with his face, too. he couldn't slip a right hand til he was 34! sure he had most opponents on the back foot which took the sting ut of their right hands. considering that til he was 34, joe was fighting no-hopers or good names on the way out. he was still having less coming back at him. when he was a learning fighter, he had no tests of pascal or taylor's calibre. hence froch's flaws show up more easily than calzaghe's.

i don't see why joe is on a pedestal. his fights were so disappointing, apart from 2 great nights (lacy & kessler). his routine defences were mostly shit

[mickey1975]

joe is "on a pedestal" for the simple reason,he retired undefeated champion of the world.if it was that easy to beat him,why didnt anyone?i am not a big fan of joes,but,you cant argue with his record.also,three abas show a lot of talent

[Autobarn]

undefeated - so what? 2 controversial decisions & no rematch, i see.

has any champ done less, for the first 8 years of their reign?

joe was an obscure friday fight night champion in scrappy fights with ppl like kabary salem by 2004 - do not forget that. joe showed very little skill in that fight, by the way.

joe stepped up at the end, got a couple of great wins, left boxing in a massive anti-climax and escaped with his unbeaten record. the jones fight was not a great test, it was a way of milking what jones had gained from PPV fight with trinidad, and they put on a shitehouse undercard - bleeding boxing dry before the full impact of the recession. he deserves a place in the HOF - only just - but for a modern great the TV ratings/PPV#s of his last 2 bouts show him up as a bit of a shoeshining small fry.

[Greg Nicholas]

Eubank actualy fought better opp than JC imo.. Benn x 2, Watson x 2, Rocchi(In Germany), Tony Thornton, Lindell Holmes nd Malinga.. ALL either reigning, former or future world champs or losing to the best p4p fighters challenging.. ALL near their best.. Eubank fought far better opp than JC..

[Greg Nicholas]

He fought Collins as well of course nd arguably won that 1st one.. (pretty much did actually according tomost)

[RLewis]

undefeated - so what? 2 controversial decisions & no rematch, i see.

has any champ done less, for the first 8 years of their reign?

joe was an obscure friday fight night champion in scrappy fights with ppl like kabary salem by 2004 - do not forget that. joe showed very little skill in that fight, by the way.

joe stepped up at the end, got a couple of great wins, left boxing in a massive anti-climax and escaped with his unbeaten record. the jones fight was not a great test, it was a way of milking what jones had gained from PPV fight with trinidad, and they put on a shitehouse undercard - bleeding boxing dry before the full impact of the recession. he deserves a place in the HOF - only just - but for a modern great the TV ratings/PPV#s of his last 2 bouts show him up as a bit of a shoeshining small fry.

How many have held a world title for longer than 8 years? Not many. Johnny Kilbane, one of the two boxers to have held a world title longer than Joe, only defended the title six times or so. I think his record in defences was something like 3-1-2. So I'd pick him.
People can only fight who is there to fight and I believe Joe only once ever defended his title on a Friday night.

[Autobarn]

it is an achievement, and i rate it higher than eubank. as chris really messed about in some fights.

it is a long run and in terms of longevity, yes it is a mark of greatness. considering the pace that joe fought at. (compared to many of eubank's lazy outings).

however things went badly stale in 2004 til march 2006. i mean, joe had become a bit of a joke. luckily, thankfully, showtime were building lacy, whose promoter pushed him. until then joe's fights just didn't seem important. (there wasn't a buzz, nowhere near the eubank v benn/watson stuff.)

personally, i prefer the way benn and froch have/are going about it: STRAIGHT FOR THE JUGULAR

[Autobarn]

Eubank actualy fought better opp than JC imo.. Benn x 2, Watson x 2, Rocchi(In Germany), Tony Thornton, Lindell Holmes nd Malinga.. ALL either reigning, former or future world champs or losing to the best p4p fighters challenging.. ALL near their best.. Eubank fought far better opp than JC..

eubank was remarkable in benn 1 and watson 2 fights. and the 2 with thompson.

however many of his defences were a load of messing about, including solid wins over rocchi and thornton. so many times there was something missing. so often his talent seemed mis-applied. i think he should have fought at 175 for the bulk of his career, but obviously you find your niche and milk it (WBO middle/super middle).