Kell Brook

peter barlow
Middleweight
Posts: 1397
Joined: 05 Aug 2014, 13:10

Re: Kell Brook

Post by peter barlow »

What are the chances of either of them having another meaningful fight after a potential Khan-Brook fight? Would both just retire?
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Kell Brook

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Depends on the money on offer.

Maybe the two of them could tag team against Canelo and Golovkin, but both wearing full face crash helmets?
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Kell Brook

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 11:23 Kell, trust me, is a rough kid who liked his nights out. Could have been more dedicated.
Have to say, he looks it. He looks bloody ancient there. Looks like he's been hammering it.
Wee Tommy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Kell Brook

Post by Wee Tommy »

mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 11:23 Kell, trust me, is a rough kid who liked his nights out. Could have been more dedicated.
Heard the very same. 4 day parties. Meant to be a great guy to be partying with though. Never met him myself.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23085
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Kell Brook

Post by mickey1975 »

Wee Tommy wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 13:46
mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 11:23 Kell, trust me, is a rough kid who liked his nights out. Could have been more dedicated.
Heard the very same. 4 day parties. Meant to be a great guy to be partying with though. Never met him myself.
I've done it with him. His mates weren't shy, either.
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28504
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: Kell Brook

Post by Coco »

mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 11:23 Kell, trust me, is a rough kid who liked his nights out. Could have been more dedicated.
Was he gardening uphill?
margaret thatcher
Super Featherweight
Posts: 39335
Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43

Re: Kell Brook

Post by margaret thatcher »

mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 18:27
Wee Tommy wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 13:46
mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 11:23 Kell, trust me, is a rough kid who liked his nights out. Could have been more dedicated.
Heard the very same. 4 day parties. Meant to be a great guy to be partying with though. Never met him myself.
I've done it with him. His mates weren't shy, either.
weve all heard the rumours....did they try to bum you mick?
KiwiRider
Super Lightweight
Posts: 26631
Joined: 11 Feb 2017, 22:25

Re: Kell Brook

Post by KiwiRider »

peter barlow wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 12:16 What are the chances of either of them having another meaningful fight after a potential Khan-Brook fight? Would both just retire?
It has cash out written all over it.
But also there is pride at stake, as in I expect both to train and give it everything in the ring. I just don't think it is going to be as lucrative as it could have been 3/4/5/6 years ago.
Webbo911
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 572
Joined: 22 Feb 2009, 07:18

Re: Kell Brook

Post by Webbo911 »

It's a pension fight. The winner gets another payday if he wants it.

Unless theres something better on that night I'll be watching, I won't be paying though.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23085
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Kell Brook

Post by mickey1975 »

margaret thatcher wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 20:16
mickey1975 wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 18:27
Wee Tommy wrote: 11 Nov 2021, 13:46

Heard the very same. 4 day parties. Meant to be a great guy to be partying with though. Never met him myself.
I've done it with him. His mates weren't shy, either.
weve all heard the rumours....did they try to bum you mick?
No, he never.
fizzjambo
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1283
Joined: 22 Sep 2010, 10:36

Re: Kell Brook

Post by fizzjambo »

Omerta wrote: 10 Nov 2021, 14:34
forcefraser wrote: 10 Nov 2021, 14:22 Not particularly. I will watch it though, more as a curiosity than anything else.

Two guys Mike's past their primes looking for a last payday.

Brook stepped up 3 times and got stopped 3 times. Says it all.for me.

Who will promote this?
He was mismanaged terribly,

If he actually had a promoter that gave a f@uk about him more than himself he would never of been sent up 2 divisions to face an absolute monster and f@ck his eye socket up

He was beating Errol Spence before his eye socket went in that fight

If his career had been handled differently he had the potential to be arguably one of the greatest UK fighters ever p4p

Welter weight was red hot for most of his career so multiple classic world title fights were there too be made to create a legacy

What a wasted career he ended up having
Agreed. Brook was a fantastic talent IMO but he’s underachieved.
He’s got to take some of the blame though as he’s been inactive at times due to his own I’ll discipline.
The Golovkin fight was appalling match making though and Hearn has to carry the can for that. Shocking to chuck a guy two weight divisions up to fight at a weight he’s never competed at before against the divisions No 1. Just chucked his unbeaten record and position down the pan
peter barlow
Middleweight
Posts: 1397
Joined: 05 Aug 2014, 13:10

Re: Kell Brook

Post by peter barlow »

If Kell fought Liam Smith at 154 early next year, how would you call it?
Coco
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 28504
Joined: 08 May 2007, 05:42

Re: Kell Brook

Post by Coco »

peter barlow wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 04:52 If Kell fought Liam Smith at 154 early next year, how would you call it?
Easy night for Smith
Noxy
Super Middleweight
Posts: 6846
Joined: 02 Jun 2013, 10:57

Re: Kell Brook

Post by Noxy »

Kell's career has been good. OK, he lost a few big fights. But he made a lot of coin and won a title. He was a serious player at welter. As pointed out on this thread, he gave Spence a really hard time before his eye went.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27508
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Re: Kell Brook

Post by stujones »

I would like to see Kell fight someone of Liam Smith's level to gauge his own level. To be fair he looked in absolutely mean shape for the Crawford fight and I thought handled himself much better than Amir did. There is a world of difference (as was shown) between Crawford, arguably the P4P number 1 fighter on the planet and the likes of Liam Smith. People seem to talk like Kell embarrassed himself - Crawford for me, embarrassed Khan more and is just top draw. Yes, perhaps the punch resistance isn't what is was but it was still though Terrence Crawford.

If Tyson Fury KOd David Haye in a round - it doesn't mean I would automatically assume Dave Allen would have too much for the shot Haye also.
rio
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1173
Joined: 22 Oct 2012, 16:48

Re: Kell Brook

Post by rio »

One of Britain's most unfulfilled talents. Down to himself Warren and Hearn. Warren never truly invested in him like he did other prospects. I heard directly from someone within Kells camp it was because Warren didn't like the Ingles over some Naz/money issues and he ruined his career. Then Hearn lost a very lucrative Eubank v GGG fight so he decides to convince Brook to jump up 2 weights to keep the ppv in tact vs the biggest middleweight puncher of all time. That was the nail in the coffin for Brooks career.
peter barlow
Middleweight
Posts: 1397
Joined: 05 Aug 2014, 13:10

Re: Kell Brook

Post by peter barlow »

Coco wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 07:05
peter barlow wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 04:52 If Kell fought Liam Smith at 154 early next year, how would you call it?
Easy night for Smith
Easier than Fowler? If it was competitive at all could be interesting build up
peter barlow
Middleweight
Posts: 1397
Joined: 05 Aug 2014, 13:10

Re: Kell Brook

Post by peter barlow »

stujones wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 08:08 I would like to see Kell fight someone of Liam Smith's level to gauge his own level. To be fair he looked in absolutely mean shape for the Crawford fight and I thought handled himself much better than Amir did. There is a world of difference (as was shown) between Crawford, arguably the P4P number 1 fighter on the planet and the likes of Liam Smith. People seem to talk like Kell embarrassed himself - Crawford for me, embarrassed Khan more and is just top draw. Yes, perhaps the punch resistance isn't what is was but it was still though Terrence Crawford.

If Tyson Fury KOd David Haye in a round - it doesn't mean I would automatically assume Dave Allen would have too much for the shot Haye also.
I tend to agree Stu. It could be though because I don't rate Liam Smith that highly, and I do rate Kell, but I'm unsure what level Brook is at these days.

I've always been a Khan fan first and foremost. But to be fair to Kell Brook he has only lost to Golovkin, Crawford and Spence, 3 of the best P4P fighters on the planet in the past decade.

I will always give guys like Brook credit for losing to the best rather than sitting on the sidelines like Eubank or many others afraid to take on the best and fighting mismatched opponents.
a force
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 789
Joined: 12 Feb 2010, 20:23

Re: Kell Brook

Post by a force »

I’m not sure Kell’s even ‘shot’. I don’t think he can take a shot at 147 anymore but that’s more to do with the weight cut. He’s been making that weight for 15 years.

At 154 or even a 150 catch weight I bet he’d take a shot better.

Could he have achieved more? Yes maybe but at the same time everybody with Haymon & Arum were holding out for the potential Mayweather or Pacquaio fights back then so it was hard to make the big fights. He only got Porter as he was mandatory. Jessie Vargas wanted £3m to unify with Kell in the UK. They got Golovkin over for less & made a lot more. It is what it is. Council estate kit with a lot of mates who’ve gone the wrong way yet he’s been a world champion & made millions.

Still though, he’s had a long career, eye surgery on both eyes. He isn’t going to fornicate about with eliminators or non PPV fights. It’ll be big money or nothing.

When you think about it so many other fighters like Bellew, Groves, DeGale, Campbell, Crolla etc all started a couple of years after Brook & Khan & have all been retired a while now.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Kell Brook

Post by polecateddy »

I think whatever recent era you try to slot him in he always comes up a bit short. I think he was effective at fighting European style opponents but would always come up short against the top Americans.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Kell Brook

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

polecateddy wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 08:45 I think whatever recent era you try to slot him in he always comes up a bit short. I think he was effective at fighting European style opponents but would always come up short against the top Americans.
I agree, he's just not THAT good.

I remember when everyone was saying how Howard Eastman underachieved, but the fact was he wasn't good enough. He was good, but just not that good.
skanksta
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16809
Joined: 17 Oct 2008, 10:25

Re: Kell Brook

Post by skanksta »

I@m actually mildly looking fwd to this.

Two modern British greats, fairly well matched. If Brook has to make 147 then it's not even certain who wins.
Let them have their pension fight - they deserve it and I'll watch it.
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45234
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Kell Brook

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

rio wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 08:20 One of Britain's most unfulfilled talents. Down to himself Warren and Hearn. Warren never truly invested in him like he did other prospects. I heard directly from someone within Kells camp it was because Warren didn't like the Ingles over some Naz/money issues and he ruined his career. Then Hearn lost a very lucrative Eubank v GGG fight so he decides to convince Brook to jump up 2 weights to keep the ppv in tact vs the biggest middleweight puncher of all time. That was the nail in the coffin for Brooks career.
Biggest middleweight puncher of all time? Not even close.
skanksta
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16809
Joined: 17 Oct 2008, 10:25

Re: Kell Brook

Post by skanksta »

jamesmcdonnell wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 09:01
polecateddy wrote: 12 Nov 2021, 08:45 I think whatever recent era you try to slot him in he always comes up a bit short. I think he was effective at fighting European style opponents but would always come up short against the top Americans.
I agree, he's just not THAT good.

I remember when everyone was saying how Howard Eastman underachieved, but the fact was he wasn't good enough. He was good, but just not that good.
Disagree.

IF Brook had fought ESJ one fight earlier without the broken face - he'd probably have nicked a decision and been undisputed No.1 in an (almost always) deadly deep WW division.
mickey1975
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 23085
Joined: 02 Mar 2009, 12:54

Re: Kell Brook

Post by mickey1975 »

Kell cut weight massively. He was 13 stone 2 weeks after the Spence fight.
Post Reply