BoxRec

Coco wrote:Hennessy has always got him big fights but that is easy if you are willing to take chump change and not get a tv deal, give away home advantage and options!

Good point. As much as he is criticised, you can't imagine FW conceding all those factors if it was one of his "star" fighters. I do feel sorry for Hennessy though. He has put on some very good shows.

jizzle wrote:

stujones wrote:Certainly true on the rematch situation, although not in all cases as some fights have a rematch clause before fight 1 took place, and in the case of the super 6 - the format was mapped out, ironed out, before fight 1 took place. Hennessy took a gamble also in allowing Froch in the Super 6 - the minute Froch was into the final 4 his future was mapped out.... Hennessy played a massive part in organising and delivering this "dream" and now with his next fight is secure - he's told him to piss off.

This is not a Hatton or Khan situation in which FW was saying "look what I was about to deliver" - Hennessy HAS delivered Johnson, Hennessy was involved in the negotations in the Super 6 that worked out the seedings etc - and Froch has said thanks and piss off. Hennessy wasn't just a small cog in this mapping out for Froch, he was critical in securing these fights, he negotated them - he organised them.

He could have waited until after the SS, thats all I am saying - because had he waited until after it would be back like a similar position that Hatton and Khan were in with FW.

Don't really agree with that...Froch got Froch into the SS - he was one of the four champions at the weight so was automatically going to be in the competition...

As a promoter Hennessy should have (1) maximised his purse outside of SS money which would be a UK TV deal and (2) ensured that all odds were stacked in Froch's favour. He did neither, remember the 'agreement' with Sauerland that was done on a supposed handshake???

Well we will never know what happened about the Saureland deal - I have a completely different take (e.g. there was no deal at all, just a bit a last minute trickery by Hennessy to make Saurland look bad on the fight club programme - It was publicised that Froch would have to fight Abraham in Germany before the SS began).

I don't think it was a "given" that Froch would be automatically into the SS - why no Steiglitz or Bute then.

We also don't know how tough SHOWTIME were to deal with when it came to TV deals - Showtime have no exsiting connection to Sky, Sky haven't shown any SS fight. Hennessy has got live UK TV and delayed UK TV deals for most of Froch's SS fights (including Abraham vs Froch on Sky) - plus live European, and US deals.

black panther wrote:

Coco wrote:Hennessy has always got him big fights but that is easy if you are willing to take chump change and not get a tv deal, give away home advantage and options!

Good point. As much as he is criticised, you can't imagine FW conceding all those factors if it was one of his "star" fighters. I do feel sorry for Hennessy though. He has put on some very good shows.

FW did try and PREVENT Setanta from Showing Jennings vs Cotto.

the best british fighte for a long time,look at his last 6 fights tell me a british boxer that would fight the number of top guys like he has,he has every right to go for broke now and earn the big money he truelly deserves,well in froch

A good move for Froch, shame for Mick.

Mick is just not going to get a sniff with Sky, as long as Warren, Hatton and Hearn are there. That's the bottom line.

Fury isn't good enough but the hype might get him a higher profile, which in turn, might help Mick get some names in his stable.

Dunno though....

Coco wrote:Hennessy has always got him big fights but that is easy if you are willing to take chump change and not get a tv deal, give away home advantage and options!

Nail on the head really. I just can't imagine the Johnson fight having been in an obscure American casino if certain other promoters were involved.

TheCobra wrote:

Coco wrote:Hennessy has always got him big fights but that is easy if you are willing to take chump change and not get a tv deal, give away home advantage and options!

Nail on the head really. I just can't imagine the Johnson fight having been in an obscure American casino if certain other promoters were involved.

Obscure American Casino???? This is the Broadwalk Hall correct - been some fantastic fights in this venue - some big ones. The venue was good enough for two of the biggest stars of the millenium to get it on - Gatti vs Mayweather. Its not a skanky venue.

Glen Johnson isn't exactly the worlds biggest name - How many fights of his fights have been in Las Vegas on MSG? Was his fight with RJJ there? Where was his most recent challenge for a world title held.

MachoMan09 wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:Good on him, I hope he starts to get the money he really does deserve!!

Deserve has got nothing to do with it, mate. Froch was never going to be a crossover star; he doesn't have the charisma. Being a top fighter isn't enough on its own.

I'd beg to differ. Froch's articulate and with media training (which I doubt he ever received under Hennessey) and better PR he'd be in far different place in terms of public perception. Charisma undoubtedly helps, but it's just simply not as simple as saying you've either got it or you haven't. Calzaghe has never had the charisma of a Hatton, but managed to cross over in the latter part of his career.

After a 10 year career though Deserter and a masterclass against one of the most hyped fighters stateside in recent times. Froch hasn't done that yet and that was live on Terrestial TV, and yet still he wasn't a popular or well known on the street as Ricky, Audley or Amir.

It was dubbed in the states as the coronation of Lacy - and it was following ten years of drib drap press and whilst he might not be the most charasmatic fighter, he is alot more photogenic than Froch. Joe went on to have a UNIFICATION fight, in a good contest and then fight two of the biggest names in the sport. Froch hasn't had a unification fight - hasn't really fought anyone with quite the hype of Lacy (Pascal untested, Dirrell untested, Taylor, Kessler and Abraham lost the previous big fights) and he hasn't looked convincing in all of these fights - 13 seconds from defeat vs Taylor, controvesial win vs Dirrell (in a stinker), loss to Kessler.

Yeah, he managed look the business last time, but Abraham isn't even a current world champion or undefeated - so not nearly the same as Lacy.

Importantly though, Froch has said on numerous occasions he doesn't want the fame. Although part of me is thinking out loud and wonders if the Froch household wouldn't mine more attention and fame.

stujones wrote:After a 10 year career though Deserter and a masterclass against one of the most hyped fighters stateside in recent times. Froch hasn't done that yet and that was live on Terrestial TV, and yet still he wasn't a popular or well known on the street as Ricky, Audley or Amir.

I don't get your point here Stu. Mine is that with better handling (a proper publicist for example) Froch could have been manufactured into a mainstream offering. The only question over it is not one of charisma, but one of how much he wanted it, if at all. But again, a good promoter should be clearly outlining the financial benefits of building yourself as a personal brand.

This is big blow for hennessy sports! Can they recover?

Deserter wrote:

stujones wrote:After a 10 year career though Deserter and a masterclass against one of the most hyped fighters stateside in recent times. Froch hasn't done that yet and that was live on Terrestial TV, and yet still he wasn't a popular or well known on the street as Ricky, Audley or Amir.

I don't get your point here Stu. Mine is that with better handling (a proper publicist for example) Froch could have been manufactured into a mainstream offering. The only question over it is not one of charisma, but one of how much he wanted it, if at all. But again, a good promoter should be clearly outlining the financial benefits of building yourself as a personal brand.

My point was that it took Joe, a good looking, not bad talking fella 10 years to become a mainstream offering - and whilst Joe had a following in Wales, his mainstream success was the result of a massive fight - a bigger fight than what Froch has had IMO.

Froch has fought on primetime ITV - what more of a platform can he have. Appearances on Soccer AM??? Well, fight a much hyped undefeated yank with terrestial TV coverage in a unification fight first and then the soccer AM appearances will come. Thats what Joe needed - Joe was no brand before the lacy fight.

Joe and Carl have very different styles, a very different look, and a very different boxing record. Joe at the time of main stream coverage has lost about 10 rounds in his whole career (the vast majority of these was in one fight - Reid), Froch has had his struggles.

stujones wrote:My point was that it took Joe, a good looking, not bad talking fella 10 years to become a mainstream offering - and whilst Joe had a following in Wales, his mainstream success was the result of a massive fight - a bigger fight than what Froch has had IMO. Froch has fought on primetime ITV - what more of a platform can he have. Appearances on Soccer AM??? .

Stu, with no disrespect, you're completely missing my point, which is that it's perfectly possible with the right PR machine to build a 'personality' without a dependency on a defining fight. In terms of platforms for Froch, they would have been a vast array should his PR have been professionally handled, ranging from celebrity association through to a CSR initiative. Trust me on this one. Froch just hasn't been marketed properly in his career to date.

Deserter wrote:

stujones wrote:My point was that it took Joe, a good looking, not bad talking fella 10 years to become a mainstream offering - and whilst Joe had a following in Wales, his mainstream success was the result of a massive fight - a bigger fight than what Froch has had IMO. Froch has fought on primetime ITV - what more of a platform can he have. Appearances on Soccer AM??? .

Stu, with no disrespect, you're completely missing my point, which is that it's perfectly possible with the right PR machine to build a 'personality' without a dependency on a defining fight. In terms of platforms for Froch, they would have been a vast array should his PR have been professionally handled, ranging from celebrity association through to a CSR initiative. Trust me on this one. Froch just hasn't been marketed properly in his career to date.

I'm not disputing this - but I do think your Calzaghe comparison is flawed because of the length of time before he got "mainstream". You highlighted that if Calzaghe could cross over then so can Froch - because both are relatively lacking the charisma of Haye and Hatton. I was merely pointing that it took Joe 10 years to make and had he not fought Lacy and Hopkins he wouldn't have made it.

So are you implying that for 9 years FW got it wrong for Joe?

So give me an example of a "mainstream" fighter, who didn't have charisma or a defining fight that crossed over? Haye, Hatton, Calzaghe, Harrison and Khan are the major mainstream stars of late - Haye, Hatton and Harrison have bags of charisma - and Khan had a unique platform of the Olympics.

Seriously the only British "fighter" not on that list that became a mainstream star these last 10 years is Alex Reid - and we know how he got there.

stujones wrote:I'm not disputing this - but I do think your Calzaghe comparison is flawed because of the length of time before he got "mainstream". You highlighted that if Calzaghe could cross over then so can Froch - because both are relatively lacking the charisma of Haye and Hatton. I was merely pointing that it took Joe 10 years to make and had he not fought Lacy and Hopkins he wouldn't have made it.
So are you implying that for 9 years FW got it wrong for Joe?

Where we differ is here. For me, the main reason Calzaghe crossed over is that his mentality changed - he went from living a 'simple' life in the valleys with his long-term wife and actively shunning 'mainstream' opportunities (Warren's been quoted on this before) to embracing it... the model girlfriend, celebrity dancing etc. That wasn't because of the Lacy and Hopkins' fights, it could have happened as early as post-Eubank if he'd Calzaghe had actively pursued it - I'm not saying he was wrong not to, just pointing out a fact.
We also know that boxing remains ridiculously behind the curve when it comes to marketing and PR, so that can't be ignored as a factor in the broader scheme of things - hence why it has taken defining fights etc for boxers to 'break out'... my whole point is that it shouldn't always be reliant purely on that... Froch shouldn't require a huge 'defining' fight as his achievements to date should be more than sufficient to build a strong mainstream profile on and any half-decent publicist would have been able to work with the 'material' to date.
Would also have to take issue with Harrison having bags of charisma!

Although your examples did occur after the Lacy fight and he is going back to relative obscurity now again. I still maintain it was that fight that made Joe - that fight got the public interested in Joe.

I will agree to disagree on the Charisma of Audley.

Plus you mentioned that this was partly Hennessy's fault - who could have done a better job in this regard? As you rightly said Boxing is behind other sports when it comes to PR - so who is the PR guru promoter?

stujones wrote:Although your examples did occur after the Lacy fight and he is going back to relative obscurity now again. I still maintain it was that fight that made Joe - that fight got the public interested in Joe.

I will agree to disagree on the Charisma of Audley.

Plus you mentioned that this was partly Hennessy's fault - who could have done a better job in this regard? As you rightly said Boxing is behind other sports when it comes to PR - so who is the PR guru promoter?

Stu, you're continually missing the point. I'm not disputing that was the fight that got the public interested in Joe. What I'm saying is that with different PR/marketing tactics (and a more committed approach from Joe) it wouldn't have needed it to reach that stage before the public got interested. Are you seriously telling me that a young, good-looking Calzaghe dethroning Eubank on the back of an undefeated pro record and one of the most distinguished amateur records of recent times couldn't have been leveraged by a PR professional to catapult him into the mainstream? If so, we'll have to agree to disagree.
As for the PR guru promoter, there isn't one, that's the problem. Look at the difference between the UFC and boxing in terms of marketing and PR - it's like comparing a Ferrari with a Ford Cortina. Promoters are focused on short-term returns and keeping their core audience rather than developing new audiences.... look at how dated posters/ads for fight bills look and sound to give you just one example... they haven't moved on in the last 30 years.

No I agree with your point - I'm sure Max Clifford could have made Joe loads of money - if he wanted to go down that route. Could have got the Jordan/Kerry Katona sex stories out or whatever. However, as you now state there is no one in boxing with a track record in this kind of thing (do they want their fighter to have such distractions is another question) - so not sure why it is labelled as Micks fault - when it would have been the same had he been under any promoter. Does FW provide media training?

stujones wrote:No I agree with your point - I'm sure Max Clifford could have made Joe loads of money - if he wanted to go down that route. Could have got the Jordan/Kerry Katona sex stories out or whatever. However, as you now state there is no one in boxing with a track record in this kind of thing (do they want their fighter to have such distractions is another question) - so not sure why it is labelled as Micks fault - when it would have been the same had he been under any promoter. Does FW provide media training?

I was just saying it was Mick's fault as it's still a clear failing irrespective of what happens in other promotional camps. I also think he happens to be the worst of the bunch in this regard, as Warren at the least clearly has in-roads with News International, which guarantees a 'pipeline' of publicity.

MachoMan09 wrote:Deserter, I understand your point but I respectfully disagree. I just think that even if somebody like Max Clifford worked full time on building Carl's profile, he still wouldn't strike a tune with the public at large. He's not that sort of guy.

I couldn't agree more. Froch, for all his achievements and skills as a fighter just isn't a likable guy! And he is also not worth hating enough to want to watch him get KO like a Naz or Eubank for example, or to make it more relevant to today, Haye. IMO no matter what he did or who promoted him he would still have the same level of recognition/exposure.

Calzaghe was boring but carried a nice guy persona which people could sort of connect with, Froch doesn't and is just boring.

youngrell wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:Deserter, I understand your point but I respectfully disagree. I just think that even if somebody like Max Clifford worked full time on building Carl's profile, he still wouldn't strike a tune with the public at large. He's not that sort of guy.

I couldn't agree more. Froch, for all his achievements and skills as a fighter just isn't a likable guy! And he is also not worth hating enough to want to watch him get KO like a Naz or Eubank for example, or to make it more relevant to today, Haye. IMO no matter what he did or who promoted him he would still have the same level of recognition/exposure.

Calzaghe was boring but carried a nice guy persona which people could sort of connect with, Froch doesn't and is just boring.

Guys, with no disrespect, you're really under-estimating the impact of things like media training. It's also not necessarily about the public en masse embracing him, it's about giving him a higher profile with the right kind of audiences.
As for somebody like Haye, you're simply wrong. He'd have a level of recognition/exposure for sure, as he's more of a 'natural' than Carl. But to say that no matter what he did or who promoted him it would be the same is just ridiculous. People like Clifford on the one extreme and PR companies like Freud on the other, survive and thrive precisely because they've proven they can make a difference to the level of recognition/exposure, whether that's with regards to a person or a brand. It's like saying that Lewis Hamilton would still be among the best drivers in the world regardless of the car he drove - just because he's clearly a great talent, doesn't mean that the right car (or wrong car) would impact on his performance.

He's on Question of Sport tonight. The first small step on the road to global domination???

Froch has had the exposure though - Primetime BBC main eventing, Primetime ITV main eventing. Great viewing figures also.

We are guessing he has had no media training, you've pointed out that he is articulate infront of the camera - he's not exactly James "Defail" is he. I think your making it sound like he has shunned the interviews etc - he's been approachable on TV, just hasn't got it and I've said before I think it also is there with his fighting style also. Its not eye catching, its not always pretty and whilst most of the time he is in wars - when the styles clash they are often stinkers.

I heard Carl never had a contract with Hennessey from the start they just had a fight by fight agreement.

Mick has done well for Carl. You have to feel sorry for him.

dbf wrote:I heard Carl never had a contract with Hennessey from the start they just had a fight by fight agreement.

Mick has done well for Carl. You have to feel sorry for him.

Yeah Mick couldn't get home advantage or a tv deal for a damn exciting world champion, leaving him no option than to take on the top boys giving all the advantages away.
I think you will find that in has been Carl which has done well for Hennessy