BoxRec

I don't recall Mick having anything to do with the arranging and promotion of the semi final vs Johnson.

Plus, the fight was promoted by DiBella and Froch, there's no indication that Matchroom were getting anything.

With the fights Froch has been prepared to put himself in, to me he's entitled to do and say what he wants. If he feels Mick isn't justifying what he's earning from Carl's endeavours, or he feels someone can represent him better, then he has every right to look elsewhere.

It's obviously unfortunate that Mick has found himself on the outer but Froch has to look after himself, he's stayed very loyal to Hennessy for the past couple of years during which time it was clear that things weren't going too well.

He's the one getting punched in the face for a living. It's not as if he's gone self promoted, fighting bums on PPV and putting on a shit undercard *cough* Haye *cough*.

Some really good points in here. The only thing I'd like to add is that people need to understand that the role of the promoter doesn't just stop with getting the fighter on TV - that's the platform, but the key is to leverage that platform to the fullest extent through channels ranging from exposure in the national press through to securing lucrative sponsorships deals.
Hennessey may have done the 'bread and butter' stuff of getting the TV deals, but seemingly wasn't able to build on that in any way, shape or form.

LeedsLad wrote:I don't recall Mick having anything to do with the arranging and promotion of the semi final vs Johnson.

Plus, the fight was promoted by DiBella and Froch, there's no indication that Matchroom were getting anything.

With the fights Froch has been prepared to put himself in, to me he's entitled to do and say what he wants. If he feels Mick isn't justifying what he's earning from Carl's endeavours, or he feels someone can represent him better, then he has every right to look elsewhere.

It's obviously unfortunate that Mick has found himself on the outer but Froch has to look after himself, he's stayed very loyal to Hennessy for the past couple of years during which time it was clear that things weren't going too well.

He's the one getting punched in the face for a living. It's not as if he's gone self promoted, fighting bums on PPV and putting on a shit undercard *cough* Haye *cough*.

All good points. Although I would say that Hennessy as Froch's "representive" (Froch's words) must have had some say for this fight.... even if it was too relay the messages from the Negotations back to Froch. What I meant this fight was set, the final was set all before Froch and Mick parted ways.

I can see your point and I see some logical no doubt... opinions is what makes the world go round. I actually would have seen more sense had Froch decided too cut out the middle man as it appeared would be the case in that BBC interview. With his next too fights set, why pay a representative and after the super 6 (if successful) it would be hoped that he would be a big enough name to get the big fights without a representative.

Deserter wrote:Some really good points in here. The only thing I'd like to add is that people need to understand that the role of the promoter doesn't just stop with getting the fighter on TV - that's the platform, but the key is to leverage that platform to the fullest extent through channels ranging from exposure in the national press through to securing lucrative sponsorships deals.
Hennessey may have done the 'bread and butter' stuff of getting the TV deals, but seemingly wasn't able to build on that in any way, shape or form.

True, and we've had this debate before. However, it has been said time and time again by people close to Froch and by the man himself that Froch didn't want to do the media circuit didn't want to be a star. This has changed naturally and he's gone to the number #1 SPORTS promoters in the country - you only have to see the live gate at the premier league darts to see that.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean the opportunities were not there under Mick... and also, its not Mick's job to tell the TV companies how to advertise and promote the bill. I'm sure all the promoters, with the possible exception of Matchroom, must be annoyed at the lack of adverts for their Saturday night boxing (PPV's aside). I don't think its the promoters job, or within the promoters power to control how TV promotes the boxing. Matchroom, who produce approximately 1/4 of all Sky Sports programming might have a bigger say and Sky would have a lot more to lose if they anger Matchroom. When is the last time you've seen an advert for an FTM, Hatton or Warren (non PPV) bill.

Thats why, now that Eddie has got the drive for boxing that Barry used to have, we are going to see a rapid change in terms of boxing promoting in the coming years. I can see Matchroom going from strength to strength.

Thats why, now that Eddie has got the drive for boxing that Barry used to have, we are going to see a rapid change in terms of boxing promoting in the coming years. I can see Matchroom going from strength to strength.

definately x2 and i think its great.

Crazyboy wrote:

Thats why, now that Eddie has got the drive for boxing that Barry used to have, we are going to see a rapid change in terms of boxing promoting in the coming years. I can see Matchroom going from strength to strength.

definately x2 and i think its great.

Yes, I'm not 100% sold that its all going to be great - but it could be. It might be if Eddie gets boxing back to being the #3 product behind football and the WWE on Sky then we could even get some terrestial TV biting from the other promoters - as terrestial TV has developed an interest in Darts etc over the past few years (yes, I know the BBC had the BDO before Eddie Hearn was born - but ITV have shown some combined BDO/PDC events etc - and other channels are showing more snooker.

Alternatively, I can also envisage alot of boxers seeing the coverage the Matchroom fighters get and wish to jump ship. This might create a mini monopoly which might not necessarily be a good thing - like it was for years the BBC would refuse to acknowledge Phil Taylor. It would be great if there was a terrestial interest.

Yep, only time will tell of course, but i just see the likes of those darts players and think to meself......i would have never ever known any of those names (Adrian Lweis, webster, wade, anderson, etc) if it wasn't for what matchroom did for their sport.

if they can do the same sort of thing for boxing like they have for darts etc, i would be a happy man.

However i also hope that more money = more acadamies, gyms etc

We'll see eh

Sponsorship, as in from blue chip companies, is all but impossible to get. Naz and Khan got it, but they had ITV exposure. Hatton and Calzaghe didn't, but they were on Sky. Even Audley had some in his BBC days. You can't dispute the power of the terrestrial platform in this.
Froch at the top had just two ITV fights. Who knows what he might have got if he had more. As things stand he has a deal with a clothing company, but that was in place long before he left Hennessy.
And we should remember that this 'Matchroom drive' brought us a lot of crap Eubank opponents so it might be wise to remain only cautiously optimistic at this stage

Yes, but that was as much down to Eubank as it was matchroom. Chris clearly wished to fight scrubs for a while.

To be fair, Eubank also had some terrific tussles in his career, so I dont begrudge his run of palookas so much.

Glyn Leach wrote:Sponsorship, as in from blue chip companies, is all but impossible to get. Naz and Khan got it, but they had ITV exposure. Hatton and Calzaghe didn't, but they were on Sky. Even Audley had some in his BBC days. You can't dispute the power of the terrestrial platform in this.
Froch at the top had just two ITV fights. Who knows what he might have got if he had more. As things stand he has a deal with a clothing company, but that was in place long before he left Hennessy.
And we should remember that this 'Matchroom drive' brought us a lot of crap Eubank opponents so it might be wise to remain only cautiously optimistic at this stage

Froch had alot more terrestial TV fights on the way up though as did Khan and Naz. Unlike in the Naz days, when ITV not only invested in fights but invested money in promotion/advertising - Froch didn't have this with the BBC and ITV. Indeed, as I said - Sky bothering investing adverts with Matchroom fighters. Did you see any advertersments for Ricky Burns world title fights, Jason Booth vs Molitor, or Rendell Munroe vs Nikosha.

Naz could generate against anyone 8/9 million consistently on a Saturday night. It made sense to advertise this - just as they advertise Coronation Street. Your not going to see them promote the programme that clashes with Eastenders heavily. It does seem odd that neither ITV nor the Beeb invested in promoting boxing programming heavily when both returned - as generally they did very well ratings.

However, nobody is going to tune if nobody knows its on. Cause of the EPG - less people buy the TV Times, so advertising programmes on the TV is becoming more and more required - just think back to how often you would see the BBC advertise their schedule between programmes, not half as much as they do now.

It was really ironic when ITV showed Malignaggi vs Khan as the voiceover man said "and now the time has come, the moment has arrived its the big fight live - Amir Khan"..... What moment, it got zero advertising.

stujones wrote:

Deserter wrote:Some really good points in here. The only thing I'd like to add is that people need to understand that the role of the promoter doesn't just stop with getting the fighter on TV - that's the platform, but the key is to leverage that platform to the fullest extent through channels ranging from exposure in the national press through to securing lucrative sponsorships deals.
Hennessey may have done the 'bread and butter' stuff of getting the TV deals, but seemingly wasn't able to build on that in any way, shape or form.

True, and we've had this debate before. However, it has been said time and time again by people close to Froch and by the man himself that Froch didn't want to do the media circuit didn't want to be a star. This has changed naturally and he's gone to the number #1 SPORTS promoters in the country - you only have to see the live gate at the premier league darts to see that.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean the opportunities were not there under Mick... and also, its not Mick's job to tell the TV companies how to advertise and promote the bill. I'm sure all the promoters, with the possible exception of Matchroom, must be annoyed at the lack of adverts for their Saturday night boxing (PPV's aside). I don't think its the promoters job, or within the promoters power to control how TV promotes the boxing. Matchroom, who produce approximately 1/4 of all Sky Sports programming might have a bigger say and Sky would have a lot more to lose if they anger Matchroom. When is the last time you've seen an advert for an FTM, Hatton or Warren (non PPV) bill.

Thats why, now that Eddie has got the drive for boxing that Barry used to have, we are going to see a rapid change in terms of boxing promoting in the coming years. I can see Matchroom going from strength to strength.

Yep, good points Stu.

King Geedorah wrote:Anyone remember when Naz went toe-to-toe with an England game? Freddy Cruz if memory serves. I got a swell of pride at the time, even if it was a meaningless Engerland game.

Imagine if it was broadcast like that now.

Naz's fight is on a weekday, it is the same time as the England game, ITV's HD is nowhere near as good as Sky's and it is for an International belt. This is shit. I'm boycotting it and launching an online petition.

I cannot say I do, I do remember the Cruz fight though. Naz was brilliant that night. Cruz was over the hill but no mug. Thats when I actually thought "He could actually fight like he does and get away with it at the highest level".

Was the England game on Sky I assume?

Its not just articles either, the US commentary team on Saturday (mainly Gus Johnson and Tarver) kept harping on about how it was criminal that British fans didnt know much about Carl Froch and that he hadnt had any exposure over here.....and so the misinformation propagates....

Terrestrial TV is going to cease to be as important in years to come, as more and more people subscribe to video on demand.

I've got Virgin Media now, and I rarely watch the terrestrial channels, as there is other stuff out there that I can watch as and when I like which is generally more interesting than what is on offer on the TV schedules.

Froch isn't that interesting. Prince Naseem was Prince Naseem. Khan was a 17-year-old Pakistani from Bolton in the Olympic final - I mean come on. Benn had Mendy and most of the England football team at ringside. Eubank had Benn, and Eubank was Eubank! And Hatton had Man City fans and most of Farnell's fans to kickstart him.

Much like Robin Reid and Richie Woodhall weren't that interesting. Neither was Calzaghe, until the whole Lacy thing lit up in his 14th year as a pro.

stujones wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:Sponsorship, as in from blue chip companies, is all but impossible to get. Naz and Khan got it, but they had ITV exposure. Hatton and Calzaghe didn't, but they were on Sky. Even Audley had some in his BBC days. You can't dispute the power of the terrestrial platform in this.
Froch at the top had just two ITV fights. Who knows what he might have got if he had more. As things stand he has a deal with a clothing company, but that was in place long before he left Hennessy.
And we should remember that this 'Matchroom drive' brought us a lot of crap Eubank opponents so it might be wise to remain only cautiously optimistic at this stage

Froch had alot more terrestial TV fights on the way up though as did Khan and Naz. Unlike in the Naz days, when ITV not only invested in fights but invested money in promotion/advertising - Froch didn't have this with the BBC and ITV. Indeed, as I said - Sky bothering investing adverts with Matchroom fighters. Did you see any advertersments for Ricky Burns world title fights, Jason Booth vs Molitor, or Rendell Munroe vs Nikosha.

Naz could generate against anyone 8/9 million consistently on a Saturday night. It made sense to advertise this - just as they advertise Coronation Street. Your not going to see them promote the programme that clashes with Eastenders heavily. It does seem odd that neither ITV nor the Beeb invested in promoting boxing programming heavily when both returned - as generally they did very well ratings.

However, nobody is going to tune if nobody knows its on. Cause of the EPG - less people buy the TV Times, so advertising programmes on the TV is becoming more and more required - just think back to how often you would see the BBC advertise their schedule between programmes, not half as much as they do now.

It was really ironic when ITV showed Malignaggi vs Khan as the voiceover man said "and now the time has come, the moment has arrived its the big fight live - Amir Khan"..... What moment, it got zero advertising.

Froch was quite heavily advertised on The Beeb with that crappy cobra cartoon.

coghaugen11 wrote:Froch isn't that interesting. Prince Naseem was Prince Naseem. Khan was a 17-year-old Pakistani from Bolton in the Olympic final - I mean come on. Benn had Mendy and most of the England football team at ringside. Eubank had Benn, and Eubank was Eubank! And Hatton had Man City fans and most of Farnell's fans to kickstart him.

Much like Robin Reid and Richie Woodhall weren't that interesting. Neither was Calzaghe, until the whole Lacy thing lit up in his 14th year as a pro.

Ahah, the elephant in the room.
Carl has had more terrestrial exposure than most but the general public just haven't taken to his personality.
Personally I find him intriguing, complex, but that's too subtle for casual viewers. They don't want fighters, they want fighters to be cartoons, like Naz and Eubank. Froch doesn't have that quality and nobody can sell what isn't there.

Glyn Leach wrote:

coghaugen11 wrote:Froch isn't that interesting. Prince Naseem was Prince Naseem. Khan was a 17-year-old Pakistani from Bolton in the Olympic final - I mean come on. Benn had Mendy and most of the England football team at ringside. Eubank had Benn, and Eubank was Eubank! And Hatton had Man City fans and most of Farnell's fans to kickstart him.

Much like Robin Reid and Richie Woodhall weren't that interesting. Neither was Calzaghe, until the whole Lacy thing lit up in his 14th year as a pro.

Ahah, the elephant in the room.
Carl has had more terrestrial exposure than most but the general public just haven't taken to his personality.
Personally I find him intriguing, complex, but that's too subtle for casual viewers. They don't want fighters, they want fighters to be cartoons, like Naz and Eubank. Froch doesn't have that quality and nobody can sell what isn't there.

Ironically, Carl literally WAS a cartoon in the early years!

I found him quite intriguing on the way up and really liked him.

He's boring, now.

mickey1975 wrote:

stujones wrote:

Glyn Leach wrote:Sponsorship, as in from blue chip companies, is all but impossible to get. Naz and Khan got it, but they had ITV exposure. Hatton and Calzaghe didn't, but they were on Sky. Even Audley had some in his BBC days. You can't dispute the power of the terrestrial platform in this.
Froch at the top had just two ITV fights. Who knows what he might have got if he had more. As things stand he has a deal with a clothing company, but that was in place long before he left Hennessy.
And we should remember that this 'Matchroom drive' brought us a lot of crap Eubank opponents so it might be wise to remain only cautiously optimistic at this stage

Froch had alot more terrestial TV fights on the way up though as did Khan and Naz. Unlike in the Naz days, when ITV not only invested in fights but invested money in promotion/advertising - Froch didn't have this with the BBC and ITV. Indeed, as I said - Sky bothering investing adverts with Matchroom fighters. Did you see any advertersments for Ricky Burns world title fights, Jason Booth vs Molitor, or Rendell Munroe vs Nikosha.

Naz could generate against anyone 8/9 million consistently on a Saturday night. It made sense to advertise this - just as they advertise Coronation Street. Your not going to see them promote the programme that clashes with Eastenders heavily. It does seem odd that neither ITV nor the Beeb invested in promoting boxing programming heavily when both returned - as generally they did very well ratings.

However, nobody is going to tune if nobody knows its on. Cause of the EPG - less people buy the TV Times, so advertising programmes on the TV is becoming more and more required - just think back to how often you would see the BBC advertise their schedule between programmes, not half as much as they do now.

It was really ironic when ITV showed Malignaggi vs Khan as the voiceover man said "and now the time has come, the moment has arrived its the big fight live - Amir Khan"..... What moment, it got zero advertising.

Froch was quite heavily advertised on The Beeb with that crappy cobra cartoon.

Yes on boxing shows - that were only going to be seen by the more hardcore boxing fans (as these were not advertised).