BoxRec

Horse wrote:Brook takes step aside money and gets a spot on the undercard of Porter vs Thurman.

Hearn makes the excuse for this as being something like: "To build up Brook's American/international profile" & "now Brook gets a shot at two belts".

The winner of Porter vs Thurman fights Mayweather and vacates the IBF title.

Brook vs Dan Ion for the vacant IBF world title.

Everyone wins.

DMA1987 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:He has beaten everyone put in front of him.

Whenever someone has to wheel out this cumbersome old cliche to defend a fighter, it's a given that the fighter has been protected.

Why does Brook bother you so much?

He doesn't bother me. He baffles me.

To me he's just a passionless boxer who's difficult to get excited about. He doesn't seem excited about his own career. Fights no one of note, stays at home, wants an Amir Khan payday more than he wants world championship glory. I can't imagine how anyone can support him, unless they're the type who needs to emotionally invest in a sportsman because he hails from the same slab of earth they're from.

I dont think he is passionless I think he is just a quiet kid, not comfortable in the limelight or banging the drum. As for who he fights and where he fights I guess much of that is his management.

As for the championship thing you cannot eat a championship belt (well you could I suppose but it wouldnt carry much nourishment) and what do belts mean these days anyway?

500K for a world championship fight in someone elses home town or a couple of mill v Khan in your own country. No brainer imo. Thats the fight I would chase if I where Brook.

Broomhall wrote:500K for a world championship fight in someone elses home town or a couple of mill v Khan in your own country. No brainer imo. Thats the fight I would chase if I where Brook.

That is surmising on a lot of outcomes though, the Khan fight that is. Even a defeat for Khan against Collazo on Saturday, Khan is still hot with Golden Boy. He wouldn't get Mayweather but rematches with Maidana, Danny Garcia and a bout against Broner, would all be potentially on the table and that is just for starters.

Do we really think that Khan v Brook is PPV? I don't think it would do that great numbers and if it did, it would only be on Khan's name and media attention, which would surely mean that Khan is still hot.

Broomhall wrote:I dont think he is passionless I think he is just a quiet kid, not comfortable in the limelight or banging the drum. As for who he fights and where he fights I guess much of that is his management.

As for the championship thing you cannot eat a championship belt (well you could I suppose but it wouldnt carry much nourishment) and what do belts mean these days anyway?

500K for a world championship fight in someone elses home town or a couple of mill v Khan in your own country. No brainer imo. Thats the fight I would chase if I where Brook.

So not only is Khan getting 5million, Brook is getting a "couple of mill"? More than Groves? How big do people think this fight is? It's all in Matchrooms heads in my opinion. It's not even a talking point amongst my friends.

Just to add to that - surely, Khan V Brook can only be PPV in the future with a World title on the line.

Brook has a lot to prove yet IMO.

It's the talk of the town in Sheffield whilst out walking their whippets

columbo wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

The opposition has been pretty dire that's why. Kell clearly has talent and that's the annoying part about it. You have to remember that this is a guy that turned pro in 2004 and he still hasnt fought a legitimate world class fighter. I understand the injuries in regards to the Alexander fight/s but still over the time frame he's been a pro it still isnt good enough. Look at his cv compared to Khans in terms of names faced and Khan is actually a little younger than Kell is aswell.

This, I actually like Brook although when thinking about it Columbo is spot on.

columbo wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

The opposition has been pretty dire that's why. Kell clearly has talent and that's the annoying part about it. You have to remember that this is a guy that turned pro in 2004 and he still hasnt fought a legitimate world class fighter. I understand the injuries in regards to the Alexander fight/s but still over the time frame he's been a pro it still isnt good enough. Look at his cv compared to Khans in terms of names faced and Khan is actually a little younger than Kell is aswell.

and kells younger then gavin and bradley saunders who are worshipped on here....

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

theyre just internet geeks....kell gets great receptions at boxing shows eg last time in liverpool....real boxing fans

los2 wrote:

columbo wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

The opposition has been pretty dire that's why. Kell clearly has talent and that's the annoying part about it. You have to remember that this is a guy that turned pro in 2004 and he still hasnt fought a legitimate world class fighter. I understand the injuries in regards to the Alexander fight/s but still over the time frame he's been a pro it still isnt good enough. Look at his cv compared to Khans in terms of names faced and Khan is actually a little younger than Kell is aswell.

and kells younger then gavin and bradley saunders who are worshipped on here....

I wouldn't say Brad Saunders gets worshipped on here. He's flying under the radar if anything. I'm the only one who bigs him up.

zero wrote:

columbo wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

The opposition has been pretty dire that's why. Kell clearly has talent and that's the annoying part about it. You have to remember that this is a guy that turned pro in 2004 and he still hasnt fought a legitimate world class fighter. I understand the injuries in regards to the Alexander fight/s but still over the time frame he's been a pro it still isnt good enough. Look at his cv compared to Khans in terms of names faced and Khan is actually a little younger than Kell is aswell.

This, I actually like Brook although when thinking about it Columbo is spot on.

X2

Horse wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

He's boring and we're sick of him.

Were fornicating bored of you Horse

TJ77 wrote:Were effing bored of you Horse

I'm bored of Brook's fanboys on here.

Brook is very boring, he deserves the ridicule that he receives.

Horse wrote:

TJ77 wrote:Were effing bored of you Horse

I'm bored of Brook's fanboys on here.

Brook is very boring, he deserves the ridicule that he receives.

He isn't boring Horse. He has just fought uninspiring people.

los2 wrote:

columbo wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

The opposition has been pretty dire that's why. Kell clearly has talent and that's the annoying part about it. You have to remember that this is a guy that turned pro in 2004 and he still hasnt fought a legitimate world class fighter. I understand the injuries in regards to the Alexander fight/s but still over the time frame he's been a pro it still isnt good enough. Look at his cv compared to Khans in terms of names faced and Khan is actually a little younger than Kell is aswell.

and kells younger then gavin and bradley saunders who are worshipped on here....

Frankie turned pro in 2009. It's a bit different.

You can't dig Brook for fighting poor opposition and then give Gavin a pass.

los2 wrote:

Old Jack J wrote:Ok, I read more than I post on here but I have a question.

Why does Kell Brook get such a hard time on these boards? To me he looks the part and deserves his shot. He has beaten everyone put in front of him fairly convincingly and improves all the time. He had to pull out of a couple of fights through injury which happens to everyone, especially when going for your biggest fight.

I just don't understand the critism. Anyone care to elaborate?

theyre just internet geeks....kell gets great receptions at boxing shows eg last time in liverpool....real boxing fans

Because that means so much.

DMA1987 wrote:He isn't boring Horse. He has just fought uninspiring people.

Which is boring.

Who looks forward to a Kell Brook fight? Year after year he gives us nothing to care about.

DMA1987 wrote:You can't dig Brook for fighting poor opposition and then give Gavin a pass.

It's not a pass though mate. If Frankie had been a pro 10 years aswell then fair but he hasnt. Also, to public knowledge he hasnt turned down fights ie im thinking along the lines of Mike Jones and Bradley at the respective times.

DMA1987 wrote:You can't dig Brook for fighting poor opposition and then give Gavin a pass.

Brook's debut: 17.09.2004
Gavin's debut: 28.02.2009

I can. Hopefully Gavin will be fighting Bundu next, who is arguably better than anyone Brook has faced.

Horse wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:You can't dig Brook for fighting poor opposition and then give Gavin a pass.

Brook's debut: 17.09.2004
Gavin's debut: 28.02.2009

I can. Hopefully Gavin will be fighting Bundu next, who is arguably better than anyone Brook has faced.

You would have to argue well.

Tuan_Jim wrote:Thurman is a lot more deserving than Brook. Porter-Thurman is also a much better fight. I'm sure Brook would rather laze back in Sheffield anyway, and babble on some more about an Amir Khan fight.

The WBC, WBO, IBF, Boxrec, Fightnews and Ring magazine all hold Brook in a higher position. Brook has won eliminators, is mandatory for this title and been waiting on his shot for some time.
I think its unfair to say he doesn't deserve the shot.

DMA1987 wrote:You would have to argue well.

Brook's record is fairly weak.

Vyacheslav Senchenko, Matthew Hatton, Lovemore Ndou etc. Leonard Bundu is on that level and I'd give him a good chance of beating Brook's best opponents.

Nothing in it for Brook to take step a side money and the IBF wouldn't allow it again, they'd strip his mandatory position if he stepped aside again. Whatever Porter decides to do Brook should be fighting for the world title on or before July 12. They have it in writing and should hold team Porter to it, if not they should force him to vacate it