Page 2 of 6
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 14:18
by gobbles
Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:Chambers2 wrote:Maxime wrote:
As far as I know Froch team didn't want to fight in Arkansas or any of the neighbor's states like Tennessee where Taylor has fought many times.
You may be right, but have you got a source for this info. I've not seen one
Florida or MSG with Barker v Duddy, Fury and Guinn all on the undercard.
No way is Duddy fighting Barker. He's boxing on Saturday and then might get a shot at Pavlik. And they wouldn't put Fury near Guinn.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 14:33
by Poncey
I didn't say they would. Just that both were on the card. The above was from Boxing News 2 weeks ago. Barrera is fighting 6 weeks after his last fight, so it's possible. Duddy has8 to 9.
Top Rank want Abraham next in the autumn if he wants to stay at 160.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 14:53
by Autobarn
Apparently Froch-Taylor has got a little bit closer. Again.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 15:02
by Poncey
Any news, yet, whether it's the 18th or 25th mate?
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 15:51
by Spud
I think the fight will be signed now the Americans are calling all the shots - I am furious at this - this fight could and should have been shown on ITV or terrestrial and yet another fight is lost because in my opinion ITV do not have a pot to piss - and despite Meaty Micks claims if he could have got Taylor to fight in the UK and had the adequate funding then the fight would have been made - I do not believe for one minute Taylor would have turned down decent money.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 18 Feb 2009, 17:03
by nobby_nobbins
Personally I'm delighted if the fight goes ahead in the US. Froch won't get the star profile he wants unless he fights there, and what could be sweeter than putting Taylor on the canvas in his own backyard?
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 02:49
by Spud
nobby_nobbins wrote:Personally I'm delighted if the fight goes ahead in the US. Froch won't get the star profile he wants unless he fights there, and what could be sweeter than putting Taylor on the canvas in his own backyard?
Whilst I see your point of view and to a point agree - boxing in this country needs the sport on our screens on "prime time" tv - and yes whilst the boxer going over to the states and winning well increases the profile of the boxer in the states - unfortunately in my view until the press make a real song and dance over that boxer the profile in the UK will remain the same and the majority of the public will not have a clue who David Haye, Carl Froch etc etc are!!! - we do because we are ardent boxing fans but the public dont.
As much as Lennox was criticised for this and that - his profile was very cleverly built in this country - look at Hamed, Benn and Eubank - they were the same. What compounds this problem is that in my view boxing in this country needs the new stars in this country on our screens - not at 5am but prime time - dare I mention UFC and what and how they are increasing their profile??
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 04:35
by banjo
You'd have thought ITV would have had more clout now that they don't have to pay huge amounts of money for F1 coverage(I'm glad because their coverage was downright awful, they might as well renamed it "The Lewis Hamilton Show") but it seems they aren't spending that money on getting the big fights.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 05:07
by chinny
banjo wrote:You'd have thought ITV would have had more clout now that they don't have to pay huge amounts of money for F1 coverage(I'm glad because their coverage was downright awful, they might as well renamed it "The Lewis Hamilton Show") but it seems they aren't spending that money on getting the big fights.
Advertising spend is way down over the last 12 months which has led to this massive cost cutting at ITV. When they are cutting flagship shows like Heartbeat then it doesn't take a genius to figure that boxing is for the chop.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 06:11
by Autobarn
Spud wrote:I think the fight will be signed now the Americans are calling all the shots - I am furious at this - this fight could and should have been shown on ITV or terrestrial and yet another fight is lost because in my opinion ITV do not have a pot to piss - and despite Meaty Micks claims if he could have got Taylor to fight in the UK and had the adequate funding then the fight would have been made - I do not believe for one minute Taylor would have turned down decent money.
It does seme like Catch 22. Froch can be a decent star on ITV. However, ITV cannot make fights like Taylor and Kessler.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 06:23
by banjo
chinny wrote:banjo wrote:You'd have thought ITV would have had more clout now that they don't have to pay huge amounts of money for F1 coverage(I'm glad because their coverage was downright awful, they might as well renamed it "The Lewis Hamilton Show") but it seems they aren't spending that money on getting the big fights.
Advertising spend is way down over the last 12 months which has led to this massive cost cutting at ITV. When they are cutting flagship shows like Heartbeat then it doesn't take a genius to figure that boxing is for the chop.
True.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 18:35
by stujones
Spud wrote:I think the fight will be signed now the Americans are calling all the shots - I am furious at this - this fight could and should have been shown on ITV or terrestrial and yet another fight is lost because in my opinion ITV do not have a pot to piss - and despite Meaty Micks claims if he could have got Taylor to fight in the UK and had the adequate funding then the fight would have been made - I do not believe for one minute Taylor would have turned down decent money.
Spud, IMO this fight NEEDS to be in the states. Its more important for Froch to have this fight shown prime time in the states with states side TV - than in the UK on UK television only. If Froch wants the big matches - Pavlik, Hopkins etc.... he needs to get out of this big fish, small pond, mentality that MH seems to like to adopt. Froch could put on a belter of a performance... fight not shown in the states - he is in the same boat. Big fights won't happen.
Taylor is a well known name in the states, he needs as much US coverage as possible.
I'm convinced that had Junior Witter fought Corley and Harris in the states, someone like Showtime would have shown it... and maybe US TV would have fancied Hatton vs Witter also.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 18:53
by tonyevs
Most here seem to think that Froch wins against Taylor .. which if he does will be great for his profile in the USA.
I just see Taylor being too smart for Froch and winning a wide points decision, Froch just hasn`t fought anybody of Taylors schoolling.
A loss for Froch, and then just frozen out.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 18:54
by Asterix
nobby_nobbins wrote:Personally I'm delighted if the fight goes ahead in the US. Froch won't get the star profile he wants unless he fights there, and what could be sweeter than putting Taylor on the canvas in his own backyard?
Same here. If Froch builds a profile in the US that should translate over here anyway.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 19 Feb 2009, 18:56
by Asterix
tonyevs wrote:Most here seem to think that Froch wins against Taylor .. which if he does will be great for his profile in the USA.
I just see Taylor being too smart for Froch and winning a wide points decision, Froch just hasn`t fought anybody of Taylors schoolling.
A loss for Froch, and then just frozen out.
I see it as a bit of a 60-40 fight at the moment, in favour of Taylor. Froch's defence makes me think that Taylor will land time and time again.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 07:01
by Chambers2
According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 09:06
by THEBUTCH
Well Alrigghhttt

Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 09:18
by nobby_nobbins
Chambers2 wrote:According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
That's good news, but it's a bit of a pain if Taylor's people dictate that the fight happens in or around Taylor's hometown. I was hoping a fight as attractive as this one ended up in one of the big, glitzy venues in say, Atlantic City, not out in Hicksville somewhere.
Froch had better get some advice from Ricky Hatton on how to avoid people interfering with his preparation and sleep. He should hire a villa instead of renting a hotel room and get someone on his team to prepare his food for him. Just as a precaution.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 09:22
by jameswilson
nobby_nobbins wrote:Chambers2 wrote:According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
That's good news, but it's a bit of a pain if Taylor's people dictate that the fight happens in or around Taylor's hometown. I was hoping a fight as attractive as this one ended up in one of the big, glitzy venues in say, Atlantic City, not out in Hicksville somewhere.
Froch had better get some advice from Ricky Hatton on how to avoid people interfering with his preparation and sleep. He should hire a villa instead of renting a hotel room and get someone on his team to prepare his food for him. Just as a precaution.
Also Id suggest hiring a load of body doubles, and driving around roundabouts three times to see if someones following him.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 10:47
by nobby_nobbins
jameswilson wrote:nobby_nobbins wrote:Chambers2 wrote:According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
That's good news, but it's a bit of a pain if Taylor's people dictate that the fight happens in or around Taylor's hometown. I was hoping a fight as attractive as this one ended up in one of the big, glitzy venues in say, Atlantic City, not out in Hicksville somewhere.
Froch had better get some advice from Ricky Hatton on how to avoid people interfering with his preparation and sleep. He should hire a villa instead of renting a hotel room and get someone on his team to prepare his food for him. Just as a precaution.
Also Id suggest hiring a load of body doubles, and driving around roundabouts three times to see if someones following him.
It's not unheard of for a local fighter's "friends" to interfere with a visiting fighter's preparation. Anyway, Froch is a bit weird-looking so I think he'll struggle to find a body double.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 10:51
by Chambers2
nobby_nobbins wrote:
It's not unheard of for a local fighter's "friends" to interfere with a visiting fighter's preparation. Anyway, Froch is a bit weird-looking so I think he'll struggle to find a body double.
Wonder if Barry Manilow been in the gym lately
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 20 Feb 2009, 10:56
by Counter-puncher
Spud wrote: I do not believe for one minute Taylor would have turned down decent money.
like, there'd be no way he'd look to fight Pascal instead of the champion that just beat Pascal.....????
According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
exactly how many times has 'Buncey' said this, or something to this effect now?
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 21 Feb 2009, 20:14
by gobbles
Counter-puncher wrote:Spud wrote: I do not believe for one minute Taylor would have turned down decent money.
like, there'd be no way he'd look to fight Pascal instead of the champion that just beat Pascal.....????
According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
exactly how many times has 'Buncey' said this, or something to this effect now?
Didn't he say Klitschko-Haye was definite.
Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 23 Feb 2009, 00:34
by Maxime
nobby_nobbins wrote:Chambers2 wrote:According to Buncey yesterday this fight is signed and will be announced once they've secured the venue
That's good news, but it's a bit of a pain if Taylor's people dictate that the fight happens in or around Taylor's hometown.
I was hoping a fight as attractive as this one ended up in one of the big, glitzy venues in say, Atlantic City, not out in Hicksville somewhere.
I think people in the UK see this fight 100x bigger then it actually is.

Re: Froch-Taylor still not signed
Posted: 23 Feb 2009, 01:26
by Autobarn
Froch will be bigger after he has beaten Taylor.