BoxRec

My reasoning for this topic is too me alot of Micks fighters dont seem to be doing very much,You have barker who was injured so I understand that but what about John murray?!The guy has been stagnating for ages when he should be getting decent fights.You have junior witter who's returning as a welterweight and yet again heard nothing about him!Hennessy sports dont even have a tv deal do they?Im not saying that mick doesnt work hard for his fighters just that he doesnt seem to have much clout,I can honestly see murray leaving him soon.Isnt murrays contract with Hennessy sports nearly up by the way?

According to some, Murray's career is going the way it should.

There's no doubt that Carl Froch would have so much more exposure had he been with allegedly. It staggers me that such a good British fighter in such a competitive division has such a low profile among casual fans. There is no doubt in my mind that had Froch regularly been on Sky throughout his career, he could have a profile close to Khan/Haye.

It saddens me that his punch perfect performance against Abraham was only seen by a few on Primetime.

Mick's been fcuked over by TV broadcasters, especially ITV (cunnts).

Mick got a good contract with ITV and provided some very good shows (alot better than allegedlys on ITV) on a small budget, then ITV dumped boxing and MH like a vindaloo-poo despite very good viewing figures.

That left Sky as the only broadcasters showing boxing and their house was already full to the rafters (with Hatton, Matchroom, FW Promotions....), which left MH with very few options and even fewer viable ones. It's testament to Mick that he's still in business unlike Dennis Hobsons Fight Academy.

The strong majority of boxings revenue comes through TV money, if you've not got a TV contract it's impossible to put on profit making shows.

Froch has been treated terribly by Sky TV IMO (hopefully that's about to change) which is ironic considering he's consistantly our most entertaining fighter

Good post Chambers, people will think I am barking mad here, but I can sort of see why TV companies are not bending over backwards to accomodate Froch. I just think is awkard, ganglyness doesn't attract the eye of the casual fan.

At world level he is not a concussive (one punch) puncher and he has a cast iron chin - two characteristics that don't bode well when it comes to TV executives. I think there are lots of similarities with Joe Calzaghe and Froch - both share these characteristics, both had a fight of the year canditate to win the title - showed champions qualities to get those decision. In both fights, the scoring (whilst accurate) didn't reflect the nature of the battle.

It took Joe 8 years to get the recognition...... very true Joe and Carl's career hasn't followed the same path since winning the world title and Calzaghe was definately a partly to blame for his slow burning career. However, I would say the Woodhall and Reid were more sellable fights to the British public than any of Froch's title fights.

If you look at his fights at world title level..... yep, Pascal vs Froch was from opening bell to end bell a ding dong fight of the year IMO. It is one that should be in the archives a fantastic battle. Taylor's fight though was a bit poor untill the last round, Dirrell was a stinker and I would even say the opening half of the Kessler fight was poor. Last four rounds were fight of the year material but I really think as a whole this fight is overated. Then we have Abraham fight, masterful display but not a good fight.

I think alot of our champions have been fortunate that they have been tied to deals with promoters so it is a given that they will fight on TV. However, I do think the days of exclusives to specific boxers are numbered, unless they are vulnerable, and puncher, have a great story or very charismatic. I'm afraid Froch doesn't fit this.... neither does Burns, or Alex Arthur before that (but then they are tied to promoter with a TV deal in place).

For me, even though Haye has now been in 3 poor heavyweight title fights. He will always be more exciting to watch than Carl - cause people loves knockouts and even though Haye has yet to score a true KO as a Heavyweight champion, no one disputes he cannot and no one disputes he cannot get KO'd. I can see why Sky have coming running to Haye and not Froch. The same applied to Khan.

Don't get me wrong I think it is a travesty that a top #3 (possibly #1) British P4Per isn't on TV often, but lets not forget Hennessy had a deal with ITV when the Super 6 started, Hennessy still had some shows on ITV4 after Froch vs Taylor. So its not as if he wasn't contracted to a TV company. He just felt Froch was worth more than what ITV were prepared to give. Was Froch getting significantly more ratings than other Hennessy fighters?

Chambers2 wrote:Mick's been fcuked over by TV broadcasters, especially ITV (cunnts).

Mick got a good contract with ITV and provided some very good shows (alot better than allegedlys on ITV) on a small budget, then ITV dumped boxing and MH like a vindaloo-poo despite very good viewing figures.

That left Sky as the only broadcasters showing boxing and their house was already full to the rafters (with Hatton, Matchroom, FW Promotions....), which left MH with very few options and even fewer viable ones. It's testament to Mick that he's still in business unlike Dennis Hobsons Fight Academy.

The strong majority of boxings revenue comes through TV money, if you've not got a TV contract it's impossible to put on profit making shows.

Froch has been treated terribly by Sky TV IMO (hopefully that's about to change) which is ironic considering he's consistantly our most entertaining fighter

Some of those ITV4 shows were terrible. Having people like Phill Fury live on TV is pretty unforgivable, even though it is probably a sign of how much ITV paid.

I think he's a good promoter who was just unlucky he can't secure a TV deal, his shows with ITV were usually brilliant. Gave lots of action and he's got some really good fighters in his stable, if he could secure a TV deal I'm sure he would be right up there with the best in Britian again

gobbles wrote:

Chambers2 wrote:Mick's been fcuked over by TV broadcasters, especially ITV (cunnts).

Mick got a good contract with ITV and provided some very good shows (alot better than allegedlys on ITV) on a small budget, then ITV dumped boxing and MH like a vindaloo-poo despite very good viewing figures.

That left Sky as the only broadcasters showing boxing and their house was already full to the rafters (with Hatton, Matchroom, FW Promotions....), which left MH with very few options and even fewer viable ones. It's testament to Mick that he's still in business unlike Dennis Hobsons Fight Academy.

The strong majority of boxings revenue comes through TV money, if you've not got a TV contract it's impossible to put on profit making shows.

Froch has been treated terribly by Sky TV IMO (hopefully that's about to change) which is ironic considering he's consistantly our most entertaining fighter

Some of those ITV4 shows were terrible. Having people like Phill Fury live on TV is pretty unforgivable, even though it is probably a sign of how much ITV paid.

I agree there were some poor shows, but on the whole they were impressive IMO considering the reported peanuts that ITV were willing to pay (as you mentioned). Mick put on alot more competitive shows than his ITV predecessor (FW)

Yes, I think the ITV shows were a bit hit and miss. ITV loved a good story though. I don't think you could say the Walsh boys - although very good prospects, deserve the attention they got at the early stages of their career. Curtis Woodhouse's pro debut was live.

Phil Fury was a story. Also wasn't some of his fights just "fillers" as the previous bouted ended early.

ITV often showed 2 entertaining fights on their bills. Have to give Hennessy his due there were often pull outs - but I can hardly remember a time when a significantly worst opponent was (on paper) in as a replacement. Its only really now - a couple years down the line, Sky are showing the equivilant on a consistent basis.

Having Phil Fury on live, is no worst than having Matt Scriven on a live PPV or having Vinny Mitchell live.

stujones wrote:Good post Chambers, people will think I am barking mad here, but I can sort of see why TV companies are not bending over backwards to accomodate Froch. I just think is awkard, ganglyness doesn't attract the eye of the casual fan.

At world level he is not a concussive (one punch) puncher and he has a cast iron chin - two characteristics that don't bode well when it comes to TV executives. I think there are lots of similarities with Joe Calzaghe and Froch - both share these characteristics, both had a fight of the year canditate to win the title - showed champions qualities to get those decision. In both fights, the scoring (whilst accurate) didn't reflect the nature of the battle.

It took Joe 8 years to get the recognition...... very true Joe and Carl's career hasn't followed the same path since winning the world title and Calzaghe was definately a partly to blame for his slow burning career. However, I would say the Woodhall and Reid were more sellable fights to the British public than any of Froch's title fights.

If you look at his fights at world title level..... yep, Pascal vs Froch was from opening bell to end bell a ding dong fight of the year IMO. It is one that should be in the archives a fantastic battle. Taylor's fight though was a bit poor untill the last round, Dirrell was a stinker and I would even say the opening half of the Kessler fight was poor. Last four rounds were fight of the year material but I really think as a whole this fight is overated. Then we have Abraham fight, masterful display but not a good fight.

I think alot of our champions have been fortunate that they have been tied to deals with promoters so it is a given that they will fight on TV. However, I do think the days of exclusives to specific boxers are numbered, unless they are vulnerable, and puncher, have a great story or very charismatic. I'm afraid Froch doesn't fit this.... neither does Burns, or Alex Arthur before that (but then they are tied to promoter with a TV deal in place).

For me, even though Haye has now been in 3 poor heavyweight title fights. He will always be more exciting to watch than Carl - cause people loves knockouts and even though Haye has yet to score a true KO as a Heavyweight champion, no one disputes he cannot and no one disputes he cannot get KO'd. I can see why Sky have coming running to Haye and not Froch. The same applied to Khan.

Don't get me wrong I think it is a travesty that a top #3 (possibly #1) British P4Per isn't on TV often, but lets not forget Hennessy had a deal with ITV when the Super 6 started, Hennessy still had some shows on ITV4 after Froch vs Taylor. So its not as if he wasn't contracted to a TV company. He just felt Froch was worth more than what ITV were prepared to give. Was Froch getting significantly more ratings than other Hennessy fighters?

Yeah I see what you're saying, especially the point about KO's being essential for casual fans and Froch not providing them.

Froch is more a decicated boxing fans dream rather than a casual boxing fans dream, as the casual fans struggles to distinguish between Pudwill and Pascal.

I think Sky were apprehensive about putting Froch straight onto a PPV as the headline act (maybe they were burned by Khans early poor PPV figures), but I also think that a Froch World title fight is too BIG a fight for a Sky1 Friday/Saturday fight night and the money Sky would provide for viewing such a fight which put Mick and Carl in no mans land........ hence why I think they took the Primetime option, as it would generate them more money than Skys (possibly) insultuing offer

(There's plenty of summising and reading between the lines going on in that last paragraph ^)

I think John Murray has left Hennessy

freddydoesdallas wrote:I think John Murray has left Hennessy

I heard as much by others on the forum but can anyone confirm this? Source?

He's still up on their website: http://www.hennessysports.com/boxers.htm

Unless they've not had time to take him down? Anyone know any more?

How can he be considered a good promoter...when he can't promote? He has a world champion in a glamour division and hardly anyone has heard of him. For comparison, imagine if Don King had been promoting Froch-Abraham...the public would never have heard the end of it; with Hennessy they never even heard about it...

MachoMan09 wrote:Regardless of who promoted him, Froch would never have had significantly more general public exposure than he does now.

Are you serious? If he was with Warren his fights would be on Sky. If he was on Sky and fighting well at the world championship level Sky would hype the shit out of him so that they could get him on PPV and start making the big bucks. I know Froch isn't as easy a sell as Haye or Khan but success always sells and Froch is a success. If Sky start hyping the shit out of a fighter then newspaper editors start paying attention and before you know it you have a household name. Given that Froch has been in 5 good world title fights in a row and won 4 of them but only 1 has been on a major TV station I think it's pretty obvious that he could have had significantly more public exposure...

Captain Hook wrote:He's still up on their website: http://www.hennessysports.com/boxers.htm

Unless they've not had time to take him down? Anyone know any more?

So is ITV

UpperCrust wrote:There's no doubt that Carl Froch would have so much more exposure had he been with allegedly. It staggers me that such a good British fighter in such a competitive division has such a low profile among casual fans. There is no doubt in my mind that had Froch regularly been on Sky throughout his career, he could have a profile close to Khan/Haye.

It saddens me that his punch perfect performance against Abraham was only seen by a few on Primetime.

its not hennesseys fault itv sports fucked him up the arrse with no ky jelly.

its not hennesseys fault sky sports news have breaking news if audley harrison runs out of toilet roll on the john, but they continue to ignore even reporting results of hennessey fighters much less report on them.

hennessey does a good job he has got the most out of most of his fighters. froch is a star in america and has made good money and had good opportunities with hennessey albeit on such a tough shchedule.

i agree froch would have made more money quicker and easier with franklyn but hes gonna make money now.

MachoMan09 - you have a point that success doesn't always sell as well as it should but it still sells better than failure. I can say that from my personal experience I have never much liked Froch but he's kept plugging away and doing his best and I have come to respect him. I think a wider audience would have reacted to him the same way boxing fans have. Some love his deadpan confidence, some find him arrogant and a little delusional. Froch may not be the most instantly likeable guy but he definitely has a personality, something for people to engage with. But, first, they need to have heard of him...that's where good promotion comes in.

I agree with Macho - if you haven't got a major story or some angle then it will be difficult.

No doubt he would be on TV - but box office?

Glenn Catley, hell even Robin Reid - were they big headliners. Were all of Glenns world title fights even on TV?

Ricky Burns, Alex Arthur, Nicky Cook - all world champions.... None of them what we could call big box office attractions thus far.

Look at Munroe - he's attracted some headlines on Sky - Sky love him to bits..got a great story. Did they put up the money for Maloney to try and get the fight in the UK? No.

MH is supposed to be a nice guy who loves the game

Agreed that you need an angle but you have to use a bit of gumption to find an angle and sell it. Take Froch-Abraham, it could have been sold as England vs. Germany. Get that on Sky and get that slimy Kalle Sauerland on TV and everyone would be rooting for Froch in a second. National pride is always a big seller...why do you think Don King always carries those little flags around with him? Don King will do anything to sell a fight and he knows how to sell! Hennessy on the other hand...

I thought Hennessey was on 100k per show in a 24 fight deal with itv?

Coco wrote:MH is supposed to be a nice guy who loves the game

Speak as you find, I'd agree with that.

If you lost a fight Hennessey would probably put his arm around you and console you in defeat.

FW would probably walk off in a huff!

bruthead wrote:Agreed that you need an angle but you have to use a bit of gumption to find an angle and sell it. Take Froch-Abraham, it could have been sold as England vs. Germany. Get that on Sky and get that slimy Kalle Sauerland on TV and everyone would be rooting for Froch in a second. National pride is always a big seller...why do you think Don King always carries those little flags around with him? Don King will do anything to sell a fight and he knows how to sell! Hennessy on the other hand...

some of the posts here are getting ridiculous such as this one. so froch-abraham should have been sol as england v germany? abraham is armenian! and the basil fawlty mentality went out in the 1970s.....froch and abraham was a clash between two of the absolute toughest men in world boxing, come forward power punchers with iron chins, and two of the absolute best at the middleweights to suggest such a matchup would need a ridiculous england v germany slant to it and the fact it didnt....makes hennessey a bad promoter well......pathetic post is all i can say.....

btw don king doesnt drag patriotism out of his black arssee every fight involving a foreigner, don knows how to sell. he has the mini flags for his personal "only in america"man gimmick not cos of which fighters fighting