Page 1 of 1
Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 09:38
by chad
Carl has come in for some flak following the fight with Groves, being booed out the arena, and shot down for not being humble in the post fight interview. Whilst he's often accused of being self centered and arrogant, I've just watched the following video on the SKY Sports website and can't help but think he's a pretty good guy.
http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/s ... carl-froch
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 09:48
by deadpan
I think a lot of us got caught up in the post fight gusto and developed a bad case of short term Frochitis. I certainly had.
He's not exactly a master of mirth or fountain of goodwill and is most probably not as good as he thinks he is. But show me a boxer who is.
Still think if he doesn't rematch Groves it's a poor show. But not legacy crushing. Not many of us chastise Lennox for the lack of a Vitali rematch these days. We remember a great fighter.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 13:10
by vargas
I know its nitpicking but I like how how still got in that he was "4 time World Champion" even when praising the young lad.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:05
by n1ebf
vargas wrote:I know its nitpicking but I like how how still got in that he was "4 time World Champion" even when praising the young lad.
it is nitpicking! I got the impression that the lad liked loads of boxers and Froch just happened to be in the studio...he might have been a George Groves fan seriously thinking, sh*t I've got to go along with this now.
Haye Hatton and Amir came across nicely too, as well as Froch who seemed genuinely respectful and proud of the kid despite the fact Groves had just given him hell and his head was far from clear you could tell. Brave kid.
I don't move my head enough when I'm on the bag so thanks to David Haye for the tip too!
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:08
by n1ebf
interesting to see Carl there describing himself as "genetically gifted".. he's a solid looking unit that's for sure. I bet he could blast Stevenson out if push came to shove as well as them two Russians - but Calzaghe would have had the style and workrate to beat him widely.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:10
by expe
n1ebf wrote:interesting to see Carl their describing himself as "genetically gifted".. he's a solid looking unit that's for sure. I bet he could blast Stevenson out if push came to shove as well as them two Russians - but Calzaghe would have had the style and workrate to beat him widely.
I'd back him against Stevenson, although he could have trouble with the southpaw stance, but Golovkin and Kovalev knock him out. They're serious punchers and Froch is too open to beat them, eventually they will land big and when they do, it's all over.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:18
by n1ebf
expe wrote:n1ebf wrote:interesting to see Carl their describing himself as "genetically gifted".. he's a solid looking unit that's for sure. I bet he could blast Stevenson out if push came to shove as well as them two Russians - but Calzaghe would have had the style and workrate to beat him widely.
I'd back him against Stevenson, although he could have trouble with the southpaw stance, but Golovkin and Kovalev knock him out. They're serious punchers and Froch is too open to beat them, eventually they will land big and when they do, it's all over.
I'm not as big an anorak as I once was, but aren't the 3 fighters I mentioned all half a stone lighter than Carl? I mentioned them primarily as they are 3 of the vogue names around that weight and theoretically are fights that could be made.
I think Froch must be on the slide. No clear evidence, I just think some freshness and resistance must have gone with so many wars on his record - however unnoticeable it may be.
I haven't seen either of the Russians (if they are both Russians in fact!) but I've read enough to know the crack with them.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:22
by expe
n1ebf wrote:expe wrote:n1ebf wrote:interesting to see Carl their describing himself as "genetically gifted".. he's a solid looking unit that's for sure. I bet he could blast Stevenson out if push came to shove as well as them two Russians - but Calzaghe would have had the style and workrate to beat him widely.
I'd back him against Stevenson, although he could have trouble with the southpaw stance, but Golovkin and Kovalev knock him out. They're serious punchers and Froch is too open to beat them, eventually they will land big and when they do, it's all over.
I'm not as big an anorak as I once was, but aren't the 3 fighters I mentioned all half a stone lighter than Carl? I mentioned them primarily as they are 3 of the vogue names around that weight and theoretically are fights that could be made.
I think Froch must be on the slide. No clear evidence, I just think some freshness and resistance must have gone with so many wars on his record - however unnoticeable it may be.
I haven't seen either of the Russians (if they are both Russians in fact!) but I've read enough to know the crack with them.
Kovalev's a light heavy, Stevenson's the same but could easily make 12st and Golovkin's a middleweight. Kovalev is a scary puncher, can be outboxed, but when he lands clean you're on the floor, yet to have his chin really tested though. Golovkin's chin is rock solid, Stevens can punch and he hit him 5 or 6 times in a row, Golokvin stood there, then walked forward and unloaded. The body shot that did Macklin was brutal, every shot looks like it hurts and he has knockout power in either hand.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:52
by n1ebf
Thanks - i'm gonna watch youtube later on. I always thought Cleverly was a hard man - which he is of course - but to blast him in 2 or 3 rounds is some feat (Kovalev). I hadn't heard of any of these guys 6 months ago tbh!
It really does beg the question why the likes of Jermain Taylor are still looking to box, link I put up earlier today.
Wonder where Hopkins comes into this - who apparently was very good in his last fight about a month ago..
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:54
by macaca
expe wrote:n1ebf wrote:interesting to see Carl their describing himself as "genetically gifted".. he's a solid looking unit that's for sure. I bet he could blast Stevenson out if push came to shove as well as them two Russians - but Calzaghe would have had the style and workrate to beat him widely.
I'd back him against Stevenson, although he could have trouble with the southpaw stance, but Golovkin and Kovalev knock him out. They're serious punchers and Froch is too open to beat them, eventually they will land big and when they do, it's all over.
Unless he gets up, carries on and gets banging and connecting himself, we will see, interesting to see what Carl does next that is for sure ......... if he could erase all the video footage from the Groves fight so no one could see what to do to him, he would love to!
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:55
by expe
n1ebf wrote:Thanks - i'm gonna watch youtube later on. I always thought Cleverly was a hard man - which he is of course - but to blast him in 2 or 3 rounds is some feat (Kovalev). I hadn't heard of any of these guys 6 months ago tbh!
It really does beg the question why the likes of Jermain Taylor are still looking to box, link I put up earlier today.
Wonder where Hopkins comes into this - who apparently was very good in his last fight about a month ago..
Can't see Hopkins fighting Kovalev or Stevenson. A Shumenov fight is more likely. I see him fighting 3 more times, finishing early 2015, retiring as a 50 year old world champion. Taylor's in it for money, Lacy's back too, neither has any hope of winning anything.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 15:57
by Yes We Can
I don't think Golovkin is the puncher people make him out to be. He has good pop, but i think it's the accuracy that kills the opponent, and the volume with it.
Kovalev is probably the only person in boxing i could envisage sending any fighter to sleep. thud thud thud off even the most average looking of shots.
Stevenson fight would be great for either man, maybe at a 172 catchweight? not sure which but one man is coming out of that fight looking a million dollars, either Froch in Bute fashion.... or Stevenson in a Groves +++ fashion.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 18:06
by Weirdyman
vargas wrote:I know its nitpicking but I like how how still got in that he was "4 time World Champion" even when praising the young lad.
Spot on, I thought the exact same. My housemate who doesn't follow boxing commented and thought that was a self-centred thing to say.
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 18:17
by dr_devious
Carl came across well in the video, more human than usual. All 3 (GGG, Stevenson and Kovalev) beat him now, he's on the slide. He would have beaten Adonis and possibly Golovkin (size advantage) two years ago, he's on the slide now and gets stopped by all three
Re: Carl Froch, he's a good egg really
Posted: 14 Dec 2013, 19:04
by King Tubby
Love them stories, get me every time. Good work by all.
