Has plenty to say about Joe Calazghe. I'd like to see them fight, just so Joe can shut up the Forest fan........ http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/boxing/article1919042.ece
Froch is not old enogh for Joe to fight him. Joe is on the way down, Froch would beat him, inside the distance.
They were not as good as Froch mate. Kessler and Lacey were both good fighters , but no more than good. Calzaghe has NEVER fought a world class fighter in their prime.
Good Bump Mark Nice to have something different spoken about. What's Chad Dawson like? I know he's unbeaten, but I don't think i've ever seen him fight (so can't really say if he's good enough for Joe).
Dawson is a very good fighter. but he is beatable, the light heavies are in decent shape at the mo, but none stand out as having the WOW factor.
RE: Dawson is a very good fighter. Beaten Tarver and Johnson I see. No point Joe facing Tarver then (who's been mentioned). If he did it would only have Dawson come out and say he's already beat him.
RE: Froch is not old enogh for Joe to fight him. Nothing against Joe Calzaghe, in fact i have a lot of respect for him, but having said that i reckon Carl Froch would end Calzaghes unbeaten run, even maybe knock him out?.... I hope Calzaghe takes his Fathers advice and calls it a day....
Calzaghe would annialte him This fight would be about as interesting as Hatton v Whitter, ones a mouthy little lovely person, the others the ******. Simple as.
Stevie there is not a snowball in hells chance of that fight ever coming off Froch is too young and dangerous for Calzaghe to fight, as Dreamy sais there has been talk of Calzaghe fighting Antonio Tarver another fighter that WAS a good one, now past his sell by date, not seen any mention of him fighting the best Light heavy out there in Dawson. Calzaghe`s whole career has been spent on fighting nobodies and has beens. Its too late for him to start fighting the best now, he is too old and they are too young. Just how good Joe Calzaghe is /was we will never know, because he didnt fight the best when they were in their prime. This is my opinion and everyone else may have a different view on it. If Calzaghe carries on and beats Dawson or Froch then I will be more than happy to take back every word , I just cant see it somehow.
I'm In The Minority But....... i'd like Calazghe to continue and try to get to that 50 and 0 record that people just don't reach.
Mark... ...much as I respect what you're saying, I recall you suggested that Calzaghe was running scared of Pavlik prior to Pavlik losing badly to Hopkins. Calzaghe beat Kessler and Lacy and both have top records (Kessler 4 defences of his title and subsequently has won it back) Lacy made a similar number of defences. To dismiss Calzaghe as somebody who has only fought has-beens is just plain wrong.</p> I really rate Froch I recall posting something about Froch, Haye and Khan (2 out of 3 aint bad) taking up the mantle from Hatton and Calzaghe; most on here thought Froch was gash. I don't think they'll fight, but only because the money won't be big enough, in fact I can't see Calzaghe fighting again.</p> Dawson? He's good but not spectacular I agree, he's got a similar style to Pavlik, solid puncher behind an excellent jab. He's not brilliant to watch, is tall and is also a south paw (I recall) but the money would not be good so it won't happen.</p>
RE: Stevie there is not a snowball in hells chance of that fight ever coming off Froch is all talk though, he's 31 and only just getting round to a World title fight. If he was that good he would've been challenging ages ago. Calzaghe would murder him IMHO Kessler was ranked number 2 when Calzaghe fought him and he's probably the best SMW in the world right now so I count that as beating a world class fighter in their prime. I agree with Dawson though, that would make an interesting matchup.
lacy was knocking people out all over the shop, seen as the mike tyson of the middlewight's calzaghe mullered him, hell do the same to froch, dawson, pavlik, whoever the only one who proves difficult is KESSLER,
