Does Froch show the importance of style, charisma and a niche????

Sure being wealthy, talented and succesful can get you respect.......But in this game it isn't enough....

Froch lacks charisma, he is ordinary looking and his style at least in the past has been less than exciting....

The majority of sports fans in this Country haven't heard of this guy....but it isn't all down to bad management and dodgy decision making...

For me his record is better than Haye's and Khan's but he is second division in world terms compared to their premiership status....

Haye has looks, charisma and a usually exciting style....Khan has two of the three as well as obvious talent....and a niche market anyway.

Both have neen mainly ppv as of late..no matter who Froch fights I doubt it will be PPv even with his better resume....

Pazienza, Mancini, Gatti all made more money than most superior fighters of their day....

maybe fighters should learn to market themselves as well as learn to fight.......

For me Froch shows the importance of at least appearing to have style, charisma, and a niche...

Because let's face it colorful fighters do get more money as well as fearing better in the alltimer stakes.....

Hard business Boxing...respect isn't enough..

I think not being on Sky TV has hurt his profile a lot.

Froch has an exciting style, hopefully with wider exposure on Sky his charisma (he's always come across very well when I've heard him speak) will come across better, and as for a niche, are you suggesting he should make the most of his Jewish background? Millions of potential followers throughout the world, and awash with money a lot of them. Is that what you are getting at?

I think it was poor promotion and lack of coverage that left him isolated which was largely promotional/management failings rather than failings on Frochs part.

Haye also has the boost of being a heavyweight which is universal but probably amplified in the UK, us not exactly being traditionally spoilt with world class heavies.

Think Froch's problem can be summed up in two words Mick Hennessy, Carl's loyalty to Mick is admirable but to be honest the minute Mick could only get the Taylor fight on delayed or online coverage he should have been out of the door because that was pretty shameful, irrespective of the reasons. Think it is late in the day but Carl should get his respect soon, as others have said he comes across well and add into that a missus who you'd have to say is pretty easy on the eye and think whilst it is late in the day he could become pretty well known with Sky's backing

I think it was really just inept management. Froch is rarely involved in a dull fight and tried the normal methods of getting noticed coming up i.e calling out a fighter with a high profile (Calzaghe) and going to the U.S to fight a name fighter (Taylor). It's true Froch is very ordinary looking, but I think with his other attributes and willingness to make big fights if he'd started out with Warren (but left eventually to go after big fights) his profile would be doing just fine.

Froch's style is light years ahead of Haye's in the "excitement" stakes, at times to Carl's own detriment. The guy's well-paid, now with people who are capable of promoting him properly, and his legacy is assured in this country. If he beats Ward, he will be, in boxing terms, a global marquee name.

The answer to the question posed at the top of the thread is therefore No. To paraphrase the Good Book - "now there abide style, charisma and talent, these three; and of these, the greatest is talent." Froch has enough of the last to finish his career as financially secure as all but two or three fighters in British ring history, and a possible all-time British top tenner for achievement to boot.

I think he'll manage.

Style, charisma, niche. Khan's style is only exciting because he's chinny. He has the charisma of a teabag (an ordinary square one at that), and his niche...he's Asian?

He DID have better promotion from an earlier stage though.

The guy isn't charismatic..He hasn't got a niche market......Haye was a loudmouth who some would pay to see lose as is Khan...

Haye is a heavy but the brits had other heavies who didn't take off...

Bruno was massive ..because of his talent???

Don't see a market for this guy..

Truss does this basically come down to your man-crush preferences?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:The guy isn't charismatic..He hasn't got a niche market......Haye was a loudmouth who some would pay to see lose as is Khan...

Haye is a heavy but the brits had other heavies who didn't take off...

Bruno was massive ..because of his talent???

Don't see a market for this guy..

He's been guaranteed a million for each of his last few fights, not everyone can be a PPV superstar.

Truss Bruno was massive because of his easy going affability and the fact that Bob Fitzsimmons was a hell of a long time ago, couple that with the fact a lot of his fights were on Terrestrial TV and easy to understand his popularity.

Froch's popularity is hard to gauge because post Dirrell all his fights have been overseas, I have a sneaking suspiscion that were he to turn Ward over and his next fight was over here people may be a little surprised by how many tickets he shifted.

Khan is a colorful lad.....Olympic background and is exciting with a niche markey anyway....

I wasn't suggesting Froch wouldn't be well off....I'm suggesting that he'd never take off in the way his record suggests he should.....

Just to clarify...

Think style and charisma are very important......in ones marketability..

Kessler, Reid and Johnson weren't exciting and the fights that are...are generally because he has to awake from a coma to pull them out the bag...

He has offered interest but generally as of situation rather than through regular occurrence..and style.

all opinions welcome though.

Bruno was massive because Brits saw a bloke who had a slight possibility of winning the world heavyweight title, something that a Brit hadn't accomplished since Bob Fitz, if he was to be counted. Cooper the same; little real talent, but a cheeky chappie, like Terry Downes, and a lovable loser, like Bruno after him.

Haye has been found out after near fiascoes against Harrison and Klitschko in succession. You can't run your mouth off indefinitely without some substance to accompany the chat. The gimmicks are necessary only if you don't have the real ability in the first place. Froch does, so doesn't need to enter the ring dressed as a giant rabbit or a Baobab tree.

I think the British public warmed to Frank's personality...and I think you do too..Captain.

Froch hasn't had the luxury of sparring and training with one of the current top two boxers on the planet. He hasn't had the luxury of fighting in a 'marquee' division. He's not had the luxury of being able to talk himself into a big fight with a dominant champion. He's not had the luxury of a competent promoter, or of being on a decent channel, or of PPV fights against limp opposition, or of being an ethnic minority, or of...

...you get the idea. He's had a very workman-like approach, and it's paying off. I think in time this will add to his stature and to his legacy, rather than diminish it.

rowley wrote:Truss Bruno was massive because of his easy going affability and the fact that Bob Fitzsimmons was a hell of a long time ago, couple that with the fact a lot of his fights were on Terrestrial TV and easy to understand his popularity.

Froch's popularity is hard to gauge because post Dirrell all his fights have been overseas, I have a sneaking suspiscion that were he to turn Ward over and his next fight was over here people may be a little surprised by how many tickets he shifted.

Bruno was popular because of HP sauce. We all know that.

Luxury of fighting in a marquee division.......

Hatton was selling out big arena's as a wbu champion before Kosta....

Got to say Truss if you genuinely didn't find the Kessler fight exciting you're a pretty tough man to please as most considered it one of the fights of the year. When it comes to the excitement factor think for Froch you have Pascal, Taylor, Kessler all of which were up and down affairs and the Abraham fight which whilst not competitive was an outstanding performance and that is solely in his title period, personally in terms of either excitement or stand out performances think that compares favourably with either Khan or Haye and if we are talking solely about his heavyweight days it blows Haye out of the water, whose actions in the ring have rarely lived up to his countless words and claims.

I warmed to Frank's personality? I have to admit, that after the third 'know what I mean?', or the fourth 'Where's 'Arry?', I found the whole pantomime ever so slightly wearing. It got to the point that the fights themselves, thinly disguised as Frank's latest blow-out of some overmatched stiff in a corset, were quite entertaining by comparison.

Perhaps I'm just a killjoy.

Simplistic to suggest Bruno's popularity was down to the fact that Brit's hadn't had a world champ etc....at heavy..

Mccall-Bruno was massive as I recall and Bruno was a huge fan favorite against Lennox.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Luxury of fighting in a marquee division.......

Hatton was selling out big arena's as a wbu champion before Kosta....

You're taking one factor and presenting it out of context though Truss. Hatton was signed with Warren, and we both know that makes a BIG difference. Degale, Khan, Calzaghe are all recent examples of guys who've benefited from being with Warren.

I love your sarcasm Captain.......cuts to the bone...

However Frank was promoted as good as anybody I've seen whether through own means or having a great agent..

Never seen a better managed fighter in my lifetime.....along with Rappaport and Cooney..

Poor old Carl. What bad luck that he failed to think of the football-mad, man of the people schtick before our Ricky. His love of Nottingham Forest will pale by comparison with the Hitman's fanaticism for all things Citeh.

Perhaps Froch can take another leaf out of Hatton's book and start speaking of himself in the third person. That should improve the charisma factor. "Carl Froch will do a number on Andre Ward, I promise you..."

On the other hand, Froch seems a sane, intelligent, articulate bloke, who won't be out of his depth against the best of his division, and seems unlikely to finish his career by dissolving into tears and Charlie.

To be fair though if you compare pretty much any fighter from these shores to Hatton they will seem unpopular, for whatever reason, be it the football thing, his genuine approachability or whatever it was Hatton tapped into something and it just chimed with the public.

There is this great myth other Brits have been hugely popular when the facts tend not to support it. I went to a lot of Naz shows and whilst they were in arenas they were rarely full to the rafters, similarly I was at the Calzaghe Lacy fight and whilst it was well attended it was not a sell out, is only post that fight Joe sold mega numbers and that is, we should not forget when he was well into his 30s and on the back of nigh on 20 defences.

Kessler was a very exciting fight in my view. Plenty of back and forth and the result uncertain right up to the announcement.

Froch simply lacked mainstream coverage which is why I think hes gone under the radar so long. I also thinks theres been something of a lack of faith with him in his ability and chances of success which his management and promoters did little to change. He was never really touted as a particular big prospect and I think if you told people 5 years ago that Froch would be sitting where he is now they would say he overacheived to a large extent. So theres never been the same buzz with him as has accompanied fighters in the past. Normally promoters and managers are out telling you that so and so is a future champion, the next big thing etc regardless of their actual chances of success and the media picks up on this and responds accordingly. Froch lacked this kind of drive or push.

Had Froch been with someone like Warren and Sky then I think things would be very different and he would not neccssarily have to rely on severed heads t shirts or smack talking. For this I think the blame lies primarily with his backroom promotional team (Hennessy) who failed to give him the platform or stage to generate widespread appeal.

I think it's simply a case of poor promotion up until recently, and that you're reading a little too much in to other factors, Truss. I'm not sure where you're getting this idea that Haye, for instance, has a crowd-pleasing and exciting style and Froch doesn't; in the last three years alone, Froch has three fight of the year contenders against Pascal, Taylor and Kessler. Even the Johnson scrap was a pretty good one. On the other hand, Haye hardly had to extend himself to win his 'showdown' with Maccarinelli, won an admittedly exciting slugfest against Barrett, boxed his way to a very cautious win over the lumbering Valuev in an extremely turgid bout, defended fairly impressively against Ruiz before the Harrison and Klitschko debacles...The less said about them, the better.

Froch hasn't had the luxury of fighting on Sky until recently, and doesn't campaign in boxing's premiere division. Now that the first of those issues has been sorted, he's getting far more exposure and recognition - which supports the idea that his so-called average style and lack of personality hasn't been all that relevant to his falling under the radar at all.

Pretty simplistic to suggest it's just poor coverage which leaves a guy on the sidelines.....

WWF wrestlers like stone cold, Hogan etc have forged huge careers outside of the fixed ring whilst others who were promoted just as highly have struggled...

People like fighters are they don't.....a lot of it is charisma....

Haugen and Pazienza were similar boxers in terms of ESPN coverage..one was huge and one had no following.....

Charisma and style pla a huge part in one's popularity...sometimes skill isn't enough.....

Honeyghan was undisputed champ bet he didn't get the same press and money Bruo got..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Pretty simplistic to suggest it's just poor coverage which leaves a guy on the sidelines.....

WWF wrestlers like stone cold, Hogan etc have forged huge careers outside of the fixed ring whilst others who were promoted just as highly have struggled...

People like fighters are they don't.....a lot of it is charisma....

Haugen and Pazienza were similar boxers in terms of ESPN coverage..one was huge and one had no following.....

Charisma and style pla a huge part in one's popularity...sometimes skill isn't enough.....

Honeyghan was undisputed champ bet he didn't get the same press and money Bruo got..

Truss you're comparing two guys who in your own words were "similar boxers interns of ESPN coverage". Froch HASN'T had similar coverage in comparison with Haye or Khan. Just compare the publicity for the Harrison debacle with the build-up for any of Froch's last half dozen fights.

Honeyghan wasn't a heavyweight, which would have made a difference to his popularity, and as for wrestling...for starters I can't believe you're bringing that pantomime into the equation, but for another thing the success of those guys post-wrestling isn't something we're able to compare as none of the current crop of British guys have finished their boxing careers yet, let alone attempted to broaden their appeal with other ventures.

It doesnt really matter how charismatic one is if they arent getting any coverage or mainstream exposure.

If you take two fighters of the same ability whereby one is supremely talented and one is not then chances are the moe charasmatic of the two will be more popular. But its subjective at best. For example I read many opinions citing the likes of Mayweather or Haye as charismatic yet personally they have never appealed to me as such. I have found them both pretty distasteful at times. Likewise Ive read views that the Klitschkos are boring and have no personality yet they sell out big venues and are held to be extremelly engaging and charismatic people where they come from.

Since Froch never got the platform afforded to people like Khan or Haye its difficult to pinpoint the blame on something like his personality.

As a recent example I would mention Wladimir Klitschko. Now taking the talent issue asie which is a different debate, the overwhelming feeling I got was that people of all levels of boxing interest in the UK saw him as this boring, faceless European fighter with no personality. He wasnt given any coverage over here and so most people were basing it on very little other than his boring fights. However I noticed a distinct change in opinions in the build up to the Haye fight where Klitschko was given far more coverage in the UK and the feeling I got was that people actually found him to be far more interesting than initially held (some even to the point where they were supporting him over Haye).

Personally I find Froch comes across well when given some reasonable tv time (as does Andre Ward for that matter) and my own view is that if Froch had been given more coverage earlier on then things would be alot different. Instead the most the public ever heard from him for a few years was the odd quote criticising Calzaghe (usually taken out of context) and almost no promotion at all. One would think even Hennessy didnt believe Froch was world championship material given how lacklustre his efforts and building him up in the media were.

I'm stating the fact that two fighters who were of the same level..one earned a great amount and had mass appeal..whilst one earned sack and was invisible.......

Basically suggesting coverage meant diddly squat and that with style and charisma one took of and one didn't....

Just to say If Froch had as much coverage as Haye and Khan he'd be a star etc is wrong....

Takes more than that to gain a following........

Lewis had a lot of exposure..did he transcend like Frank did..nope.

Not suggesting that coverage isn't important...suggesting as the title suggests style and charisma are important.....

He hasn't got the mosdt pleasing style and lacks charisma....

I knew guys that went to see Hatton who never followed Boxing....he transcended as I'm sure Frank and Naz did.....

This guy doesn't and hasn't got the appeal despite any exposure..

but your opinion is welcome..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm stating the fact that two fighters who were of the same level..one earned a great amount and had mass appeal..whilst one earned sack and was invisible.......

Basically suggesting coverage meant diddly squat and that with style and charisma one took of and one didn't....

Just to say If Froch had as much coverage as Haye and Khan he'd be a star etc is wrong....

Takes more than that to gain a following........

Lewis had a lot of exposure..did he transcend like Frank did..nope.

Your example was of two guys who had 'similar coverage'. My point is that Froch hasn't even had a remotely level playing field where coverage has been concerned. Khan was on PPV fighting the staff of his local Burger King, and Haye was in charge of his own promotions to a much greater degree than either.

I'm not saying charisma doesn't play a role, but rather that charisma hasn't been the sole deciding factor in Froch's popularity. Khan has zero charisma, unless you'd consider it charismatic to send pictures of your knob to Jordan. Actually...knowing you...

Seriously though; Khan wouldn't be as 'popular' if he'd not been touted as the great Olympic medal winner, and had the publicity he has.

I'd agree that Froch comes across extremely well when interviewed although the whole "warrior" thing I find a little tiresome at times.

As has already been mentioned the Froch issue just highlights the necessity to have a good management team in place. I also think he will end up being a fighter that is vastly more appreciated after he has retired.