Shut up, Joe
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 1:48 AM EDT
Email
Print
I'm at the point now as a boxing fan that if you want to consider me a guy that has a bias against Joe Calzaghe, go ahead. The man simply refuses to shut his yap. Here's his latest, which goes back to things he's said before, and is just as easily picked apart. Via Sporting Life:
Calzaghe, who beat Hopkins back in April, said: "I said all along Kelly Pavlik was overrated, overhyped and hadn't done anything in his career to a warrant a fight with me.
"This was evident Saturday night when Hopkins destroyed and exposed him for what he is.
"That is why I wasn't going to waste my time fighting him and went straight to a bout with Roy Jones who has proved himself time and time again that he is one of the greatest fighters in our era. I have been a champion for 11 years and I am only interested in fighting legends.
"My boxing career and record speaks for itself. This will be the biggest fight of my career as I am fighting one of the best, at the best place to fight."
Cram it, Joe. You're the same gutsy, never-turn-'em-down cham-peen of the sport that has said repeatedly you offered Kelly Pavlik a fight after you beat Jeff Lacy. Before Pavlik ever beat Taylor or Miranda or Lockett or even Jose Luis freaking Zertuche.
You're the same fighter that is trying -- and failing miserably -- to convince the boxing public that you're facing Roy Jones, Jr., on November 8, and not a hollow shell of the fighter Roy Jones once was.
Maybe if you still had Frank Warren covering for you, you wouldn't be struggling so massively to sell tickets at Madison Square Garden for this insulting card you and Roy have put together. Be proud of it, Joe, while you discover why fighters have promoters.
What do you think the U.S. PPV sales will be, Joe? What have you got to say about the fact that it took you forever and a day to leave your comfort zone for a single freaking fight?
What have you got to say about fighting a 40-year old man that hasn't beaten anyone in YEARS, when you could have made big money to fight Kelly Pavlik -- and since you're so confident you'd have beaten him, there's no excuse for it.
This isn't about talent. Joe Calzaghe has it in spades. This is about character, or a lack thereof. If Pavlik sucks so much, why did you offer an unknown middleweight a chance to fight you years ago, before he was anybody? And no doubt he'd have had to go to your backyard to do it. (Not that Calzaghe coming to the States to fight nobody Pavlik would have made any sense.)
As a fighter, I think Calzaghe is class, one of the best in the world, and that he's been in that company for a long time now. As a personality, I just can't respect him anymore. This is the same big talkin' crap I'd take Antonio Tarver to task over, and it cannot be excused just because Calzaghe is unbeaten with his fluffed-up record. When I said great fighters lose fights because they fight great opposition, I'll tell you something else: Joe Calzaghe doesn't qualify.
The most disappointing thing about this is it doesn't have to be this way. For whatever reason (fan perception, probably), Calzaghe has felt this need to attack Kelly Pavlik in recent months. I don't think Joe Calzaghe ducked Pavlik -- you can't duck a guy that's never fought your weight before. Calzaghe chose to fight Roy. That's all fine and good. When he says he wants to only fight legends, then fine. Great. That's OK.
But why talk about Pavlik almost exclusively and say he sucks, while also noting your willingness to fight him years before he mattered, and also having been so kind and allegedly impressed by his performance when he beat Taylor for the middleweight championship?
This isn't about selling a fight, because Calzaghe and Pavlik aren't going to fight. This isn't hype. This is jealousy, I think, from Calzaghe. Jealousy over the fact that he's not gotten the same amount of hype or fan excitement generated even once in his career that Kelly Pavlik has stirred up in the last year. Calzaghe may well have deserved better, but as Warren and others have said, he never went that extra mile to get it. And he's pulled out of more fights and ignored more fighters than you can shake a stick at.
But, hey, have fun with your crap card on November 8, Joe. I guarantee more people were watching last night than will be when you and Roy get together at Madison Square Garden. Too bad there isn't more to say about that fight and the atrocious undercard you're insulting the paying public with than there is about you not fighting Kelly Pavlik.
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'll go ahead and agree with you.
For the record, this is not my attempt to imply subtly that Belichick is nothing without cheating and Tom Brady. Seriously. I am straight-out saying: Belichick is nothing without cheating and Tom Brady ~ DJ Gallo
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 21, 2008 2:00 AM EDT reply actions
I think that Joe Calzaghe was just cowardly in avoiding Pavlik because he felt he was more of a threat to his ‘0’ than Roy Jones Jr, and now that Pavlik was well beatean, he must be really disgusted with himself for missing a chance to cement his ‘legend’. A win over an in prime Pavlik would have meant a lot more than one over Roy Jones Jr, especially the sort of dominant performance Hopkins pulled out. I think in his heart he knows he made the wrong, more safe fight decision.
Thats the way to do it boys dont talk about how your over hyped white hope was exposed but slag off and undefeated legend ! and who has he ever ducked ?
I am fairly new to boxing so correct me if i'm wrong.
But how the hell is Joe Calzaghe a legend?? He’s only fought in America once, barely beating a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins in a controversal decision that a lot of people, including one judge, thought he lost. (Keep in mind this was before last Saturday). The guy only fights on his own terms on his own turf and only the fighters he thinks are easy enough for him to beat. His notable wins are over Chris Eubank, Jeff Lacy, Mikkel Kessler all on his home turf and none by KO. Am I wrong here?
Fire Ted Cottrell! Promote Ron Rivera!
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Oct 21, 2008 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes you are wrong
Why do you have to fight in America to be known as a good fighter? Boxing is a global sport and Europe like it or not are producing more and more title holders. Whatever people think of the fight with Hopkins. Hopkins lost. I thought Joe won. If the fight was in the UK the scorecards would of been wider but Joe still won. After the fight folk were saying Hopkins is washed up and past it and he takes on another top 10 fighter in Pavlik and nearly shuts him out. So Hopkins is back to legendary status again… Hey i agree a lot of the fighters Joe beat were not world class, useless WBO mandatories etc but i think he proved his legendary status by fighting three very good opponants he was 50/50 or pick em to beat. Lacy was the next big thing, undefeated dangerous Kessler and the American Icon Hopkins. He picked up 2 thats two RING MAGAZINE titles which is the most respected belt, In two weight divisons, all those defences. You telling me Louis and Hopkins not had a fair share of crap in defending the title? Eubank was a good scalp and i always thought the same with Mitchell. Sdsuaztec4 mate its a long worn out thing now..Americans dont know how to deal with British Boxing Success. Not everybody from these isles is Audley Harrison.
yup
I agree with dinkman. There is a long long history of Americans not giving British boxers their due.
by Matt Miller on Oct 21, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
come on, dude
How many fights has Calzaghe pulled out of with injuries?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/boxing/3646797.stm
http://www.doghouseboxing.com/uk/Elliott031405.htm
Glen Johnson and Clinton Woods would have been big fights for Joe, perfectly respectable fights. I think he beats both (Woods handily). Why didn’t those happen? Why didn’t a lot of fights happen? He took crap mandatory after crap mandatory, and the mandatories aren’t his FAULT, but here’s the secret: he didn’t have to fight them all. Nothing in boxing is truly mandatory. This isn’t exactly a law-based system anymore.
Joe Calzaghe IS a legend. Joe Calzaghe IS a first-ballot Hall of Famer. And Joe Calzaghe IS a better fighter than Kelly Pavlik, and I truly believe that Calzaghe would have done the same, only different, to Pavlik on Saturday night.
And don’t throw “white hope” at me — I don’t give a shit if a guy’s purple so long as he can and will fight.
My problem is not with Calzaghe the fighter; my problem is with Calzaghe’s wishy-washy attitude over the last three years about whether or not Pavlik is worth his time. He offered to fight him in 2006? When Pavlik was an unknown, untested middleweight prospect? Wow. What a man’s man. When Pavlik won the middleweight title, Calzaghe was so impressed and gracious that he invited Kelly over to Cardiff for Calzaghe-Kessler, which I thought was a class move by a Joe, period. Just as a dude, I thought that was a nice thing for Calzaghe to say.
I respect the hell out of Calzaghe. That’s why it disappoints me. There’s no reason to keep picking at the Pavlik scab. “See! See! I was right! Pavlik lost! That means I was right! Pavlik is crap! I’m good! Watch me battle Roy Jones on November 8!”
The Jones fight has been a farce since day one. He was superb against Hopkins (I thought he clearly beat Bernard), and he was a career-best against Kessler (I pick that over Lacy because Kessler is a better fighter than Lacy). And I really don’t want to hear about Joe’s age as a defense for not fighting some of the younger guys out there instead of his “dream fight” with Jones that would have been something eight-to-ten years ago — he has not been in a long list of career-hampering wars the way Erik Morales or someone has. Calzaghe is in perfectly great shape and his age is not a factor. This isn’t the 50s; guys last longer than they used to at a very high level. Modern methods of conditioning if nothing else.
As for Joe’s contention that this is the biggest fight of his career:
1. It’s not his biggest fight this year.
2. It’s not going to be among his five best victories when he handles Roy. And he will handle Roy.
But again, my point is mostly why keep picking at Pavlik? The only answer I can come up with is he wants to convince people that by not fighting Pavlik, he has somehow done the world a favor, and don’t forget to tune in for Calzaghe-Jones, clash of the super gods, or whatever the hell they’re calling it.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Of all those fights
He only took 5 mandatories (6 if you count Pudwill, who was a last-minute replacement for a mandatory who got hurt), so the too many mandatory line is BS. Cut out Sheika, Veit x 2, Gimenez and Mkrtchian, you still have a bunch of crappy defenses interpersed with the occasional legitimate contender.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
only five of those were mandatories?
Jeez, I thought it was twice that. Well that makes it worse.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Have you seen the crappy defences he made? Woodhall- Ried-Brewer-Ashira with one hand tied behind his back? B level boxers but pretty good fights. Manfredo was funny.
And its billed as living legends for those that mock :)
Mainstream is brought to you ..
Underground you got to go there...
Until the Woodhall fight, he had a respectable slate of opponents
Some mandatories, a couple of up-and-comers, and he pretty much wiped out the domestic scene at 168 (he never fought Nunn, though Nunn was mostly done by that time). Then, between December 2000 and March 2006, he fought ONE legitimate opponent, Byron Mitchell, who Calzaghe only agreed to fight after he already lost to Ottke. Even if you give him Brewer (who was long shot by the time he got to Calzaghe), it’s a pretty pathetic slate of opponents, even when you consider the mostly weak opposition that was available.
Reid was probably his best win until Lacy, and Reid came as close to beating him as anyone. Reid, Lacy and Kessler are the only prime top-10 in weight class fighters he’s fought in his career.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
“even when you consider the mostly weak opposition that was available.”
I don’t know man. That’s a big consideration. The competition at his weight class was exceedingly weak for a long time.
Yes, but
At 2000, before he stagnated, he was enough of a name that he probably could have made fights against top guys at 160 and 175 had he been willing to leave the country.
Plus, even with the weakness of 168, consider who he still didn’t face: Ottke, Lucas, Harding, Beyer, Girard, Siaca, etc. Any of those would have been better than half his non-mandatory fights, and honestly, he should have gone out of his way to force unification with Ottke.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
So much bullshit to fight a legend
However, legends don’t make undercards or do they. The close to if not completely horrific untold story of the Calzaghe-Jones undercard. In stores soon.
"I beat him so bad, he ended up in the Hospital. And I am still pretty." -Cassius Clay
Overhyped was Jeff Lacy – beating Jermain Taylor twice doesn’t put Kelly Pavlik in the same category. He preferred to fight Roy Jones Jr for less money than the mega-fight that would have been with Pavlik, when Pavlik was calling him out. Do the numbers, whats a bigger attraction/worth more right now, Calzaghe/Jones or Calzaghe/Pavlik?! He could have embarassed Pavlik worse than Hopkins did, but instead he chose to fight a guy way past his prime but doesn’t provide the same sort of danger Pavlik might have done. Thats the real shame for him – he missed out on real glory. No-one will give him anywhere near the sort of props for dominating Jones that he would have got for Pavlik – or the money, or the audience. He could have got the fight where he wanted, at the same catchweight, with a better purse split(he’s splitting 50-50 with Jones?!?!) but he saw Pavlik as too much of a threat and ducked him. AMEN.
Eh?
So you still believe that Pavlik would have posed a huge threat to Calzaghe? I think Joe would have utterly schooled him, a la Lacey.
by Matt Miller on Oct 21, 2008 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
he doesn't
The point now is that if Calzaghe thinks so little of Pavlik as a fighter, why didn’t he take more money to fight Pavlik? If Kelly’s always been so overrated, why was Joe keen on fighting him way back in 2006, and again after Kelly beat Taylor the first time?
I think we all know that right now, Calzaghe likely would have given Kelly a boxing lesson. So why fight a clearly washed-up old man when a win over Pavlik would have been a lot bigger?
If anyone is buying Roy Jones as a legitimate threat on Nov. 8, I just can’t see it. And I know a lot of people really think Roy can win. How? Why? He hasn’t shown anything in years other than (1) he can’t beat good fighters his own size anymore, and (2) if you blow up a rusty welterweight, Roy can do some damage!
Calzaghe should have fought Pavlik. He didn’t. There is no reason at this point for Calzaghe to keep pushing the Pavlik button. He was all hunky dory about Pavlik until people wanted the two to fight, and now he’s kicking a guy while he’s down and acting like this 50 dollar sham against Jones is a fucking mega clash.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Why I Respectfully Disagree
I believe your argument is based on two premises that are not solid: one, that a fight with Pavlik will pay better than the fight with Jones. Where is the proof? A lot of Joe’s pay will come from the U.K. obviously. Who do you think they are more familiar with, Kelly or Jones? You are underestimating the over-the-pond factor in the payday.
Hell, who are most fans in America the most familiar with? The sad truth is that a washed up old guy who people know is often—usually even—a bigger draw than a young up-and-comer respected by the boxing hardcore.
The other premise regards Joe’s motives in respect to his legacy. Calzaghe appears to have been right about Pavlik. Isn’t it possible that he really would rather go out fighting a legendary hall of famer than a fighter who he sees as a lot of American Hype, in other words, another Jeff Lacey? Isn’t it possible that Calzaghe’s motives aren’t so coldly and cynically calculating? For myself, I can see the argument that going out on a fight with Jones has a lot more personal and historical significance for Joe than fighting Pavlik.
re:
I think UK fans know Kelly Pavlik, and I also think that the majority of them know Jones is over the hill.
And if Calzaghe truly considers Pavlik a lot of American hype and nothing more, and not befitting his grand presence in the ring, then why did he offer him a fight well before Pavlik was ANYBODY?
It’s double-talking B.S. That’s my real problem. Two years ago Kelly Pavlik was worthy. Now he wasn’t. Why? What changed? Pavlik has done nothing but get better since 2006.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions
“What changed?”
I guess I take him seriously when he says this will be his last fight, so that may be what has changed. I’m probably out of my mind for taking any boxer seriously when they say they are retiring, but for some reason I believe him. I’m saying that if he really is retiring, then fighting his last fight with RJJ does make sense for a boxer as obsessed with his own legacy as Joe Calzaghe.
by Matt Miller on Oct 21, 2008 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with that
If Joe really does go (and I hope he doesn’t, because he’s a great fighter and there are more fights for him), then yes, fighting Roy to retire is totally understandable. Still doesn’t excuse going, “Now Pavlik is bad!” but it makes the Jones fight make total sense instead of just dollars and sense.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 22, 2008 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Is Calzaghe really making less fighting Jones?
Considering how Jones and Tito both took home over $5M in their matchup, I don’t think so. Don’t forget, Jones runs it though his own promotional company, which doesn’t take a massive cut off the top of the purses like Top Rank would.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
Dont all top fighters like to talk big?...
Joe is top five p4p. Where you fit him in thats down to you. Dont you think he can spout crap from time to time? Floyd did a lot of it when he was at the top. I do agree that Joe should of taken on Pavlik, easy in hindsight and i bet the boy is kicking himself. But SC do you really think Boxing fans think that this RJJ of old? I dont . Maybe thats why the PPV figures wont be up to much. Deep down Joe will know this. Remember Joe is not Peter Pan anymore. He is on the wrong side of 30. Whats the problem with him fighting one more time in the garden against a real name (name not a test)? If Joe was from Gatorcreek Georgia we would not be hearing this. I know you not knocking him as a fighter but talking crap really is part of the game. After he cains in Jones, he can retire with his stunning lass and 20million in the bank. Perfect.
re:
Whats the problem with him fighting one more time in the garden against a real name (name not a test)? If Joe was from Gatorcreek Georgia we would not be hearing this.
You would from me. I am comparing this to Tarver right now, and you know I’ve dumped on Tarver plenty for his crap fights and bullshit talk. Talking is one thing. Being a flip-flopping, full of shit, yammering old lady is another. If he hadn’t so frequently changed his mind on whether or not Pavlik was worthy of his legendary fisticuffery, this wouldn’t bug me.
But SC do you really think Boxing fans think that this RJJ of old?
There are way too many people that think Jones has a legitimate chance against Joe. I give Roy maybe a 5% chance. I’d have given Hopkins about a 25% chance against Pavlik, I’d say, because Bernard was still a top 10 P4P fighter. Roy isn’t top 40.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
“If he hadn’t so frequently changed his mind on whether or not Pavlik was worthy of his legendary fisticuffery, this wouldn’t bug me.”
Is it possible that this is a bit of a pet peeve of yours?
yes
Because it doesn’t make sense that Pavlik would be slagged by Calzaghe as unworthy, when Calzaghe was high enough on him years ago to allegedly offer him a fight. And that comes from Calzaghe, not from Pavlik. “Oh well we offered him a fight and he refused.” Like that is an excuse to not fight him now? Come on.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions
in other words (so I'm not responding to everything)
When Joe Calzaghe is able to offer an explanation of why Kelly Pavlik was worthy pre-Miranda, pre-Zertuche, pre-Taylor, pre-Lockett, pre-anybody, but was not worthy pre-Hopkins and post-everyone else, then maybe I’ll stop being so annoyed by his jive.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
I see your argument, and it is kind of lame, especially when you focus in on it a lot.
But boxers say shit.
by Matt Miller on Oct 21, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah
And they should be held accountable for it. Which sounds like I take it super duper seriously, but I don’t. But when it annoys the shit out of me, or any fan, calling bullshit is the only thing we have.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 22, 2008 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Joe is right
Pavlik isn’t in his league, and I’m confident that history will show this to be true. I love Pavlik, and I can’t wait to see him fight again. That straight right of his is one of the most deceptively powerful punches in the sport. But I do not believe Pavlik has demonstrated he is the kind of world class elite that Calzaghe is.
Trivia Question for Boxing Fans
Who fought more elite boxers in their prime, Joe Calzaghe or Rocky Marciano?
hey
I’m not huge fan of Marciano’s legend, either.
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
by Scott Christ on Oct 21, 2008 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Rocky could not carry Joes Jockstrap..
Joking guys :)
Mainstream is brought to you ..
Underground you got to go there...
let me say this
I do not think Calzaghe is anything less than a great fighter. But if I’m gonna bust on guys like Tarver for being loudmouth, transparent bullshitters, then why does Joe get a pass? Because he’s never lost?
"Yesterday I was lying, today I am telling the truth." -- Bob Arum
Right on SC
You’re in no way being unfair or harsh to Joe. You have never said he’s anything less than a phenomenal fighter. Somebody needs to say what you are saying.
And, this talk by Joe has been so transparent. Now that he’s become more renown internationally in the last year or two, he doesn’t want people to think that he’s ducking Kelly.
Most knowledgeable observers know that he just took an easier fight (which there is nothing wrong with) against a faded legend, but to some you could see how it would appear that he didn’t want to fight the unbeaten Middleweight champ when Kelly wanted to fight him.
So, he’s been talking all this crap to try to justify his decision but all it’s really making him look is catty and revisionist. That’s where the problem lies, not that he’s overrated or ducked anyone.
Pavlik may not be in his league, but pre the weekend he was a bigger perceived threat and draw(maybe even still a bigger draw after losing) than RJJ. Common sense tells you that a Pavlik fight would have grossed more and the purse split in his favor. Initially I thought a lot of what Frank Warren wrote was b-s, but if Joe had believed in himself more – and if he doesn’t by now he never will – he would have taken the more lucrative if more threatening fight. I think he’s awesome but its a shame about his clear ducking of Pavlik and the lack of class showing now. By the way, I think its being advertised in the UK as clash of the living legends….
Again, I Disagree
Joe believes in himself plenty, and I don’t see the evidence that Pavlik is a bigger draw than than Jones (see my response to Scott above). It seems like people are forgetting about the fans overseas, for whom Pavlik is just a vague name.
And as far as the “perceived threat” factor goes—perceived by whom? By most American fans, for sure, but why do people immediately discount the possibility that Joe really did have a better perspective on Pavlik than we did pre-Hopkins? Seriously.
sorry so late
Apologies for the late response, I’ve never commented before and usually just read the articles. I just thought that the general perception was that Jones is well past his best, and therefore the previously unbeaten, younger, in prime Pavlik would be a bigger perceived threat generally, not just in the US if you look at what they’ve both done in the last few years. Joe could well have had a better perspective on Pavlik than we did pre Hopkins. He could have then fought him, schooled him for more money and respect than he’ll get for doing the same thing to Roy…rather than dismissing him as not worthy. Anyway, apologies again for being so late, will keep up better in future threads.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
