I think so. Antonio Tarver said as much before the fight, when he mentioned whoever wins the Super Six has a strong case, and I agree with him.
Yes. There is no competition. If Hopkins would have beat Dawson then there could have been an argument.
Super 6 is an overrated tournament. It is inhabited by a 42 years old past it champion and fighters who were already exposed. The bantamweight tournament involving Darchinyan, Mares, Agbeko, Peres is even more credible than that. Even Brian Viloria accomplished more this year than any S6 fighter.
Had Marquez gotten the nod, I think he would've won it. Too bad they robbed him when he put in the performance of his life given the circumstances.
Nope Beating a Abraham - 160lb plodder who was exposed 2 before that by dirrell and froch. Froch - 34year old slowmo who was exposed 2 previously by Kessler and dirrell. Don't make u a FOTY.
You're grossly undermining the magnitude of those events in my estimation. Those were the Semi-Final and Final match-ups in the Super Six, which has been the best thing going in boxing since it began. :smoke
I would make a case for Kessler here. He beat Forch in 2010. HE should have been also FOTY. I voted yes only because Ward beat Froch very convincingly. I think it matters a lot the way you win. He didn't use dirty tactics. He was a better fighter. I'm just curious to know if Bute beats Froch next year even more convincingly than Ward if he will be granted FOTY.
I have been saying this, S6 is an overrated tournament. If S6 did not exist and you have those fighters in the SMW, people would be discussing how weak this era of SMW would be. You got Froch, old Johnson, Dirrell, Abraham, taylor, allan green etc who won't even be top 30 PFP fighters.