He's between where Kalambay and Toney is. He's still racked up enough decent names and he's yet to add a few more. It's not the best career but it's been a solid one. I'd say Nunn and McCallum are close to what his level is, h2h he's a monster though. He was very heavily avoided by JCC Jr, Sergio Martinez, Miguel Cotto, Felix Sturm and Dmitry Pirog had to retire due to ongoing injuries while in camp for his fight with GGG. Otherwise all the other champs and top contenders were beaten by him. He faced everyone he could that was worthy of a shot, being ducked by so many didn't help him at all. He's been the best MW of this decade so that's worth something. I'd say he'll be remembered as a great fighter who could've done more if the opportunities had really opened up for him.
I think there's reason to believe he'd be the best at 147. Only guys who would trouble him at Spence, Crawford and Porter but he could definitely beat all 3.
He handled Shawn Porter fairly easily in their fight. I don't think Porter has improved much more since that fight. He'd be #3 behind Crawford and Spence. Its such a shame that he neglected the fundamentals so much.
Pre golovkin loses to bud 50/50 Pac-Man, maybe edge to pac 50/50 spence, again maybe edge to spence most likely beats García, Porter (as he proved in a tight affair), Thurman hammers khan
the only reason he looked good was because he used to bully smaller guys at 147 once he met someone who was the same size (errol spenc jr) it was over for him
trying to think of who brook weight bullied? also bit unfair considering he dared to face ggg, I think brook outskilled most apart from his Carson Jones gut check
Fighting GGG at MW really knocked years off his career and he hasn't looked the same since - the pre-GGG version of Brook (or a version which didn't fight GGG) would have beaten Spence IMO and would have proven himself to be the best welterweight at that time.
Agree with most of this, although as mentioned above, think he would have beaten Spence. I'm not sure the timing would ever have quite worked out for Brook vs Crawford at 147 (would Brook have likely moved up to 154 sooner anyway, but for the inactivity) to have been feasible, but think Crawford would have the edge.
shawn porter aint a 154lber... let's be real him daring to fight guys the same size or bigger was his demise once size of opponeent and competition level went up... the loss column also rose i don't think he will fair well at 154... charlo... lara... too much for kell
well I’m trying to think who brook weight bullied though? He was taking rounds off ggg before the inevitable and he fought on even terms with spence until his face cracked again. ok you can knock the quality of opponent but he wasn’t dragging up ex lightweights etc he easily beat the like of zefera who is a big lad and proved to perhaps be better than originally touted
let's look at his record, shall we? jo jo dan, frankie gavin, lvaro robles.... these guys aint big... i think it was well known that kell brook used his size (and why wouldn't he?) to his advangtage i just feel when he stepped up and started facing guys of same size and more skillfull, he faced trouble that's how i see it
Thank you for being a rare voice of reason on here.......... Original topic: Kell achieved everything that he possibly could've. Golovkin showed his limits as far as moving up in weight, Spence showed his limits at WW (before I get marked as a hater, I initially said he'd beat Spence). He was good, but wasn't going to go much higher. He'd still clobber Khan though.
