Clearly Froch. The WBO was such a paper title back then, that Ring magazine didn't recognise it as a world title, hence why its challengers were mostly 2nd and 3rd rate... Eubank and Watson even managed to fight for the vacant belt due to being parachuted into the rankings overnight- no one really complained, no one cared. It was a big fight, yes, but for a nothing belt- something to keep the casual happy, really. It was only a few years later it started getting some attention, and yes, a big name fighter like Eubank helped this but at the time, it was a hotbed for many a fighter who couldn't get near a title shot for the other alphabets- and that's saying something! And some of the judging in these 'title defence'- especially Schommer, Amaral and Close, were laughable. The best American he beat was probably Tony Thornton- one of the few super middles in the Ring's top 10- the other being Roccigiano and maybe there was another, i'm not sure right now. Sam Storey managed to get a Paper Title fight due to beating Slugger O'Toole, who'd spent the past couple of years getting beat by virtually everyone. Other belt holders hardly ever talked about 'unifications' back then, if one fighter held the WBO title, they weren't interested. He avoided the likes of Jones and Toney like they had leprosy. But, in fairness, he himself knew his limitations and that was not taking on any top Americans.
Dunno. He dipped quite noticeably in the middle rounds and overall fought in frenetic spurts. He seemed pretty sold out at the end too.
Eubank never beat a fighter at Joe`s level, Watson was dominated by McCallum who Eubank never fought, Eubank never fought Toney either, he never beat the best in his division at 160 or 168, he was just a WBO champ during an era when lower contenders won the WBO title.
Benn lost to Watson at 160 but achieve far more at 168 than Watson did, the Eubank rematch doesn`t place Watson above Benn who earned a draw v Eubank at 168.