True, but in terms of fights fought, I mean his age aint going to be a factor in people knowing who he is, is it?A lot depends on this Taylor fight, Froch wins (which he will) then people he will hopefully get the publicity he deserves!
I just think most boxers build up a fan base over several years getting better fights in bigger arenas over time. Froch turned pro late and then had a stop/ start career with poor expsoure after that, unless he fights (and wins) well into his mid- 30s I don't think theres enough time left for him to get that type of support.
3 million watched him on ITV in one fight. Everyone needs to understand that boxers aren't just fighters, they are commodoties/products. They need to be sold. Just like every product you need to tell the public they want it and why they want it. Do that and they will want it. I think Mayweather shows you both sides of boxing. He used to be an amazing boxer with a promoter who didn't market him much and he didn't market himself much either. Then he went to 140 and it all clicked in his head. He warred with Corley, built up the Gatti fight, signed sponsorship deal for Mitchell fight, did the press conferences, did the ring entrances, did the talk shows etc etc Then he went from earning about $2-4mil a fight to about $8-12. If fighters take a leaf out of Mayweathers book they'll see the two sides of boxing.
I think that's part of the reason but not totally. Calzaghe wasn't really one of the lads but he was promoted well and built up a good fan base. I wonder how much of this percieved 'wanker attitude' we get from Carl has been, wrongly, perpetuated by his promoter. I say this because we're seeing the same thing with Tyson Fury. A lot of people, myself included, can't wait to see Fury knocked out now. That's hardly good promotion is it? I don't feel that way about Carl anymore though because he's won my respect with the way he's approached his career lately. It does make you wonder, though, what he could have done with a better promoter. He's defending a WBC title he won in an exciting fight against an American marquis opponent and it's not on TV. When you think about it, it almost beggars belief.
I'm with you Dan on this one - it does seem that Hennessy fighters are often the 'bad guys' or the 'arseholes'. Seemingly every fighter has to have a Benn-Eubank rivalry.... but it's all of their own doing - and also.... the public aren't going to buy into all that stuff. Michael Gomez was pushing Ricky Burns around for the cameras, backstage they were probably having a laugh and a pot of tea. The marketing strategy at Hennessy Sports is awful. Getting the ITV deal was a great move, but what does he do with it? Completely butchers it by giving us Lenny Daws vs ???? in a meaningless fight. We want Murray vs A. Goodfighter, Witter vs A. Goodfighter - Murray has been sat on his ass pretty much constantly for the past couple of years, even his trainer said so in Boxing Monthly..... why? We can moan all we want about Warren and Maloney etc.... but they know how to build a fighter. Before the first Martinez fight, who the **** had heard of Rendall Munroe barring close boxing fans - now... the lads ask me when that funny looking bin man dude is on again. Warren has built Calzaghe, Hatton and Hamed - Hennessy has done what exactly? Got Froch and Witter WBC titles, but no clown knows who they are for their boxing.... just for making clowns of themselves in post fight interviews calling people out all over the place!
It's because his surname is clunky and difficult to say Stick with me on this one. Hatton, Prince Naz, Benn, Eubank, they are all virtually brands. They roll off the tongue and almost generate excitement on their own. Froch sounds rubbish I'm a massive fan, I'm going to the Taylor fight, but I think there's something in it! Imagine how much less interest there'd be in Tyson Fury if he was called Barry Smith.