If Andre Ward retired today, should he get inducted into the HOF?

[SnakeVen0m]

I love Ward but the answer is simply no.

[black.ink]

Agreed.

People love to throw Froch at Ward....and sometimes the small details do not equal a correct larger picture. Small details: 12 world title fights versus 7, Active, regular schedule versus inactivity... BIG DETAIL Froch TOTALLY OUTCLASSED BY WARD, WARD beat the man who was condsidered pound for pound one of the best fighters at the time, (Dawson) and beat the best common opponent between the two (Kessler).

You can say Ward is undeserving but don't compare Froch to Ward. Resume Schmezume!

So resume means nothing lol?

So going off your ******ed logic, let's put Kirkland Laing into the HOF too. Afterall, he holds a win over one of the greatest boxers of all time.

[LacedUp]

Ward has a better resume than Froch? lol yeah and in other news Breidis Prescott has a better resume than Amir Khan

Someone told me Corrie Sanders has a better resume than Wladimir Klitschko.

[RubenSonny]

Ward has the best win (Froch) and a fresher Kessler. But outside if that he doesn't have much, Abraham and Bika are good solid wins.

Froch has Kessler (abit older), Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Dirrell, Groves x2, Pascal.

I think it's definitely very clear Froch has more depth to his resume. But again it is still arguable.

Dirrell was a novice who hadn't beaten anyone and he has only beaten Abraham who isn't very good, Froch was a favourite and he didn't win convincingly, I don't see how that counts for anything.

Groves is a crappy fighter, and people only rate that win because Froch struggled so badly, that's a paradox.

Abraham is another crappy fighter and Taylor was done.

None of these wins have much value if you are talking 'history' or 'legacy', just simply overhyping names. Neither have done that much in that respect, but Ward holds a definitive win over Froch, it's not hard to work out.

[black.ink]

Dirrell was a novice who hadn't beaten anyone and he has only beaten Abraham who isn't very good, Froch was a favourite and he didn't win convincingly, I don't see how that counts for anything.

Groves is a crappy fighter, and people only rate that win because Froch struggled so badly, that's a paradox.

Abraham is another crappy fighter and Taylor was done.

None of these wins have much value if you are talking 'history' or 'legacy', just simply overhyping names. Neither have done that much in that respect, but Ward holds a definitive win over Froch, it's not hard to work out.

You can break down any resume in history in a hindsight view to make it seem worse than it is.

Pre-fight, Froch was an underdog against Taylor, Abraham, Bute, Ward and Kessler 1. Only 1 of those fights was on home soil.

Against Taylor, he went to the US where casuals had never heard of him, and stopped him.

Abraham and Kessler were Super-six favourites pre-tournament. Everybody talked about how Abraham was going to knock the one-dimensional, lethargic Froch out! Froch schools him.

Bute was supposedly the man to put Froch into retirement, the man everybody wanted Ward to face to determine the number 1 at 168. Froch stops him in brutal fashion.

Just because these men haven't amounted to much post-Froch does not diminish the result in any way.

Bute, Kessler, Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Groves, Johnson....almost a who's who of the best the division has on offer at the time.

[NEETzsche]

neither froch or ward deserve to be in the hof tbh

[RubenSonny]

You can break down any resume in history in a hindsight view to make it seem worse than it is.

Pre-fight, Froch was an underdog against Taylor, Abraham, Bute, Ward and Kessler 1. Only 1 of those fights was on home soil.

Against Taylor, he went to the US where casuals had never heard of him, and stopped him.

Abraham and Kessler were Super-six favourites pre-tournament. Everybody talked about how Abraham was going to knock the one-dimensional, lethargic Froch out! Froch schools him.

Bute was supposedly the man to put Froch into retirement, the man everybody wanted Ward to face to determine the number 1 at 168. Froch stops him in brutal fashion.

Just because these men haven't amounted to much post-Froch does not diminish the result in any way.

Bute, Kessler, Pascal, Abraham, Dirrell, Groves, Johnson....almost a who's who of the best the division has on offer at the time.

The value of a win is based on the quality of fighter beaten, nothing else, a fighter being incorrectly hyped doesn't make a win better.

Simply listing names doesn't mean much either.

[Dr Rumack]

If he died maybe.

[SUBZER0ED]

Ward is a top candidate for the Hall of Shame. He showed promise early on but got full of himself, and single-handedly tanked his own career by suing his promoter. The fact that he continues to lose in court should tell him something about his logic.

[Mr.Fantastic]

Ward has the best win (Froch) and a fresher Kessler. But outside if that he doesn't have much, Abraham and Bika are good solid wins.

Froch has Kessler (abit older), Bute, Abraham, Taylor, Dirrell, Groves x2, Pascal.

I think it's definitely very clear Froch has more depth to his resume. But again it is still arguable.

I don't see how it's arguable. It's as clear as daylight Froch is superior in the resume department. A fighter can have the talent to be the best ever but if he's not putting in work, he shouldn't get the credit of other boxers.