So was Dirrell's "Nuerological issues" legit?

[Rantcatrat]

Lest we forget, Ricky Hatton was the lineal champ at 140 for a good four years. He defeated two future HOF's in Kosta Tszyu and Jose Luis Castillo. He held the IBO, IBF, and WBA belts at one point.

Carl Froch has done very well, but at this point, his resume is at best on par with Hatton's, not much better than Hatton's. His best win is over Jean Pascal. Glen Johnson is a good win, but let's not get too carried away, he does have over 10 losses and he is 42. The Dirrell win was just a horrible fight, and objectively, Dirrell wasn't a champion, and Dirrell's biggest true victory is over Curtis Stevens (AA win was a DQ). Abraham is a former champion at middleweight, but he isn't a super middleweight. Jermain Taylor same. Don't get me wrong, Carl gets credit for those wins without a doubt. However, when Froch stepped up to an elite level fighter (although I would say overrated too) at his weight in Kessler, he lost. Froch also has never beat an assured HOF although perhaps arguably Jermain will make it to the hall. Froch's career at this point and Hatton's career overall are comparable, but Carl just doesn't have the career-defining win that Hatton did in Tszyu. I don't consider his win over Taylor or Pascal to be as good as Hatton's over Tszyu. A win over Ward might just be such a win.

Please don't mistake this as an argument that Froch isn't a badass dude because he is - he fights anyone, anywhere, and always comes to fight. I was at the Jermain Taylor fight rooting for Jermain (as a patriot should ), and Carl won me over in that fight. He never gave up when he was down on points and he fought till the end with the crowd rooting against him.

This sums up how I feel. Over their careers it's about even. Froch would need to either beat Ward or have a real close fight to surpass him for me. I think Hatton gets a lot of criticism these days, but his resume is not as bad as some make out.

On the Dirrell thing, I'm one of those 'fools' who believes he didn't fake the reaction, as I've seen someone react near on exactly the same after getting sparked in sparring & I also know from personal experience how contrived genuine responses can look on camera. Still, maybe if I hadn't seen those I'd also believe he was acting, but I have & the fighter deserves the benefit of the doubt.

However, I don't believe the neurological thing that came up afterwards, I'm sure that was his team's way of getting out of the fight with Ward, which could have seriously derailed his marketability. So no imo the neurological issues weren't legit. His team have seriously fucked his future, keeping him out of the ring for a year & half & making every commission look extra hard at him.

I couldn't agree more. This long layoff can't be good for him, not to mention all the test he's going to have to go through to prove he is "healed". That's why i wanted to see what everyone thought. If it wasn't legit then why put himself through all the BS that comes with it, test, not making money fighting etc. But i do think it was BS and he was so far into it he had to ride it out.

Well, it's possible they weighed the options and thought it was worse for Dirrell if he took a bad beating at the hands of Ward, followed by being knocked out of the S6 in the first round after going 0-2 with one DQ win. Then where is he? Or take the time off to regroup and gradually return to the ring. He still comes away with the exposure the S6 brought and he wasn't humiliated by being knocked out early.

The above-poster was spot-on that said the dq ko by AA was legit but the severity of the injury was exaggerated in order to avoid fighting and losing to Ward.

The primary problem I see for Dirrell now is that he avoided the Ward fight, but now the only way he'll be seen as legit again at 168 is if he fights Ward. So, at the end of the day, dodging Ward just pushed back the inevitable. Maybe he can make some $ in the meantime.