If Floyd is on "vacation", who should Pacquiao fight next?
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
Good point, if you recall stevie forbes cracked Oscar's orbital bone.
I just dont think Oscar was much of a challenge for anyone at that point.
Did oscar look good against Pacquiao? he looked like shit. He looked like shit against forbes too. His time was over. Fact is both Floyd and Pac fought past prime, old versions of Oscar. Neither win does anything for their legacies. What the win did for each guy was boost their popularity though.
I just dont think Oscar was much of a challenge for anyone at that point.
Did oscar look good against Pacquiao? he looked like shit. He looked like shit against forbes too. His time was over. Fact is both Floyd and Pac fought past prime, old versions of Oscar. Neither win does anything for their legacies. What the win did for each guy was boost their popularity though.
Tony, what I tell you he picks and chooses what to answer. I'm retard but you don't know the different between a loss and a ass whipping. You have been exposed 2-0-Sixx. Reading over your lames ass excuses is just funny. Mayweather beat both Judah and Baldimor back to back to become the real 147lb he fought the winner and the loser. Manny would've only fought the loser. LOL.. Did Cotto lose to Maragrito or did he get the shit beat out of him? Did Maragrito lose to Mosley or did he get his ass beat by Mosley? So getting your ass beat and then getting KO'ed doesn't have any effects on you? I'm retard but you're too much of a dick rider to admit that Manny is making a name of himself by beating up damaged name fighters.
see this what I'm talking about broken damn record we've had this conversion a dozen times i should have a clipboard and copy & paste my responses instead of wasting my time. pacquiao is fighting all the top guys. no one cried that hagler fought hearns after leonard already knocked hearns out no one cried that hagler fought duran after hearns brutally knocked him out the point is these guys all fought. why? because they were the top guys! pac is doing that floyd isn't.
Pacquiao:
Cotto
Margarito
Clottey
Mosley?
Margarito:
Cotto
Pacquiao
Clottey
Williams
Mosley
Cotto:
Pacquiao
Margarito
Clottey
Mosley
Floyd Mayweather:
Mosley
Again, all the top guys fighting eachother, except ONE guy. Who is the lone wolf?
Compare that to the golden age of boxing:
Leonard fought Hearns, Duran, Hagler.
Hagler fought Hearns, Duran, Leonard.
Duran fought Hagler, Hurans, Leonard.
Didn't matter if fighter A lost to fighter B they all fought.
Pacquiao:
Cotto
Margarito
Clottey
Mosley?
Margarito:
Cotto
Pacquiao
Clottey
Williams
Mosley
Cotto:
Pacquiao
Margarito
Clottey
Mosley
Floyd Mayweather:
Mosley
Again, all the top guys fighting eachother, except ONE guy. Who is the lone wolf?
Compare that to the golden age of boxing:
Leonard fought Hearns, Duran, Hagler.
Hagler fought Hearns, Duran, Leonard.
Duran fought Hagler, Hurans, Leonard.
Didn't matter if fighter A lost to fighter B they all fought.
all but hagler.
Leonard fought hearns & duran at welterweight then hagler at middleweight.
Duran fought Leonard at Welter and Hearns at super welter, then hagler at middleweight.
hearns fought hagler at middlweight.
Leonard & Hearns started there careers as welterweights and went up in weight together. Duran started his career at like 119 pounds he was like the pacquiao of the group. Hagler spent his entire career at middle.
The key here is they were all stars at the same time and they were always around the same weight class, which is why they all fought. The public demanded it, the public got it.
It's irrelevant though cuz all these guys were huge compared to the welterweights today (besides williams). These guys ALL (besides hagler) became light heavyweight champions (hearns, duran, leonard). Most of the welterweights today (floyd, pac, cotto, berto) are too small and really are like junior welterweights posing as welterweights.
Leonard fought hearns & duran at welterweight then hagler at middleweight.
Duran fought Leonard at Welter and Hearns at super welter, then hagler at middleweight.
hearns fought hagler at middlweight.
Leonard & Hearns started there careers as welterweights and went up in weight together. Duran started his career at like 119 pounds he was like the pacquiao of the group. Hagler spent his entire career at middle.
The key here is they were all stars at the same time and they were always around the same weight class, which is why they all fought. The public demanded it, the public got it.
It's irrelevant though cuz all these guys were huge compared to the welterweights today (besides williams). These guys ALL (besides hagler) became light heavyweight champions (hearns, duran, leonard). Most of the welterweights today (floyd, pac, cotto, berto) are too small and really are like junior welterweights posing as welterweights.
Well if Oscar was "irrelevant" then what was Margarito? Margarito was coming off a suspension and could barely get licensed in the United States to fight. So how was he at the top when he wasn't even allowed to fight in this country? Was he irrelevant too? In your biased opinion, probably not since he was Pacquiao's last opponent.
Mayweather vs De La Hoya was the biggest fight in the history of boxing but De La Hoya was irrelevant..... Just another low blow to Floyd's accomplishments.
Mayweather vs De La Hoya was the biggest fight in the history of boxing but De La Hoya was irrelevant..... Just another low blow to Floyd's accomplishments.
tony, you just don't get it. I'm not bashing floyd for fighting Oscar. I said it was his money fight and that's great, everyone deserves a money fight once they get to that level. Shit, even Bernard Hopkins, a middleweight, got his money fight with Oscar. It doesn't do anything for their legacies though when you take everything into consideration, but it's great for their careers, everyone who fights oscar gets paid big money and becomes instant known names. So there is no fault in fighting oscar. I've said that.
My point, which should be so simple even a caveman could get it, is that floyd didn't fight any of the top guys at 147 at the time instead he retired. Margarito, cotto, williams, mosley, etc., he left when the division was the best it had been in years. That is MY critique of floyd. Take it how you want i don't care.
I just don't see how anyone can defend a guy that takes 2 years off when shit gets hot then fights a couple guys then takes another 2 years off.
My point, which should be so simple even a caveman could get it, is that floyd didn't fight any of the top guys at 147 at the time instead he retired. Margarito, cotto, williams, mosley, etc., he left when the division was the best it had been in years. That is MY critique of floyd. Take it how you want i don't care.
I just don't see how anyone can defend a guy that takes 2 years off when shit gets hot then fights a couple guys then takes another 2 years off.
LOL.. Pure comedy.. So you're mad because Mayweather retired from boxing for two years and didn't fight the guys YOU wanted him to fight. After a two year lay-off Mayweather comes back to beat the number 2 p4p fighter at the time. Then beat up Mosley the number one guy at 147lb and you're still crying about him not fighting Cotto or Maragrito. 206 You're whole agurment is just dumb as hell now. Smigg, Mayweather won the first fight against Castillo and to prove his haters wrong he beat his ass a lot easier in the second fight. He beat him easy in the 2nd fight so really what's your piont of bring that fight up? Does that answer your question Smigg? Question for you Did Manny beat Marquez in both of there fights??
The public, the media and the fans wanted Floyd to fight Cotto/Margarito/Williams/Mosley. Don't act like it's just me and I'm making this shit up!
A lightweight...
Mosley was a good win and that's what he needed to do, but we were specifically talking about back then, not right now at this particular time. There is a reason why a huge amount of people feel floyd ducks fighters or whatever, and part of that reason is because he didn't fight the top guys at 147 when he had the chance to. That's what I'm pointing out.
Like I said it's floyd's career, it's his legacy he can do what he wants. But there are consequences for his actions or lack thereof and historians aren't going to like the missing names on his resume.
I don't think people would care as much but floyd contently tells anyone that will listen that he's the greatest fighter of all time and when you start to say that, your resume and accomplishments are going to be analyzed and when compared to the other all time greats, floyd falls way short of being the greatest. He's not even the greatest fighter right now. Pacquiao, Hopkins, Holyfield, all these guys rank higher than floyd on the all time great list.
And the sad thing only floyd is to blame for that. I have no doubt floyd could have beat cotto. He could have beat margarito. But he didn't. His resume could have been spectacular. But it's not. And it's a shame because he's so talented and gifted.
lol beating him in the second fight proves he won the first fight? genius!
second fight was no walk in the park either
A lightweight...
Mosley was a good win and that's what he needed to do, but we were specifically talking about back then, not right now at this particular time. There is a reason why a huge amount of people feel floyd ducks fighters or whatever, and part of that reason is because he didn't fight the top guys at 147 when he had the chance to. That's what I'm pointing out.
Like I said it's floyd's career, it's his legacy he can do what he wants. But there are consequences for his actions or lack thereof and historians aren't going to like the missing names on his resume.
I don't think people would care as much but floyd contently tells anyone that will listen that he's the greatest fighter of all time and when you start to say that, your resume and accomplishments are going to be analyzed and when compared to the other all time greats, floyd falls way short of being the greatest. He's not even the greatest fighter right now. Pacquiao, Hopkins, Holyfield, all these guys rank higher than floyd on the all time great list.
And the sad thing only floyd is to blame for that. I have no doubt floyd could have beat cotto. He could have beat margarito. But he didn't. His resume could have been spectacular. But it's not. And it's a shame because he's so talented and gifted.
lol beating him in the second fight proves he won the first fight? genius!
second fight was no walk in the park either
So if you win a close decision in the 1st fight, you rematch the guy and beat him by a wider margin in the 2nd fight that doesn't prove you're the better fighter?? Mayweather beat Castillo two times get over it. You seem kind of slow so let me help you out ( 2 wins Mayweather vs. 2 losses by Castillo) = Mayweather is the better fighter. Please just explain to me what's the point of bring up the two Castillo fights? You're just proving that Mayweather fought a prime fighter back to back.. I'm just exposing your hater logic more and more everyday. Double standards after double standards.
