Boxing historians, and just a fan of the sport such as myself, don't give him full credit for that title. The catchweight doesn't mean anything, the reason it was bogus was because neither margarito or pac were ranked at 154 and it was a vacant title, i.e neither deserved to fight for it and the WBC obviously just wanted to get the money. So that was a bogus title to begin with, even before the catchweight. But you can't blame pacquiao for the WBC deciding to make it a title fight, as pac vs margarito would have happened regardless if that vacant belt was on the line or not.
If you take that title away, he still has the record for winning titles in 7 weight classes, and 4 linear titles in 4 weight classes. Which is amazing.
Shane wasn't prime against Floyd or Pacquiao, although he was coming off an impressive win over margarito so his win was better (I have said on this forum fighting Mosley was a waste of time for pacquiao).
You can also dissect floyd's resume too, any fighters resume can from Ali to floyd to hopkins. As you know a lot of floyd's critics/haters will discredit his wins over pretty much everyone (hatton was fighting at too big of a weight class, castillo beat him, etc etc etc). So if someone has an agenda or personal dislike for a fighter, they can and will discredit wins.
I'm not going to debate who's resume is better, because that's up to you to decide and the historians (who already have pacquiao much higher than floyd on the all time great list), but as far as good wins for pacquiao a lot of his critics unfairly criticize him when he fought and beat the top guys in Barrera, Morales & Marquez in a span of just a couple of years at 126/130 pounds. That's 3 hall of famers and all time greats in a short period of time. That was an amazing stretch of fights. Obviously going up in weight beating Hatton was a good win (not phenomenal), Cotto was a Great win, Clottey a solid defense. Since then though he wasted time with Mosley, had a tough one with Marquez and margarito was an interesting fight but not sure it does a whole lot legacy wise, although it's at worst an ok win.
If you take that title away, he still has the record for winning titles in 7 weight classes, and 4 linear titles in 4 weight classes. Which is amazing.
Shane wasn't prime against Floyd or Pacquiao, although he was coming off an impressive win over margarito so his win was better (I have said on this forum fighting Mosley was a waste of time for pacquiao).
You can also dissect floyd's resume too, any fighters resume can from Ali to floyd to hopkins. As you know a lot of floyd's critics/haters will discredit his wins over pretty much everyone (hatton was fighting at too big of a weight class, castillo beat him, etc etc etc). So if someone has an agenda or personal dislike for a fighter, they can and will discredit wins.
I'm not going to debate who's resume is better, because that's up to you to decide and the historians (who already have pacquiao much higher than floyd on the all time great list), but as far as good wins for pacquiao a lot of his critics unfairly criticize him when he fought and beat the top guys in Barrera, Morales & Marquez in a span of just a couple of years at 126/130 pounds. That's 3 hall of famers and all time greats in a short period of time. That was an amazing stretch of fights. Obviously going up in weight beating Hatton was a good win (not phenomenal), Cotto was a Great win, Clottey a solid defense. Since then though he wasted time with Mosley, had a tough one with Marquez and margarito was an interesting fight but not sure it does a whole lot legacy wise, although it's at worst an ok win.
