Tweet
The reason why so many of us here on boxingscene.com do not label Floyd Mayweather Jr. as an all time great is because most of us have been watching this sport for more than 2-3 years. All time great is an elite position that only a small percentage of fighters have ever achieved. Getting established as an all time great means that you've made a permanent mark on the sport, and that without your presence the sport would not be what it is today.
There's only one way to become an all time great, and that's to constantly fight the best opponets possible. Pick any all time great off any list and I guarantee you they not only fought the best in their era, but they have victories over other established greats. I also guarantee you that if you removed them from the history of the sport, the sport would not be the same afterward.
I don't think anybody who's been watching this sport for over 3 years (or over the age of 18) could make a compelling argument as to why mayweather is an all time great. He is the greatest of his era, that much is for sure and nobody can take that away from him. But who has he beaten who is a shoe-in to the list of the greatest fighters ever to lace up the boots?
De La Hoya? He lost in every big match he ever had and was a far more sucessful businessman than boxer. Castillo, or Corrales? While both men are tough as nails and have my utmost respect, nobody could logically argue that either of them were some of the best to ever do it. Gatti? The man was always a C level bar brawler with little in the way on actual boxing talent and he won't even make the hall of fame, same goes for Carlos Baldomir. Zab Judah? Exciting prospect that never had the mental toughness to fully commit himself to an opponet who didn't "spark" him.
Do I need to pull out Hernandez, Mitchell, Corley, etc...? Bottom line is this, Mayweather is the greatest of his era and that much will always be his. But unless he beats Hatton, Cotto, Mosley and Williams there's no way to make an argument for him being an all time great. The only way for him to be an all time great is to wipe out his the entire division of all logical competition. Because none of his opponets were ever on anybody's list to be an all time great, because none of them (aside from De La Hoya's win over a deflated and old Chavez) ever beat another all time great.
Accept it for what it is: the truth. Stop calling us "haters" and whatever other lame **** you like to throw around, we're veterans of the sport and we call it like it is. I'm sorry if this is unacceptable to you but in time you'll forget all about it.
There's only one way to become an all time great, and that's to constantly fight the best opponets possible. Pick any all time great off any list and I guarantee you they not only fought the best in their era, but they have victories over other established greats. I also guarantee you that if you removed them from the history of the sport, the sport would not be the same afterward.
I don't think anybody who's been watching this sport for over 3 years (or over the age of 18) could make a compelling argument as to why mayweather is an all time great. He is the greatest of his era, that much is for sure and nobody can take that away from him. But who has he beaten who is a shoe-in to the list of the greatest fighters ever to lace up the boots?
De La Hoya? He lost in every big match he ever had and was a far more sucessful businessman than boxer. Castillo, or Corrales? While both men are tough as nails and have my utmost respect, nobody could logically argue that either of them were some of the best to ever do it. Gatti? The man was always a C level bar brawler with little in the way on actual boxing talent and he won't even make the hall of fame, same goes for Carlos Baldomir. Zab Judah? Exciting prospect that never had the mental toughness to fully commit himself to an opponet who didn't "spark" him.
Do I need to pull out Hernandez, Mitchell, Corley, etc...? Bottom line is this, Mayweather is the greatest of his era and that much will always be his. But unless he beats Hatton, Cotto, Mosley and Williams there's no way to make an argument for him being an all time great. The only way for him to be an all time great is to wipe out his the entire division of all logical competition. Because none of his opponets were ever on anybody's list to be an all time great, because none of them (aside from De La Hoya's win over a deflated and old Chavez) ever beat another all time great.
Accept it for what it is: the truth. Stop calling us "haters" and whatever other lame **** you like to throw around, we're veterans of the sport and we call it like it is. I'm sorry if this is unacceptable to you but in time you'll forget all about it.
) I gave credit where it is due.
Comment