Must See Pinoy Thread."Wake up Pac Fans... Pacquiao is screwed!"

They were common opponents but at different points in their careers. Fighters grow or dwindle in popularity throughout their career and sometimes that can shift rather quickly. Help me understand what your point is: Are you saying that after Floyd beat DLH.... DLH wasnt as big a draw and therefore the ppv numbers vs. Pac were less? After Floyd beat Hatton..... Hatton wasnt as big a draw and therefore the ppv numbers vs. Pac were less? If that is true then why is that not the case with Marquez after losing to Pac... why did Floyd sell almost twice as much in one fight with Marquez than Pac did in two? I understand a fighters popularity can shift but I'm still not sure I understand the point you are trying to make.

quit the bull shit you know dam well dhl carried those numbers with out dhl those numbers would have never been that high. floyd was not know by the mast media untill he fought dhl. iam not disputing they wanted to watch floyd vs dhl more then pac becasue the facts and numbers are thier. but dont make it seem like floyd was the one pushing the numbers it was 75% dhl and 25% floyd so what about hatton and marquez thats never going to happen and hatton will push more numbers then jmm so whats your point. You've missed the point.... go back and read the first post in this thread and you will see all my comparisons were Pac & Floyd vs common opponents and the net ppv numbers (DLH just happend to be one of them)..... bottom line Floyd carried bigger numbers in every case... period... end of story.... (no b.s..... its an indisputable fact) What percentage of who's fans bought what fight is irrelevant.... (and for the record if HBO cant break down whos fans bought a certain percentage of a fight.... there is no way in hell you can..... so you stating 75/25 as if it were fact....now that is b.s. ... next time state your opinion and leave it at that) My assessment is more simple..... FACT: more people put down money to watch one fighter over the other verses a common opponent every single time..... so why you are finding it so hard to understand that... I've never once compared Floyd v.s. DLH and their ability to draw ppv.... so why are you? My point about Hatton and Marquez was AGAIN.... common opponents of both fighters and one fighter was the bigger draw.

hey retard these fights "Floyd v DLH 2.4 Mil PPV buys (Pac v DLH 1.25 Mil PPV buys)" dlh is pushing those numbers so those dont count as floyd numbers, even though floyd was in one of those fights :rofl: Enough with the name calling.... its unnecessary to get your point across. Even if what you say is true (I disagree).... almost twice as many people were interested in watching DLH v Mayweather than DLH v Pac (1.15 million less homes were willing to shell out cash when Pac was in the ring against DLH.... you cant just disregard that part of the equation and simply say Mayweather has minimal ppv drawing power ). To argue that 100% of the people that bought those fights were DLH fans is to completely discredit Pac and Floyd. So what is your excuse for Hatton and Marquez?

do you know that while DLH puts himself out there like hes a good guy, how many times ive heard or read hes actaully a prick? hell, look at that article from GQ about pacquaio. id assume you would let your kids get an autograph from him though huh? a womanizer who cheats on his wife, has the people working around him in fear of him, getting prostitutes preggo and shit...thats a real role model huh tiger woods, i have met him personly...in a club though. a club named "The Roxy" here in orlando. i met him back in 03. while tiger had his good guy image on tv and had just gotten married, i saw a totally different tiger this night. dude was chillen in a "gangsta lean" against the vip bar, there with his boys and having his boys bring chics up to him to meet him. even leaving with a couple chics at the end of the night. so again, whether good or bad. most people who are celebs have media personalities which isnt who they truly are when a camera isnt smack-dab in their faces. so yes, in a sense-they are "actors" being that they are displaying a character when in the media which is different away from the media floyd shifted media personalites from pretty boy to money. you can see when this transition was taking place, and it starting taking place when he wasnt getting the fights and popularity he felt he deserved. show he changed his media character to become more marketable. with all the shit that ALI was saying, would you have let your kids get an autograph from him if you lived in that time? my parents go to vegas all the time and my father met Floyd when out in a casino one night. he said floyd was a really cool guy, humble and polite. wasnt in the mood to take a pic but gave him his autograph so one more time, your post doest make sense. and he doesnt need an L just to learn from it. ever heard of living vicariously through others and learning from their mistakes? so yet again, your post makes no sense. Lets get the easy stuff out of the way... Its important to you for Floyd to keep his undefeated record... I think he can have the best and most memorable part of his career even after a loss.... so we can agree to disagree on that point. Now the part that you say makes no sense...... actually you do get it...... its right under your nose... your not giving yourself enough credit. Oscar acts like a good guy but does crap behind the scenes - you admit his character is questionable Pac acts like a good guy but does crap behind the scenes - you admit his character is questionable Tiger act like a good guy but does crap behind the scenes - you admit his character is questionable You are a smart guy and you realize those actions are a part of their character. THATS MY POINT.... what you DO comes out of who you ARE!!! You are correctly assessing the whole person and not just who they pretend to be. What makes no sense to me is why you are applying a different standard to Floyd trying to say he is a good guy and choosing to overlook all his horrible behavior. You've convinced yourself that he really is a good guy because you see him treat his family and friends nice on tv, and your dad says so because he got his autograph in Vegas. Why two different standards? I can appreciate the skills of all the above mentioned superstars but none deserve or expect any more from us than that....

it wouldn't be the first time. it won't be the last. Sadly you're right. Disgusting as it is.

i said "some merit" and it did. enough to go to war? probably not but that's debatable i guess. What was the merit?

the number of countries wasn't the issue. a lot of countries supported the u.s. they kinda have to just because of alliances and economic and political ties. there's this thing in the U.N. called the security council. their votes can veto or block a majority u.n. vote. i think we all know who the 2-3 nations are that have huge interests in iraq that are on the security council. Who cares? The bottom line is: The U.S.A. has killed hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians for no reason. And lied to their own population in the process to justify their disgusting actions. End of story.

using 9/11 as an excuse is joke. everyone knows this. wmd thing had more merit at the time but obviously there wasn't any. Why did it have merit? don't use that "US KICKED UN INSPECTORS OUT" stuff and make a big issue out of it. fact is the us always tell un inspectors to get out before they do airstrikes. that's not something new. you're talking as if it's something new. Uhh...no. I'm talking as if that's something they did. all throughout the 90's whenever america and britain was about to conduct missile or air strikes against iraq they always told un inspectors to get out for their own safety. No sh*t. the reason being the places the un inspectors want to inspect are probably some of the places they were gonna attack. Uhh...no sh*t again.

why don't you reread the original post you replied to from last night. i even stated they had it in GULF WAR I and didn't have it anymore when we invaded them the 2nd time. as far as un inspectors go. you want to talk about just when the u.s. decided to go in already. telling un inspectors to get out for their own safety is nothing new. clinton did the same thing in 1998. when iraq was refusing to cooperate with un inspectors , clinton told the un inspectors to get out before they conducted airstrikes. what about all the other times saddam jerked the un around? you forget un was upset at saddam too and wanted to take action against him. they just didn't agree on invading iraq. they wanted sanctions and other options aside from the war bush wanted. What is your point? That Saddam (like many other nations--including the U.S. ALL THE TIME) jerked the UN around at certain points? Well stop the presses! In 2003, the US couldn't even get enough countries behind them (UN, right?) so they created the Coalition of the Willing :lol1:. (UN, right?) And finally, the point is that the United Nations Inspectors were kicked out by the US so they could go ahead and bomb the country. For no good reason. To kill hundreds and thousands of Iraqis. End of story.

1. oil 4. set up a american "friendly" iraq smack in the middle of the persian gulf The rest really isn't necessary. Furthermore, the reasons we were told we were going in was because of 9/11 (wtf?) and WMD (even though it was the US that kicked out the inspectors before they did their job). Seven years and countless lives later. Disgusting.

Speaking of next week... What do you think about Shane trash talking back? Asking if Floyd is gay and of all that? Do you think that is a bad sign? Or really means nothing? Means very little IMO. Don't even think Floyd getting in his head will make that much of a difference. If Mosley can fight through a divorce, he can fight through some corny one-liners.

imdazed , how many times did saddam kick un weapons inspectors out? how many times did he butt heads with the un concerning weapons inspections? saddam would deny he had any biological/chemical weapons left but at the same time acted as if he still had it. who knows what's going on in his head? the dude mobilized his troops on the kuwaiti border several times after the war. everyone knew he wasn't gonna invade kuwait again. he couldn't. but he did it to dick the us and un and kuwait around. the guy wasn't all there. All of the things you are mentioning are Gulf War I and US Propaganda. I live in this country and I know more. Sh*t, in 2003 the US told the UN Inspectors to GET OUT because they were going to attack. Now Saddam was kicking them out? Actually, he was inviting them in - pleading with them. I think you must have Iraq confused with North Korea. How quickly we forget.

i'm not buying anything. wnd's wasn't the reason we went to iraq. that's just the reason bush gave. there's quite a few reasons bush wanted to invade iraq. hell if you want to talk personal issues , saddam tried to have his dad capped in iraq in the mid 90's. the kuwaitis stopped an iraqi assassination plot during a bush sr. visit when he was no longer president. that said , i didn't state anything false. iraq did have wmd's before the 1st gulf war. Yeah, if you believe that's the reason we invaded and now occupy the nation after installing our own gov't there. :rolleyes:

Well he's lost already a few times so no, it wouldn't be so devastating. Let's see how Floyd looks next weekend. Speaking of next week... What do you think about Shane trash talking back? Asking if Floyd is gay and of all that? Do you think that is a bad sign? Or really means nothing?

I think both have proved to be all-time greats, but just not on the same level. I'm sure both their names will be discussed for years to come regardless of what happens from here on out. However a loss for Floyd in his next fight would be devastating. Pacquiao has reached a point where even if he loses, he has so many great wins to fall back on. Well he's lost already a few times so no, it wouldn't be so devastating. Let's see how Floyd looks next weekend.

true. But right now it definately looks that way. Even if they fight, nothing is for sure. True, bud. Pacquiao has established himself as an ATG. I'm not quite convinced about Floyd but a win over Mosley would do it for me. And another great win could catapult him over Pacquiao - but that really depends.

i smell mongolian chicken

Bottom line if Pac doesn't fight Floyd, he still ends up with the better legacy. Floyd can ask for the moon if he wants to but for legacy he needs the fight more than Pac. Depends. Both are still fighting. Never say never.

you dont know him as a person, you see his media character. and why wouldnt you want your kids getting his auto. hes great with his kids, loves all kids and treats his family well. what more could you ask for in a person than to look at how he treats his fam, kids and everyone surrounding him. your post doesnt make sense and i wont even get to the floyd needing a L comment to refocus. dude is undefeated. fighting the num 1 WW and wanted the "num 1 p4p" until pacroid ran again, your post doesnt make sense I'll put it to you this way.... in judging character it is irrational to take all the nice parts.... throw out all the nasty parts..... and say the person is actually, really, deep down inside, when he's not playing a character, a really good guy you would want to be associated with. Thats what you are choosing to do and I think its misguided. Floyd is not an actor... (in the same sence that DeNiro, or Peschi, or Cruise are) he is promoter selling fight tickets...... and he choose to promote himself in a particular way. That is a part of "who he is".... you cant disregard that part of Floyd! Oscar choose to promote himself in a way that wasn't so abrasive and did very well financially with very little public disapproval. Floyd has choosen to promote himself in a way that is mean spirited and caustic and he has done very well financially..........but in doing so he has revealed his true character. What you DO comes out of who you ARE.... ie. Mother Theresa, Charles Manson, Barak Obama, you, me.... (the fact that you didn't cuss me out and call me all kinds of names because you disagree with my post reveals a part of your character...) Floyd is short on character and no amount of feeding the homeless or Floyd Mayweather Foundation work (which are good things and I'm glad he does them.....) is going to change that. I dont want my kids getting the impression from Floyd or anyone else that it is ok to act the way he does or say the things he says and think that has nothing to do with the type of person you are. As far as Floyd losing.... all I'm saying is that it wouldn't hurt my opinion of him as a fighter if he lost a fight, saw it as a learning experience, and rebounded as more of a warrior.... willing to engage more..... willing to take on greater challenges... I actually think it would help his ppv numbers. Think of Leonard with Duran, Hearns, Hagler, ect... Leonard gained popularity after avenging his loss to Duran..... the same could go for Floyd

Only just realised that there are actually a lot more pages than I first thought so that previous post might be a bit off topic. Sorry