The fight is close to being done.Mosley got gassed in the second round and got a serious ass whooping.Chances are he wasnt on any supplements because he was scared of testing positive of any banned substances.He was so careful and in the end Mosley without supplements was getting bashed.
Manny is next.We all know he takes supplements that he doesnt know what they are.With random blood testing he might be off them to reduce chances of getting caught on the wrong side.Well if he is not on supplements you all know that work rate will be gone and his ass will get whooped.
On another hand,his team could still give him supplements and he trains the way he always trains.
The question is ,what if say Manny Pacquiao tests positive of banned substances,what will you guys think of him?Please note this is a hypothetical question,I am not in any way saying Manny is doping in this thread but what you would say,think or do if say Manny got caught on the wrong side.
then he would be an idiot......thats like i know im being randomly drug tested and go smoke weed any way..
lol @ the irony in this statement.... j/k but you know what I'm talking about.
You know you might be right and I hope he doesn't. Again the future generation is watching and if he gets away with it, what does that say to the young amature boxer out there who looks up to these guys?
That Pacquiao is a cheater and you can be one too?
Manny won't get a pass if he tests positive. He ensured that by making such a huge issue of the testing.
You know you might be right and I hope he doesn't. Again the future generation is watching and if he gets away with it, what does that say to the young amature boxer out there who looks up to these guys?
"I don't even know what a steroid is," said Pacquiao. "I've never done that."
Watching him say that...ugh. That was really, really, really bad. And made me feel bad as a sport's fan and boxing fan.
Honestly, I wish there was a huge backlash and there would be a lot of backlash because the youth and future generation is watching these guys. I'm more disappointing in the media, but I digress. Most people like to hold on to ideals in this society, but in reality all people care about is end results.
I'm guilty of supporting this guy by buying is albums, but R-Kelly is the perfect example in this. The dude was literally caught on tape, pissing on and fukking a minor, yet he still sells records, makes performance/all type of concerts, and has lost zero marketability. Also, for years he was rumored in the industry as a guy who smashed under aged girls and even dating a minor in aliyah.
Now the fukked up part is that if Floyd tested positive they would try to bash the guy and run him outta boxing. You would never hear the end of it and I truly believe that is fukked up. Manny on the other hand is like and the media may blow it over similar to Michael Phelps smoking weed, Imus and his nappy headed-hoes comment, and Dog the Bowty hunters N-word remarks to his son's girlfriend. Media is shit and picks and choses who they slam, and I honestly think they will give Manny a pass (Even though I disagree and feel they should slam him as well).
Manny won't get a pass if he tests positive. He ensured that by making such a huge issue of the testing.
I think this is an excellent point. As to your bolded - that's what makes boxing so special. Would Pac still be able to put on special performances once he's outed? Who knows.
Honestly, I wish there was a huge backlash and there would be a lot of backlash because the youth and future generation is watching these guys. I'm more disappointing in the media, but I digress. Most people like to hold on to ideals in this society, but in reality all people care about is end results.
I'm guilty of supporting this guy by buying is albums, but R-Kelly is the perfect example in this. The dude was literally caught on tape, pissing on and fukking a minor, yet he still sells records, makes performance/all type of concerts, and has lost zero marketability. Also, for years he was rumored in the industry as a guy who smashed under aged girls and even dating a minor in aliyah.
Now the fukked up part is that if Floyd tested positive they would try to bash the guy and run him outta boxing. You would never hear the end of it and I truly believe that is fukked up. Manny on the other hand is like and the media may blow it over similar to Michael Phelps smoking weed, Imus and his nappy headed-hoes comment, and Dog the Bowty hunters N-word remarks to his son's girlfriend. Media is shit and picks and choses who they slam, and I honestly think they will give Manny a pass (Even though I disagree and feel they should slam him as well).
What if he is? Ok.
Didn't Floyd say that "he can beat Manny with or without him on anything".
My question is, why did he say that if he is so adamant about this drug testing of his.
Floyd: I can beat him, but I just want an "even" playing field, just like I did when I came in overweight against JMM, that's why I didn't allow HBO to weigh me on fight night.
Man STFU you F**king Pu$$Y!!!!!
Sign the dam contract already and prove your claim.
If not then just "retire" like you said you would and disappear.
I'm pretty much feed up with these threads, but this is a pretty interesting topic. In all honesty I don't think it will be as bad as people make it out to be. I think public perception is what kills most athletes in cases like this. Barry Bonds and Jose Canseco are perfect examples. The media was just looking for a reason to slam these guys (due to their attitude and the stigma surrounding both) so that provided the perfect tool for them.
With that said, now if days is there really a negative consequence if you are liked by the media or fans? Not to justify it, but I don't think so. Let's look at some examples:
Manny Ramirez testing positive, yet the fames in LA were just as supportive, even though did other bad things on top of that. Only when he stopped producing and went on the slide he did, that people started to kinda turn on him.
A-Rod admitted use, and even made a mockery out of the situation by his actions, yet he is loved and revered just as much as he has ever been. Fans and Media still support him just as much. To top it off, he legacy hasn't taken any hit, even though he was rumored to be around his MVP years, because many of the analyst still considered him one of the greatest of this era.
Mark McGuire he admitted use, and I saw zero backlash. Matter of a fact he was praised, which I found disgusting, because people were saying he manned up, came out and confessed, and made no excuses (or tried to justify his actions).
Brian Cushing Tested positive, and while he was stripped of his award, he was later giving his rookie award back. Also I have been following USC football for a while and he was rumored for years (since his frosh and soph years) to be on the juice.
Those are just a few examples, and while I'm not trying to justify cheating, the recent examples shows that their really isn't alot of negative backlash for cheating. I think in Pac's case, if he did (although I know he is clean) test positive, I would be a hot topic for a week or so, then after another dominating performance no one would really care. I disagree with that approach, but that is just being a realist (based off of recent examples) on how thing play out.
I think this is an excellent point. As to your bolded - that's what makes boxing so special. Would Pac still be able to put on special performances once he's outed? Who knows.
I'm pretty much feed up with these threads, but this is a pretty interesting topic. In all honesty I don't think it will be as bad as people make it out to be. I think public perception is what kills most athletes in cases like this. Barry Bonds and Jose Canseco are perfect examples. The media was just looking for a reason to slam these guys (due to their attitude and the stigma surrounding both) so that provided the perfect tool for them.
With that said, now if days is there really a negative consequence if you are liked by the media or fans? Not to justify it, but I don't think so. Let's look at some examples:
Manny Ramirez testing positive, yet the fames in LA were just as supportive, even though did other bad things on top of that. Only when he stopped producing and went on the slide he did, that people started to kinda turn on him.
A-Rod admitted use, and even made a mockery out of the situation by his actions, yet he is loved and revered just as much as he has ever been. Fans and Media still support him just as much. To top it off, he legacy hasn't taken any hit, even though he was rumored to be around his MVP years, because many of the analyst still considered him one of the greatest of this era.
Mark McGuire he admitted use, and I saw zero backlash. Matter of a fact he was praised, which I found disgusting, because people were saying he manned up, came out and confessed, and made no excuses (or tried to justify his actions).
Brian Cushing Tested positive, and while he was stripped of his award, he was later giving his rookie award back. Also I have been following USC football for a while and he was rumored for years (since his frosh and soph years) to be on the juice.
Those are just a few examples, and while I'm not trying to justify cheating, the recent examples shows that their really isn't alot of negative backlash for cheating. I think in Pac's case, if he did (although I know he is clean) test positive, I would be a hot topic for a week or so, then after another dominating performance no one would really care. I disagree with that approach, but that is just being a realist (based off of recent examples) on how thing play out.
So you're basically saying that we'll never know??? that you would go on happily with your lives bashing Pac without evidence???
I for one, would like to know the fact/evidence if my so called "hero", as you put it, is clean or not, rather than being told otherwise by bias internet experts like yourself consistently.
Yes, responsible journalism... hence why the article was printed with a disclaimer that it was second-hand information. And that there's no follow up, since it's a dead source. It would be irresponsible of them, to continue chasing a dead source would it?
Your post made me laugh. Yeah, we'll never know. :lol1:
This isn't Watergate, stop having an over-inflated opinion of your hero. Second, why would ANYONE want to nail Pac by bringing out the emails? Really, how stupid are you? Who let's go of leverage? Not everyone kicks their ball over the fence just because things aren't going their way. And your last statement says it all. They practice responsible journalism right? Ok then. Watergate...Jesus Christ.
So you're basically saying that we'll never know??? that you would go on happily with your lives bashing Pac without evidence???
I for one, would like to know the fact/evidence if my so called "hero", as you put it, is clean or not, rather than being told otherwise by bias internet experts like yourself consistently.
Yes, responsible journalism... hence why the article was printed with a disclaimer that it was second-hand information. And that there's no follow up, since it's a dead source. It would be irresponsible of them, to continue chasing a dead source would it?
If that's the "evidence" that will nail Pacquiao to the cross and send him home without his accolodes, you bet your ass it'll come out...
That's like uncovering the Watergate scandal... the memoirs, the publicity, the $$$.
Yeah, 1 article from the Daily News, presented as second hand information (third for Atlas), without a follow up means Daily News handled it internally.
As crappy as NY Daily News is (I'm from NYC), they still practice responsible journalism.
This isn't Watergate, stop having an over-inflated opinion of your hero. Second, why would ANYONE want to nail Pac by bringing out the emails? Really, how stupid are you? Who let's go of leverage? Not everyone kicks their ball over the fence just because things aren't going their way. And your last statement says it all. They practice responsible journalism right? Ok then. Watergate...Jesus Christ.
Are you on crack? Why would Smith out his sources? It would take a court order to do so and, in case you didn't notice, Team Pacquiao didn't have the balls to sue him. Let that soak in.
If that's the "evidence" that will nail Pacquiao to the cross and send him home without his accolodes, you bet your ass it'll come out...
That's like uncovering the Watergate scandal... the memoirs, the publicity, the $$$.
Yeah, 1 article from the Daily News, presented as second hand information (third for Atlas), without a follow up means Daily News handled it internally.
As crappy as NY Daily News is (I'm from NYC), they still practice responsible journalism.