Pacquiao has a weak resume at 147. Cotto and others have been more impressive

blah...blah...blah...blah... old fighters....blah...blah...blah.... past history...blah...blah...blah... face it, your past fighters are SIX FEET UNDER IF NOT, CLOSE TO BEING THERE...NO ONE GIVES A SH!T Floyd and Manny destroys them all. These 2 guys are WW past, present, and future. They knock down anyone put in front of them. So, keep the past as what it is, the past, STOP LIVING IN IT. To the idiots with a black and whites pictures of ancient fighters, I bet you never even saw them fight actively, you might as well put King Leonidas of the movie 300 while you are into fantasy, these past champions don't hold a candle to the top fighters of modern times, GIVE IT UP, LIVE IN THE PRESENT!!!

And Pac nor Floyd are remotely close to being ATG WW's.

he beat Cotto, Margarito, Mosley and Clottey. all were top 5 WW's when he fought them. so suck a nut and go away :rofl: :rofl:

Absolutely no one calls Pacquiao an ATG welterweight except for trolls, so you are pulling that out of your ass.

Who can compete with the klitschkos? Doesn't mean they are ATG hw's. Current welterweight division must be one of the weakest of all time, no? just like what i said bro they are not ATG ww but they are the best we have at the momment and I would like to add that no active WW have better career standing @147 and also correct TS opinion the Cotto's career at WW was better ...

No...Well...I don't know...Depending on when exactly the fight take place, on how the winner wins. I would have to take into account. But, I don't think so...I mean I wouldn't consider them top 25 ATG WW's. I made this thread in the history section. http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10416309&postcount=1 Overall that's 26 names...Who would they surpass? Maybe Oscar for the 26th spot :lol1: WW just has the most deepest talented division in the history of boxing. It's only rival as far and deep and talented goes is MW. But, this is no knock on either Floyd or Pac though. One is not their natural division. Neither have double neither have double digits fights at WW. And, who knows if they ever get to 10 WW fights. Maybe so. But, you comparing them to ATG WW's who ever natural WW's and had numbers of WW fights. Is not a real fair comparison for Pac or Floyd. It would be no knock on the winner. On the contrary it would be quite complimentary for the winner to be mentioned in the borderline top 25 ATG at said weight-class with such few fights. Yeah thats very true. The way boxing is now how guys only fight like 2 maybe 3 times a year and constantly moving up in weight it will be hard for anyone to outperform the past WW champs. I think the fact that it could and should be the biggest fight in boxing history PPV wise would garner the winner much more credit then they may deserve.

PAC shouldn't even be a welterweight.

both PAC and Floyd may not be WW ATG but at this momment who at 147 can beat or even compete with either one? Who can compete with the klitschkos? Doesn't mean they are ATG hw's. Current welterweight division must be one of the weakest of all time, no?

I agree with pretty much everything you said. Just a question though would you consider either fighter (Pac, Mayweather) a p4p at WW if they were to beat the other? No...Well...I don't know...Depending on when exactly the fight take place, on how the winner wins. I would have to take into account. But, I don't think so...I mean I wouldn't consider them top 25 ATG WW's. I made this thread in the history section. http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10416309&postcount=1 Overall that's 26 names...Who would they surpass? Maybe Oscar for the 26th spot :lol1: WW just has the most deepest talented division in the history of boxing. It's only rival as far and deep and talented goes is MW. But, this is no knock on either Floyd or Pac though. One is not their natural division. Neither have double neither have double digits fights at WW. And, who knows if they ever get to 10 WW fights. Maybe so. But, you comparing them to ATG WW's who ever natural WW's and had numbers of WW fights. Is not a real fair comparison for Pac or Floyd. It would be no knock on the winner. On the contrary it would be quite complimentary for the winner to be mentioned in the borderline top 25 ATG at said weight-class with such few fights.

both PAC and Floyd may not be WW ATG but at this momment who at 147 can beat or even compete with either one?

And, yes Pac resume at 8 weight-classes higher than where he won his first title is fairly weak. Also Floyd resume 4 weight-classes above where he won his first title is also fairly weak. Neither are natural WW's neither are ATG WW's. Neither are top 30 ATG WW's. Pac is not an ATG in any particular weight-class. He just an over P4P ATG. While Floyd is an ATG at 130 and that's the only weight-class where he's an ATG and overall P4P ATG. I agree with pretty much everything you said. Just a question though would you consider either fighter (Pac, Mayweather) a p4p at WW if they were to beat the other?

And, yes Pac resume at 8 weight-classes higher than where he won his first title is fairly weak. Also Floyd resume 4 weight-classes above where he won his first title is also fairly weak. Neither are natural WW's neither are ATG WW's. Neither are top 30 ATG WW's. Pac is not an ATG in any particular weight-class. He just an over P4P ATG. While Floyd is an ATG at 130 and that's the only weight-class where he's an ATG and overall P4P ATG.

he beat Cotto, Margarito, Mosley and Clottey. all were top 5 WW's when he fought them. so suck a nut and go away Margarito wasn't top 5 at any weight-class when Pac fought him. And, he didn't even fight him at WW So suck a nut and go away.

Manny's resume is weak at 140 , lightweight and overrated at 130 won vacant belt and fought a shot versions of MAB and Morales and got schooled by JMM what else is new

Pacquiao and Floyd's WW resumes are so overrated it's not even funny. Pac beat DLH, Mosley, and Clottey and Floyd beat Baldomir, Judah, Mosley, and Hatton. Both lists make me laugh. Oh wait...

Another dumb post. Who else is there to fight at welterweight that Pacman hasn't fought? Hercules? Dude, he could fight guys at 140 easily instead of trying to climb weight divisions and break bull**** records.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Pac has a fairly weak resume at welterweight relative to ATG welterweights. Mayweather is also questionable as an ATG at this weight. Overall, Pac is legendary, but this perception of him as an unprecedented welterweight is stupid. Please tell me if I'm wrong. atg as in top10 welterweight of all time? Not even close. Neither is Floyd imo. I mean just look at the guys who fought at the weight, and could be considered. Robinson, Leonard, Hearns, Gavilan, Armstrong etc etc... It's one of the richest weights of all time. Besides Pacquiao shouldn't be ranked at welterweight. It's not "his" weightclass.

atg naw.....

Another dumb post. Who else is there to fight at welterweight that Pacman hasn't fought? Hercules?

He's only had about 4 fights at WW, the guys Floyd wouldn't fight. He resume at 147 is good for how short it is, and it puts Floyds to shame who was a WW for what, 3-4 years before Manny? Just sad. I personally think Floyd is better than Manny, But you could make an argument for Pac's resume at welterweight being better...I don't know.