If Cotto beats Pacquiao does he ranked above Mayweather?

depends on your definition of elite Chico was ranked Top 5 P4P by Ring that would put him there with the elites I could argue that Cotto was never an elite because he won vacant belts and lost or struggled with the top guys in his division This is the dumbest thing anyone can ever say I swear. Floyd struggled with Castillo the top guy in his division, Manny struggled with Marquez so I guess they aren't elite. I don't get where in order to be a great fighter means you have to outclass EVERYONE on the planet, there is just no possible way to be good you can look bad/lose. Well you can say Floyd dominated Castillo in the rematch, fine. You can also say Cotto dominated Margarito in there rematch so then why exactly isn't Cotto elite? Because he struggled with Mosley... that was Mosley last great fight, unless you want to count the Marg fight which was still 3 fights after Cotto faced him. Saying Floyd did better means nothing, Mosley was done. So Cotto has a loss to Manny, at least he's faced him.

Even if Cotto were to beat Pacquiao he would be 1-1 against Pacquiao. A win against Pacquiao could never erase the fact that Pac completely and utterly humiliated Cotto the first time they fought. In my opinion Cotto can never beat Pacquiao and I'm not sure why the TS has an obsession with discrediting Floyd. Basically every guy Floyd has fought in recent years has been at or near the top of their division while the same can't be said for many of Cotto's recent opponents. A win against Pacquiao would put Cotto closer to Floyd in the p4p rankings but it would never help him surpass Floyd.

depends on your definition of elite Chico was ranked Top 5 P4P by Ring that would put him there with the elites I could argue that Cotto was never an elite because he won vacant belts and lost or struggled with the top guys in his division In a historical sense, neither Cotto or Corrales are "elite". But in contemporary context, both are elite. No way in hell can Cotto be considered "elite" if Corrales isn't. They both are practically the same caliber of fighter, with about even resumes. Which makes the Cotto-Mayweather comparison that much funnier. Because Mayweather has not only beaten several Cotto-level fighters, but has straight lopsidedly DOMINATED Cotto-level fighters. Where are Cotto's dominant wins over Mayweather-level fighters? Where are Cotto's wins PERIOD over fighters of Mayweather's caliber? :thinking:

Much as I like MC and don't think it impossible that he beats up Pac, were he to actually do it, imo, he'd still have to beat up Floyd to be recognized as better and higher in an ATG sense. Fanboys would be unwise to discard this scenario out of hand. Stranger shlt has happened. It's boxing...

Lmao at people saying Chico was elite, might as well say Gatti was too. These guys were in great fights, but a great fight doesn't equate to great skill. He was a good fighter but elite, get a grip. depends on your definition of elite Chico was ranked Top 5 P4P by Ring that would put him there with the elites I could argue that Cotto was never an elite because he won vacant belts and lost or struggled with the top guys in his division

Lmao at people saying Chico was elite, might as well say Gatti was too. These guys were in great fights, but a great fight doesn't equate to great skill. He was a good fighter but elite, get a grip. I said Cotto but it can go either way. People say Cotto has a soft resume, but its WHEN you fought guys as well as who you fought. Paulie, Foreman, Quintana, Torres all these guys were undefeated when they faced Cotto that accounts for a lot. I think the main issue here, is that Floyd had a really good resume before he got to WW and Cotto has a really strong resume at WW. IDK man, Floyd has good NAMES on his resume but he was/is in the same boat with Manny in the sense that people want him to fight young strong guys. (Peterson, Bradley) but Manny is fighting the names too. Floyd did a better job of it though fighting Oscar and Hatton. (Retired when Cotto/Marg were brought up though.) Those were the young lions that people wanted to see Floyd fight and he just left, I guess that's where I see Cotto getting a possible nod. I mean Hatton is a perfect example, at least for me I knew the guy was a overblown club fighter. But its a HUGE plus for Floyd to take his 0, Cotto did to that like 5 or 6 guys and fought Mosley/Margarito when Floyd didn't, as well as not fighting Cotto either. Floyd just left, not to mention he's only fought 3 times in 5 years now. And lately his resume is garbage, overblown Marquez (then didn't make CW) Grandpa Mosley who was done and Victor Oritz... I understand he was young but that is seriously the best reason he is even on there. It can go either way.

I love how you and other Floyd haters always never want to mention what Floyd di at 130 and 135. He beat every Super Featherweight while he was there, including Corrales when he was #5 P4P. And he beat the best LW in the early 2000's era in Jose Luis Castillo. I'll post a resume thread about Floyd and Cotto, so we can compare each guys notable resume. The premise of putting Cotto higher is based on a win with the rematch with Pacquiao. That being a major scalp and also that makes it so he beats every fighter he ever fought. Floyd was the dominant fighter at superfeather when he was there. And I think the Corrales and Castillo wins were very good, just as Cottos wins over Mosley and Quintana

No but he would be one of the top fighters of this era

the ts actually thinks that jabs shouldnt count in hit accuracy percentages so that way manny pacquiao will have a higher connect rate than floyd. he made a whole thread about it. this guy licks pacquiaos nuts to the highest degree and hates on floyd for everything. seriously dont feed this troll. MAKE THREADS http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4119/4863943207_e0088c4bb6_z.jpg GET REPLIES

"Greatness" is different from being "very good". Mayweather is "great"...while Cotto is "good to very good". Nobody that get's dropped and almost loses to Torres should ever be considered better than Floyd. A fighters career should emcompass EVERYTHING in that fighters career, not just the highlights. The totality of Cotto's career compared to Floyd's is a joke really. In every "marquee" win on Cotto's ledger...there was a moment of struggle. Floyd has been a world champion for over a decade and only split a card ONCE....and that was highly questionable against Oscar. He's been beating championship caliber fighters for a decade plus EASILY. And please can someone end the fallacy that having Margarito on your resume somehow legitimizes it. The 32-0 with 30 ko Corrales that Floyd fought was WAY MORE of a monster than the big bad wolf, Maragarito was in any sense of the word.

Why not he would have beating everyone he has ever fought and he would have beating a higher level of opponents than Mayweather and against common opponent he has done better on a whole. What reason is there to rank Mayweather higher. I love how you and other Floyd haters always never want to mention what Floyd di at 130 and 135. He beat every Super Featherweight while he was there, including Corrales when he was #5 P4P. And he beat the best LW in the early 2000's era in Jose Luis Castillo. I'll post a resume thread about Floyd and Cotto, so we can compare each guys notable resume.

Isn't this the same guy that said jabs didn't count.......?

Yeah and JLC is one of the best lightweights of all time :Flush: No, he's not. Mosley > JLC Only to idiot's who have no clue what they are talking about. Losing fights and scraping wafer thing decision making you the best :wave: Oh, no, it was just being a crying shame if you have competitive fight's would it? I mean, why fight the best fighter's in your division and them be competitive when you can just fight unranked bums and knock them out? Castillo had close wins over Stevie Johnston and Joel Casamayor - Who happen to be leagues and leagues above ANY fighter Mosley faced. Which on that alone puts him above Shane Mosley at Lightweight. And that's just to start. You're just another idiot who looks at Mosley's record and presume he's a great Lightweight when in actual fact his resume is a joke at the weight and the best fighter he beat there was Philip Holiday. And other than that, he only beat 1 or 2 other ranked fighters at the weight.

People just see Mosley record at LW...Which was what 33-0 with 30ko's? Or something like that at LW. So the idea is wow he's amazing. But, they're not looking at who he actually fought and when he fought them. Castillo resume at LW is greater than Mosley. I don't even like Oscar and his resume is greater than Mosley at LW. Hell some of Mosley best wins at LW were Oscar leftovers. Mosley didn't even fight the best LW at the time. Which was Stevie Johnston. Mosley didn't fight the best guy. And, that would have been a damn good fight. A tough fight for Mosley IMO. Maybe a bit like some people see Floyd's record and think that is great, whilst not looking at who he fought and when. Cotto resume from 140-154lb is better.

People just don't know sh*t. The fact you have idiot's on this thread talking down to other's whilst in the same breath claiming Shane Mosley was one of the best Lightweight's ever is a joke. The fact Title Defenses are used to justify idiocy is a joke. And it's becoming increasing to use that reasoning. I understand not everyone is into the History and prefer to focus on modern times. And that's fine. I just hate when people make brash, stupid, uneducated and ignorant statements concerning the history of the sport when it's obvious they don't know sh*t. I'll never understand why people feel the need to make comment's on things they clearly know nothing about. Why bother? It's disrespectful to the sport. Yeah and JLC is one of the best lightweights of all time :Flush: Mosley > JLC Losing fights and scraping wafer thing decision making you the best :wave:

next thing you know some people are gonna be claiming phillip ndou 31-0 30 knockouts was great............oh wait they do that. Well atleast people don't say Phillip N'Dou is a greater Lightweight than Castillo and is one of the greatest Lightweight's of all time.

People just see Mosley record at LW...Which was what 33-0 with 30ko's? Or something like that at LW. So the idea is wow he's amazing. But, they're not looking at who he actually fought and when he fought them. Castillo resume at LW is greater than Mosley. I don't even like Oscar and his resume is greater than Mosley at LW. Hell some of Mosley best wins at LW were Oscar leftovers. Mosley didn't even fight the best LW at the time. Which was Stevie Johnston. Mosley didn't fight the best guy. And, that would have been a damn good fight. A tough fight for Mosley IMO. next thing you know people are gonna be claiming phillip ndou 31-1 30 knockouts was great............oh wait they do that.

People just see Mosley record at LW...Which was what 33-0 with 30ko's? Or something like that at LW. So the idea is wow he's amazing. But, they're not looking at who he actually fought and when he fought them. Castillo resume at LW is greater than Mosley. I don't even like Oscar and his resume is greater than Mosley at LW. Hell some of Mosley best wins at LW were Oscar leftovers. Mosley didn't even fight the best LW at the time. Which was Stevie Johnston. Mosley didn't fight the best guy. And, that would have been a damn good fight. A tough fight for Mosley IMO. People just don't know sh*t. The fact you have idiot's on this thread talking down to other's whilst in the same breath claiming Shane Mosley was one of the best Lightweight's ever is a joke. The fact Title Defenses are used to justify idiocy is a joke. And it's becoming increasing to use that reasoning. I understand not everyone is into the History and prefer to focus on modern times. And that's fine. I just hate when people make brash, stupid, uneducated and ignorant statements concerning the history of the sport when it's obvious they don't know sh*t. I'll never understand why people feel the need to make comment's on things they clearly know nothing about. Why bother? It's disrespectful to the sport.

Cezar Bazan is about as good as anyone Shane Mosley faced at Lightweight. Atleast Cesar Bazan was not only ranked, but ranked in the Top 5 of his Division at the time. Something we can't say about many of Mosley's wins at Lightweight. People just see Mosley record at LW...Which was what 33-0 with 30ko's? Or something like that at LW. So the idea is wow he's amazing. But, they're not looking at who he actually fought and when he fought them. Castillo resume at LW is greater than Mosley. I don't even like Oscar and his resume is greater than Mosley at LW. Hell some of Mosley best wins at LW were Oscar leftovers. Mosley didn't even fight the best LW at the time. Which was Stevie Johnston. Mosley didn't fight the best guy. And, that would have been a damn good fight. A tough fight for Mosley IMO.

Too bad the likes of Johnston and Casamayor are as good either. :wave: Cezar Bazan is about as good as anyone Shane Mosley faced at Lightweight. Atleast Cesar Bazan was not only ranked, but ranked in the Top 5 of his Division at the time. Something we can't say about many of Mosley's wins at Lightweight.