Does Terrence Crawford make any of you think that Old School fighters would rule 2day

I think the real difference between fighters of the past and current fighters is their physicality. Modern fighters are stronger, fitter and faster as technology and nutritional understanding have improved. While they don't have to go 15 rounds, nor do they fight as often, this allows them to perform at a consistently higher level. If you look at the physiques of ATG heavyweights for example, they come no where near those of the Klits, Joshua, Wilder or even Povetkin. Even in the lower divisions, fighters such as Berton, Forrest, Maragarito and Williams would be physical beast back in the day. These physical advantages make up for any lack of skill they are supposed to have. Furthermore, older fighters tend to be seen in a somewhat nostalgic manner, not dissimilar to the way in which old music and films are. We only remember the very best from these eras and tend to forget that there were many very poor fighters around who would not stack well in any era. Also as we can only judge them against each other, the extent to which you rate on past fighter tends to influence your view on old fighters as a whole. Just to be clear though, I'm in no way saying that fighters from the past were not superb fighters, just that nostalgia clouds our view a little.

I agree about srr, but I think the greats of the 80s are way better than most fighters today and could dominate or at the very least compete with the greats of today. I don't see how anyone could say Floyd or Manny are a higher caliber than SRL or that either of them can beat him easy. SRL looked at Pryor as a super beast, and Pryor is a poorman's version of the PackyMonster. SRL had a plus minus of 15 while Floyd had a plus minus of 30. Duran, a guy who cant even speak english, got into SRL's head and SRL tried to bully him. Couldnt even land clean jab on him. Now how in the hell is SRL going to beat Floyd? SRL was washed up at 30 because he did dope and didnt dedicate himself. Fighters of this era are dedicated af. SRL is the exact same fighter as Floyd. Their identical except everything he does Floyd is an expert at. SRL will fight in the pocket and the outside. But Floyd will fight on the outside, and in an instance transform into a pocket fighter. He will go to the ropes, the inside, etc. Pryor can give Floyd a fight but not no damn SRL, or SRR. They have styles where they will do what Floyd wants them to do. We all saw the Floyd Sr fight with SRL. If that was Floyd Jr, that wouldnt even be a fight tbh.

this Terence Crawford guy is good really good

Well the creme always rises to the top so I am sure most of the top guys of the past would do just fine, just as the reverse would also be true. Terrence Crawford does not really make me old school either but having a good versatile offense is kind of a timeless thing.

Wrong. They dont say it because 100% of all boxing fans are all biased for past ATG's. People lie all the time about what SRL and SRR would do to Pac and Floyd. Anyone with eyes can see their is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY those outdated azz fighters can beat fighters of Floyd and Pac's caliber. But people always lie and act like they would lose to them. Im not stoopid I know boxing and I know skills. I agree about srr, but I think the greats of the 80s are way better than most fighters today and could dominate or at the very least compete with the greats of today. I don't see how anyone could say Floyd or Manny are a higher caliber than SRL or that either of them can beat him easy.

psst, they don't say it, because it holds absolutely no merit. if you've seen any of his fights, and think this, then you need to watch more. boxing b, watch it. Wrong. They dont say it because 100% of all boxing fans are all biased for past ATG's. People lie all the time about what SRL and SRR would do to Pac and Floyd. Anyone with eyes can see their is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY those outdated azz fighters can beat fighters of Floyd and Pac's caliber. But people always lie and act like they would lose to them. Im not stoopid I know boxing and I know skills.

Im only saying what other boxing fans refuse to say. This dude was a TERRIBLE fighter in comparison to Floyd and Pac. SRL is better than SRR. psst, they don't say it, because it holds absolutely no merit. if you've seen any of his fights, and think this, then you need to watch more. boxing b, watch it.

pump ya' brakes, son. Im only saying what other boxing fans refuse to say. This dude was a TERRIBLE fighter in comparison to Floyd and Pac. SRL is better than SRR.

TC has skills...

Boxing has evolved those old outdated azz fighters werent that special in terms of skills. SRR was truly a superbum just watch his fights. Winging power shots and just knocking everyone out. If fighters like Floyd, Crawford, and Pac fought in that era it would be like WOW to those guys because they didnt know boxing could be executed on that lvl. If you look at SRL, this guy had a plus minus of 15, same as Ward. And he is way faster than Ward. Basically Ward would be the best fighter in that era. Floyd had a plus minus of 30 which was top three in boxing history. So even in the 80's fighter of today's fighter's caliber would blow their minds! I know the popular thing to do is overexaggerate about how good the past ATG's were, but I dont care WHAT era you fought in Im going to tell the truth about how good you REALLY are! Boxing has evolved. pump ya' brakes, son.

Does a fighter of this era make me think fighters of past eras would dominate today's era??? Errrrr... umm... I don't know if I'm answering your question appropriately, but I figured it was obvious that fighters of old were more skilled than the fighters of today. What I'm not understanding is where Terence Crawford comes in. If you're saying Crawford in your eyes uses an old school style and seems to dominate with it, while he had a good year, he hasn't showcased what you believe to be greatness up against a truly elite fighter. If he does, wouldn't that beef up the greatness of this current era's fighters seeing that he fights in this era? That's a legit question, because if you're saying a style determines what era a fighter should be thrown in I disagree. The era you fight in, is the era you fight in period. I'll use Floyd as an example as he's more accomplished than Crawford. He uses the shoulder roll, which by many is considered an old school style of fighting. However, previous era's can't make a claim to him because of that. He is a fighter of this era and when you're debating one era vs another he has to be included on the side with the current crop of fighters regardless of his style or skill. There's nothing new under the sun, so you can't consider every fighter who shows skills that were seen in the past as old school or you would literally include every great fighter, because some part of their style comes from someone in the past. I get that we say fighters like JT, B-Hop, and Floyd are old school, but when comparing eras that have to be sided with the modern era. Now this is just what I got out of your question. Sorry if I misunderstood, because you just worded that awkwardly to me.

Makes me wonder what truly skilful old school fighters would do to boxers of today Boxing has evolved those old outdated azz fighters werent that special in terms of skills. SRR was truly a superbum just watch his fights. Winging power shots and just knocking everyone out. If fighters like Floyd, Crawford, and Pac fought in that era it would be like WOW to those guys because they didnt know boxing could be executed on that lvl. If you look at SRL, this guy had a plus minus of 15, same as Ward. And he is way faster than Ward. Basically Ward would be the best fighter in that era. Floyd had a plus minus of 30 which was top three in boxing history. So even in the 80's fighter of today's fighter's caliber would blow their minds! I know the popular thing to do is overexaggerate about how good the past ATG's were, but I dont care WHAT era you fought in Im going to tell the truth about how good you REALLY are! Boxing has evolved.

Que? TC is so much truth it's not even funny.