The winner of Thurman and Pacquiao should not fight Spence/Crawford

i wanna see all these fights in one weekend if possible. but you know boxing fans dont get what they want. Great, I hope they fight soon and then the winner can take on the Pacquiao Thurman winner

He beat him And the point is Thurman has stepped up more than Spence or Crawford. They are both in their prime they claim to be the best but not fighting each other Are you really telling me you don't want to see them fight this year? i wanna see all these fights in one weekend if possible. but you know boxing fans dont get what they want.

:blackeye: meh.. Keith barely beat Porter i wouldnt call him a "leftover" He beat him And the point is Thurman has stepped up more than Spence or Crawford. They are both in their prime they claim to be the best but not fighting each other Are you really telling me you don't want to see them fight this year?

:blackeye:Porter is Thurman's leftovers. Khan is Garcia's leftover, who Thurman also beat. Matthew Hatton won 4 rounds against Canelo meh.. Keith barely beat Porter i wouldnt call him a "leftover"

Spence is not taking a tough fight vs Porter? and Crawfish just demonlished King Khan who won 3 rounds vs Canelo. Porter is Thurman's leftovers. Khan is Garcia's leftover, who Thurman also beat. Matthew Hatton won 4 rounds against Canelo

Name me Spence's Crawford's and Thurman's best 5 opponents at welter?

Thurman is the best. Can't remember Spence or Crawford beating him? Maybe if Spence would stop fighting lightweights and fight some real guys he might get a shot. LMAO!!! Best at what? Ducking his competition? Then again, now that I think of it. the Thurman vs Pac fight makes sense. They both pick opponents similarly...

Spence is not taking a tough fight vs Porter? and Crawfish just demonlished King Khan who won 3 rounds vs Canelo.

There aren't that many tough fights at 147 to be had by Spence. That's a big reason why he fought Garcia in the first place. Let Spence fight an old Pacquiao and get beat. Pacquiao goes down as a top 5 fighter of all time. Spence needs to fight Crawford then he can fight the winner of Thurman Pacquiao. Crawford wants that fight. Spence making excuses.

Sooooooo...we're all gonna sit here and act like this never happened, right? No mention of this when talking about how "Manny fights the best"? Yeah, I didn't think so. Thurman is the best. Can't remember Spence or Crawford beating him? Maybe if Spence would stop fighting lightweights and fight some real guys he might get a shot.

Sooooooo...we're all gonna sit here and act like this never happened, right? No mention of this when talking about how "Manny fights the best"? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Has been out over 2 years hurt. I will answer the question when you justify what I asked you to justify. Don't worry your silence speaks volumes. The fact that you are even scared to answer says it all. And you call yourself a boxing fan. Do you want to see Joshua fight Wilder this year?

Been the belt holder longer, unified belts, unbeaten and has faced better opposition. So do you want to see Crawford vs Spence this year or not? Has been out over 2 years hurt. I will answer the question when you justify what I asked you to justify.

Thurman isn’t the best in the division in any credible ranking. Manny isn’t top 4 in any credible ranking. There is no way anyone credible thinks the winner of manny and Thurman is the #1 ww. Ym Been the belt holder longer, unified belts, unbeaten and has faced better opposition. So do you want to see Crawford vs Spence this year or not?

Because he is done from this equation. And yes Crawford should not be fighting the best in the division which is Thurman, and will be the winner of Thurman vs Pacquiao. He should be fighting Spence just another title holder. Again, Do you want to see Spence fight Crawford this year? Simple question yet for some reason you don't want to answer it. Thurman isn’t the best in the division in any credible ranking. Manny isn’t top 4 in any credible ranking. There is no way anyone credible thinks the winner of manny and Thurman is the #1 ww. You don’t want Crawford/ Spence next based on your saying Crawford hasn’t fought anyone. Yet are arguing it should be next for some weird reason. I will answer the question when you justify why you want someone that hasn’t fought anyone to get a shot at the #1 ww ahead of guys you feel are more deserving because they fought someone at ww.

I agree to a certain extent when it comes to Crawford. Spence on the other hand called out these dudes and they aint wanna fight. U see how Porter tried to fight Thurman instead of Spence lol. But Crawford over on TopRank island and Garcia already turned him down. U cant just say "they need to fight" and disregard the blantant shyt stopping that from happening. Aka boxing politics/business

So what if he lost to Thurman in the past. We are talking now. If Crawford according to you hasn’t beaten anyone, then he shouldn’t be fighting the top ww next . The fight should go to the guys that have beaten someone. Yet you contradict yourself by calling for the fight and arguing with anyone that doesn’t agree with you. You have to explain why you are calling for a Spence/ Crawford fight next when you think porter, Thurman ad manny all have a better case and are more deserving of the fight next since they beat someone of substance while Crawford has not. You are not making sense with your argument. Because he is done from this equation. And yes Crawford should not be fighting the best in the division which is Thurman, and will be the winner of Thurman vs Pacquiao. He should be fighting Spence just another title holder. Again, Do you want to see Spence fight Crawford this year? Simple question yet for some reason you don't want to answer it.

He has also lost to Thurman and only has a paper title. Do you want Crawford to fight Spence this year? Just for the record. So what if he lost to Thurman in the past. We are talking now. If Crawford according to you hasn’t beaten anyone, then he shouldn’t be fighting the top ww next . The fight should go to the guys that have beaten someone. Yet you contradict yourself by calling for the fight and arguing with anyone that doesn’t agree with you. You have to explain why you are calling for a Spence/ Crawford fight next when you think porter, Thurman ad manny all have a better case and are more deserving of the fight next since they beat someone of substance while Crawford has not. You are not making sense with your argument.

Again has nothing to do with that. If Crawford has beat no one of note as you said then he should earn a shot at the #1 ww by beating the winner of Thurman/manny. You are being gay as usual. On the one hand you claim Crawford has fought no one. On the other you say he should get the #1 ww next despite that fact. In no other weight class would you argue for a fight between the top guy and someone you claimed “beat no one”. You should want Spence to fight porter next because in your opinion he, unlike Crawford , has beat someone. He has also lost to Thurman and only has a paper title. Do you want Crawford to fight Spence this year? Just for the record.

Porter has already been beat, picked up Thurman's vacant title after Thruman has already beat him. Spence needs to fight Crawford instead of Thruman's leftovers. Then the winner can fight the Pacquiao Thurman winner. Crawford has beat nobody of note at welter. And Spence only got Brook on his record. Amazing that you don't want Spence to fight Crawford. Again has nothing to do with that. If Crawford has beat no one of note as you said then he should earn a shot at the #1 ww by beating the winner of Thurman/manny. You are being gay as usual. On the one hand you claim Crawford has fought no one. On the other you say he should get the #1 ww next despite that fact. In no other weight class would you argue for a fight between the top guy and someone you claimed “beat no one”. You should want Spence to fight porter next because in your opinion he, unlike Crawford , has beat someone.