Lists like this are so subjective they are almost meaningless. How do you really judge who was the best? Overall record, titles won, quality of opponents, exciting fights, skills, etc. All of these factors have to come into play so coming up with an objective list it is really an impossible task.
Having said that it is not a terrible list in my opinion, although I would definitely change the order it is in. But then again there is the problem, what makes me right and them wrong? It is all too subjective.
But I guess the goal of this for ESPN was to simply spur debate, which is what we are doing.
Having said that it is not a terrible list in my opinion, although I would definitely change the order it is in. But then again there is the problem, what makes me right and them wrong? It is all too subjective.
But I guess the goal of this for ESPN was to simply spur debate, which is what we are doing.
Comment