Should Floyd be stripped of his WW title/s?
Collapse
-
that dont mean nuthin. peeps can be fans. and if im a lil bias thats okay but not much ****. he actin like i stalk floyd and hide near his house waiting for him to come home from 24 hour fitness at 4 in the morning in vegas.Comment
-
It's funny that you call Floyd out for **** that you allow other fighters to do.
Hatton was actually ranked #1 by the WBC at 147 when he decided to move up, because *gasp* the WBC recognized that Hatton is a hell of a lot better than a green Andre Berto at this point in his career.
Also, Hatton won the IBF belt from Luis Collazo, which you apparantly think is a robbery, even though the majority of people agree Hatton won, even if he did look like **** in the last few rounds.Comment
-
Apparently you dont know the rules of Defending your title... Nowhere in the rules does it state you HAVE to defend your title against a fighter in the same weight class. If the commission feels that the fighter coming up in weight or down in weight, is worthy of your title shot, then you may freely and legally defend it. An undefeated 43-0 Ricky Hatton, who has already won a belt a Welterweight, is more than enough reasonable fighter to get a shot at Floyds belt. That was 6 Weeks ago.
If Ricky beat floyd, he would of taken Floyds belt. That is called "Defending". Oscar WILL be fighting for Floyds belt this time. That is called "Defending". Hating or Loving Floyd, has nothing to do with this topic.Comment
-
-
I don't care if Floyd doesn't fight for 2 years. Hes the best out there, thus should be world champion.Since beating Carlos Baldomir for the crown, Mayweather hasn’t defended his title/s against one single welterweight contender to date. Now he is scheduled to face Oscar in Sept. So, should he be allowed to hold on to his titles/belts as if they were superbowl rings, or should he be stripped due to the fact that he is refusing to defend them against his #1 contender, or any other WW for the matter? Vote!Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
Comment