I'm having trouble working this out...

[Fox McCloud]

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

[C'MONMANG']

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

Cotto's resume at 140 (understandably is better)

Cott's resume at 147 IMO is better then Floyds and getting even better.

Floyds resume isnt **** but....it isnt THAT good at WW.

[C'MONMANG']

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

Mosley was/is more active.. Dela is a part time fighter PERIOD.

Malignaggi was at his proper weight right now 140..

Hatton ALREADY proved against Collazo (who Mosley DOMINAted MOST IF THE FIGHT) that he didnt belong at 147..


WHATS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT?

[Fox McCloud]

Cotto's resume at 140 (understandably is better)

Cott's resume at 147 IMO is better then Floyds and getting even better.

Floyds resume isnt **** but....it isnt THAT good at WW.

And THAT makes a ton of sense to me.

Even though P4P lists aren't material or anything like that, people are talking about Cotto being too low and Floyd way too high, but honestly I don't see much between them.

I am completely okay with people thinking Cotto is the man at 147. I think the consensus is that he has the best resume at 147 and Floyd is just the lineal champion, much like Diaz and Casamayor were at 135.

[C'MONMANG']

And THAT makes a ton of sense to me.

Even though P4P lists aren't material or anything like that, people are talking about Cotto being too low and Floyd way too high, but honestly I don't see much between them.

I am completely okay with people thinking Cotto is the man at 147. I think the consensus is that he has the best resume at 147 and Floyd is just the lineal champion, much like Diaz and Casamayor were at 135.

cool.. im glad you agree young grass hopper.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

cause they base his resume on 140 and 147 and forget about the rest

[2501]

first of all, who are these people that say that? are they good posters? do they just constantly hate?

[C'MONMANG']

cause they base his resume on 140 and 147 and forget about the rest

lol..... great answer.

[Fox McCloud]

first of all, who are these people that say that? are they good posters? do they just constantly hate?

Mostly just ******s who think Ludacris is a good rapper.

I mean, the majority of them are probably pretty dumb and just hate, but there are some decent posters on here who think Floyd's resume is terrible, but never breathe a word about Cotto's.

I personally think both of their resumes are pretty good to be honest.

[C'MONMANG']

Mostly just ******s who think Ludacris is a good rapper.

I mean, the majority of them are probably pretty dumb and just hate, but there are some decent posters on here who think Floyd's resume is terrible, but never breathe a word about Cotto's.

I personally think both of their resumes are pretty good to be honest.

thanks to boxrec.