Because Erik was well past his prime for the 2nd and 3rd. It would have been great to see that trilogy when Erik was peak, as Pac was.
But Pac couldn't (and SHOULDN'T) have to fight trilogies or multi-fights with Barrera, Marquez, AND Erik all in their primes. That is too much to ask of anyone.
Pacquiao wasn't in his prime either... I'd say he was still green. Consider how much he has improved since then.
Originally posted by MOREBASS
How convinient that he was only 'past his prime' for the 2nd & 3rd fight, the ones he lost.
Just because someone loses, doesn't automatically mean they are 'well past prime'
You guys on here do way too much with the 'past prime' stuff. The fighters themselves have less excuses than some of you.
Besides, I would argue that Pacquiao was nowhere near his peak when he fought El Terrible.
How convenient that Morales didn't win a fight after the first Pacquiao fight too, but obviously he was completely prime. That's why he retired soon after. A prime Morales losing a bunch and then retiring... that makes sense.
You Pacquaio fans are just out of control when it comes to your fighter. For ****'s sake.
The better argument you should go for is that Pacquiao has improved about a trillion times since those fights, and the Pacquiao of right now would beat a prime Morales... I'm a Morales fan, and I agree with that.
Comment