Crawfish is just an opportunist cherry picker

[billeau2]

Crawford is 14-0 with 11 KOs against fighters ranked in the top 10 by the TBRB and/or The Ring. 8-0 vs the top 5, 6-0 vs the top 3.

You keep using rankings, which are relative standards... When Hank Armstrong got titles... and call them what you want... he beat ATG fighters in each weight class f-i-g-h-t-e-r-s not f-i-g-h-t-e-r... That may be an extreme example, but it illustrates the big difference here in quality. ATG is a designation that fight pundits derive, so it has objective qualities.

Crawford is obviously talented, but it is fair to ask what quality opponents he beat to attain his status. And one more thing: I wouldn't pick on Crawford for the Spence fight alone... If Dan's comments were strictly about one fight, I don't believe in that... the fact is when we look at all his work and start to compare him to fighters like Floyd, who fought guys like Judah and Cotto, one should have some skeptacism.

[dan_cov]

I am dead serious I think its you lot all trolling acting like the guy was perfectly fine.

Car crash
Blacked out twice in his last two fights mid-fight...Yeah he won vs two slow as **** guys with slab feet that throw 12 punches a round and a lot has happened since.
16 months inactivity.
The weight/not having to make it in so long.
Look at his training footage - Stiff as a board, slow, can't move laterally.
Walked to the ring with his face all puffy and his eyes all over the place looking like he'd just been hitting a bong hard in his dressing room.
His speech is awful - Can claim dentures, dentures don't make you forget what you was talking about.

Then the fight itself. No balance, couldn't follow basic instructions, was going down continually and couldn't take any sort of shot.

How much more proof or evidence do we need to just admit that this guy was far from his best and in fact in no fit state to fight let alone against an elite fighter.

I can not believe people are this desperate to give him credit that they're totally turning a blind eye to it all.

[IronDanHamza]

People said this about Crawford prior to Spence.
Resumes don't win fights.

But he has stopped Lipinets who was top 10 and Villa top 5 and that is enough to be Crawfords mandatory.

Lipenets wasn’t Top 10 and Villa wasn’t Top 5.

He’s beaten no one. One ranked fighter (Villa) we have absolutely no idea if he’s even good at all.

Crawford is 3 weight Lineal Champion.

It’s chalk and cheese.

[billeau2]

For the record I do think he's an excellent fighter, a top p4p even.
But I am not buying these opponents are still close to being at the top of their game when he has fought them.

There is always something with this guy that stops him from fighting the best fighters at their best.
He'd probably beat them anyway but its like he has to wait until he is absolutely certain they carry no risk.

Its also a terrible look for Tank if this fight happens also because of the whole catchweight bs he had for Garcia now suddenly he can fight at Welter. Why drain Garcia then?

Its not just with "this guy" it tends to be a an outgrowth of several factors and I do not blame Crawford... The emphasis on the goose egg, as though it is a sign of greatness on its very own. The role promoters have taken in destroying big fights by marinating them (so to speak) and I would add... how de****able the judging in the sport has been and which is possibly getting worse, not better.

When the Ref was a judge I think it inspired fighters... Refs see things very clearly.

[dan_cov]

Lipenets wasn’t Top 10 and Villa wasn’t Top 5.

He’s beaten no one. One ranked fighter (Villa) we have absolutely no idea if he’s even good at all.

Crawford is 3 weight Lineal Champion.

It’s chalk and cheese.

Lipinets was #9 by Ring, #7 with the WBO, #9 with the IBF #3 with the WBA
Villa #7 with Ring magazine

Oh Crawfords a million times more accomplished, no denying that.

[famicommander]

You keep using rankings, which are relative standards... When Hank Armstrong got titles... and call them what you want... he beat ATG fighters in each weight class f-i-g-h-t-e-r-s not f-i-g-h-t-e-r... That may be an extreme example, but it illustrates the big difference here in quality. ATG is a designation that fight pundits derive, so it has objective qualities.

Crawford is obviously talented, but it is fair to ask what quality opponents he beat to attain his status. And one more thing: I wouldn't pick on Crawford for the Spence fight alone... If Dan's comments were strictly about one fight, I don't believe in that... the fact is when we look at all his work and start to compare him to fighters like Floyd, who fought guys like Judah and Cotto, one should have some skeptacism.

Either that, or you're a casual hater clown.

That's what I'm going with.

[billeau2]

Either that, or you're a casual hater clown.

That's what I'm going with.

idiots do not respect a difference of opinion and that makes you an idiot. Are you threatened by an alternative POV so much so that you make shiat up? Where have I ever said I so much as "disliked" Crawford you idiot. If I ever chose to "hate on" a fighter, much less call them a bum, there is no indication Crawford would be on that list... I will even give you an example, when making predictions about the upcoming fight between Crawford and Spence my prediction was as follows: "My heart says Crawford, my head says Spence." Does that sound like a hater?

Grow up... One can disagree, entertain other POV than your own. You made your point and I made mine, why does someone have to be the bad guy? Be an adult and stop acting like an idiot.

[famicommander]

idiots do not respect a difference of opinion and that makes you an idiot. Are you threatened by an alternative POV so much so that you make shiat up? Where have I ever said I so much as "disliked" Crawford you idiot. If I ever chose to "hate on" a fighter, much less call them a bum, there is no indication Crawford would be on that list... I will even give you an example, when making predictions about the upcoming fight between Crawford and Spence my prediction was as follows: "My heart says Crawford, my head says Spence." Does that sound like a hater?

Grow up... One can disagree, entertain other POV than your own. You made your point and I made mine, why does someone have to be the bad guy? Be an adult and stop acting like an idiot.

You dismiss rankings when they don't suit your argument. Your level of engagement on this topic is sop****ric at best and my responses reflect the amount of effort warranted.

[billeau2]

You dismiss rankings when they don't suit your argument. Your level of engagement on this topic is sop****ric at best and my responses reflect the amount of effort warranted.

You missed my point about rankings, I never dismissed them I simply said they were relative based on the fighters fighting at that time... that happens to be a fact. There can be great variation between obtaining titles, ranks, belts based on your cohorts. I even gave you multiple examples! But you were to intent on seeing the differences between ranks and making the ridiculous assertion that ranks are the same meaning that there cannot be any variation between an undisputed who fought ATG competition and the same attainement of rank fighting lesser competitors.

Your response reflects ignorance. You don't even see the point because you have your hammer and everything therefore has to be a nail. It matters whom you beat to attain your undisputed status or otherwise that happens to be a fact. That is not dismissing anything.