Comments Thread For: Crawford Reacts To Canelo's Criticism About Lackluster Resume: 'Y'all so Delusional It's Crazy'

[TheWinners]

No delusions just facts. Everyone can't be delusional.

[TheWinners]

Look at the end of the day Crawfords resume is not that good and it's his own fault no one else's. When his first contract with top rank was up he decided to stick with Bob knowing top rank didn't have anything for him at WW it's the same song different fighter just like Pacquiao.

Also miss me with the PBC don't make fights argument as soon as Crawford signed a deal with PBC what happened he got Spence. It's his fault that he didn't get Danny Garcia when Garcia was undefeated, it's his fault he didn't get Shawn Porter when he was undefeated and he could have got Thurman also when he was one time and not once upon a Time. He could have also got Spence before the crash and squashed all this debate about the car crash and messed up eye crap.

At the end of the day it's his own fault for the decision he and his team have made. Now he's still looked at as as a great fighter with no real dance partner due to not making the right decisions.

Just imagine would we be having this conversation if Crawford moved up to 147 and took on Danny Garcia Shawn Porter Keith Thurman, Brook and Spence (not in the order) the answer is hell no...

that's how you shut the haters up and force them to give you, your props... or else what you have is well he beat Spence but he was in a car accident and his eye and well Spence stayed at 147 too long and (insert what ever excuse I missed).

To the Crawford fans that say oh there's always going to be excuses well again it's Crawfords fault for letting these excuses come up. In my scenario where he fought the top guys if he would have left top rank (which was a near 100% scenario if he signed with PBC) there would have been no definitive and legitimate way to make any viable excuse.

When people are bias they're too ****** to recognize those simple facts. These are very simple facts but if they're ignored its due to bias and ******ity. He has no one but himself to blame. Even still I think he did alright for himself.

[Jab jab boom]

The level of delusion is out of this world. Bud's resume is trash compared to Canelo's and the worst I've ever seen for a P4P #1.

I notice you conveniently edited out the rest of my comment which makes my point. The level of sensitivity from you canelo boys is out of this world.

[Jab jab boom]

Trying to knock Canelo's wins over future HOF'ers who were still reigning champs only makes Crawford look all the worse because other than Spence, the most notable guys on his resume were never-will-be-HOF ex champs who were years past winning a title fight. You even knock undisputed champ Charlo but expect people to be impressed by Crawford fighting a gatekeeper or damaged ex champ as his only fight of the year. Crawford's just never shown his ambition. Canelo was champ by age 20, unified and Ring champ by age 22 and continues lining up champs after doing it all. Bud didn't challenge for his first title until he was nearly 27 and mailed it in throughout most of his 30s fighting once a year before finally having an anticipated fight when he was pushing 36 without having faced a champ in the five years previous to that.

I didn’t say those wins were bad wins but would you say those wins were against those guys at their best? Yes or no? Spoiler, the answer is no and it’s not even close. Especially in the cases of Cotto, Mosley and Kovalev. I’m pointing out Canelo’s hypocrisy of how he also wants credit for his undisputed run and all of those guys had significantly worse resumes than Crawford’s which he’s choosing to criticize. Plus, canelo still doesn’t have a win more impressive than Crawford beating Spence.

[SplitSecond]

Canelo wants everyone to rave about his undisputed status but nobody that he beat to become undisputed at 168 had any elite wins. He wants people to rave about him fighting another undisputed champion two weight classes below him, but charlo hasn’t had any elite wins either. Canelo is hanging onto a shady/controversial win over a 36 yr old ggg , a competitive 12 round win over a 35 yr old smaller Cotto, a decision over 40 yr old Mosley and a late stoppage over a 36 yr old Kovalev that was 3-3 with 2 ko losses in his last 6 on 10 weeks rest. That’s all that really separates his resume, the name value of the old men he fought while he was in his 20’s. Otherwise his resume isn’t much better than Crawford’s so his criticism is lame and wreaks of insecurity.

A whole lot of nothing just to end up admitting Canelo has a better resume anyway. Those aren’t the only victories that put Canelo over Crawford neither. Canelo’s resume is far superior to Crawfords.

[Jab jab boom]

A whole lot of nothing just to end up admitting Canelo has a better resume anyway. Those aren’t the only victories that put Canelo over Crawford neither. Canelo’s resume is far superior to Crawfords.

Those are the only victories that separate him resume wise. Canelo has had a more entitled career and it’s benefitted him. Crawford is still the overall better boxer and always has been.

[TheWinners]

Those are the only victories that separate him resume wise. Canelo has had a more entitled career and it’s benefitted him. Crawford is still the overall better boxer and always has been.

You must be some noob or bias. Probably a black vs Mexican vs white thing. Only this new breed brainless boxing bunch would believe Crawford took bigger risk than Canelo. Other than Spence you can't even compare anyone to Austin Trout when he was undefeated that Crawford has on his resume. This is just pure fu$$kery.

[Jab jab boom]

You must be some noob or bias. Probably a black vs Mexican vs white thing. Only this new breed brainless boxing bunch would believe Crawford took bigger risk than Canelo. Other than Spence you can't even compare anyone to Austin Trout when he was undefeated that Crawford has on his resume. This is just pure fu$$kery.

You must be on some canelo nut slobbing thing. I never said Crawford took more risks. I see reading isn’t a strong suit of yours. I clearly stated that Canelo has had more entitlement which means he’s able to get fights that others (like Crawford) weren’t able to get as easily. Austin the gate keeper trout? Lmaooo. I think it’s pretty clear what type of fighter trout was. What separates him from the undefeated Victor postol that Crawford beat? You think trout was more of a challenge than Porter? Trout had 1 significant win vs a lackluster Cotto and has been a stepping stone ever since. Calm your tetas cheerleader.

[Gary Coleman]

I notice you conveniently edited out the rest of my comment which makes my point. The level of sensitivity from you canelo boys is out of this world.

You're projecting. Crawford's resume is trash. No amount of backwards reasoning will change that.

[Jab jab boom]

You're projecting. Crawford's resume is trash. No amount of backwards reasoning will change that.

I didn’t defend Crawford’s resume. I mentioned Canelo’s hypocrisy as far as his stance on it. Sorry if that aggravated your v@gina.