Jesse Rodriguez has one of the best resumes in the business.

[Combat Talk Radio]

You're listing Spence's accolades and discrediting Crawford who easily dismantled him in the same post.

What will you say if Spence has a great performance in the future against quality opponents at 154?

Nowhere did I discredit, I asked a question. You answered it while ducking it.

You don’t care about the guy that did the work. You care about the opportunist.

I care about who put the work in. That’s Spence, of the two of them. Because Spence took multiple risks to get up there.

[Spray_resistant]

Nowhere did I discredit, I asked a question. You answered it while ducking it.

You don’t care about the guy that did the work. You care about the opportunist.

I care about who put the work in. That’s Spence, of the two of them. Because Spence took multiple risks to get up there.

So if Canelo loses to Benavidez after collecting the belts, its somehow more of a credit to Canelo than Benavidez?

It really doesn't matter how someone got to the spot as undisputed champion in the case of Spence and Crawford, Spence had some really good wins then he was soundly beaten with little trouble by Crawford so I don't see what the problem is here.

[daggum]

So if Canelo loses to Benavidez after collecting the belts, its somehow more of a credit to Canelo than Benavidez?

It really doesn't matter how someone got to the spot as undisputed champion in the case of Spence and Crawford, Spence had some really good wins then he was soundly beaten with little trouble by Crawford so I don't see what the problem is here.

canelo's belt collecting at 168 has to be the most pathetic thing ever. callum smith coming off a robbery win over ryder, bille joe who won a belt over some random unranked nobody and plant who is pretty good but benavidez easily beat as well.

[JakeTheBoxer]

Nowhere did I discredit, I asked a question. You answered it while ducking it.

You don’t care about the guy that did the work. You care about the opportunist.

I care about who put the work in. That’s Spence, of the two of them. Because Spence took multiple risks to get up there.

At the end of the day Crawford beat the sh.it out of Spence. That is all that counts for me.

[JakeTheBoxer]

These midgets usually have better resumes than the bigger men because there's no money in them fighting nobodies. They have to fight each other and unify if they want to get paid.

Which is good. I want the best fighters fighting the best. I don`t care how much are they paid. I watch boxing, I am not financial advisor.

[Combat Talk Radio]

So if Canelo loses to Benavidez after collecting the belts, its somehow more of a credit to Canelo than Benavidez?

It really doesn't matter how someone got to the spot as undisputed champion in the case of Spence and Crawford, Spence had some really good wins then he was soundly beaten with little trouble by Crawford so I don't see what the problem is here.

Canelo beat the holders. He took the risks. Which is why I have him at least #2 or 3.

We can say whatever after the fact about how much risk, don’t change the facts.

[Combat Talk Radio]

At the end of the day Crawford beat the sh.it out of Spence. That is all that counts for me.

It’s fine to celebrate that ONE signature win.

Nobody celebrated Manny after getting one win. Let’s be consistent

[Spray_resistant]

canelo's belt collecting at 168 has to be the most pathetic thing ever. callum smith coming off a robbery win over ryder, bille joe who won a belt over some random unranked nobody and plant who is pretty good but benavidez easily beat as well.

It wasn't a great body of wins but its not the point I was trying to make. He did collect them regardless of how he did it and that doesn't matter if he gets beaten by Benny if he fights him at all.

[ShoulderRoll]

More evidence you know nothing about these weight classes. Even to make that comment says you didn't follow them, and don't know what those fighters were doing at the time. Then to make a hypocritical comment like "put those numbers in context??" Are you really that ******? Look at what those fighters were doing then. THAT'S context, you fool. There's a reason they were all ranked in the top 5 by every credible third party organization, and that's the CONTEXT. FOH.

The fact that Narvaez was still #1 at almost 40 years old tells you how poor the depth in that weight class was. There’s no way around it.

It’s cool to beat the best guys in the division, but it’s not unfair to ask how that division compares to others.

[famicommander]

It’s fine to celebrate that ONE signature win.

Nobody celebrated Manny after getting one win. Let’s be consistent

Crawford's wins over Ricky Burns, Ray Beltran, Yuriorkis Gamboa, and Viktor Postol were fantastic wins at the time. To pretend otherwise is revisionist fanboy nonsense. His resume at welterweight is padded by some faded names like Khan and Brook, plus Horn who probably didn't deserve to get the W over Pac in the first place, but the Porter and Spence wins were both great wins.