Who had the better career at Welterweight: Pacquiao or Crawford?

[djtmal]

Stop it. That is ridiculous. He was not prime for any of the 3 guys I listed.

Crawford has a decent resume at ww but he needs more scalps could he even crack top 20 all time with that list

Needs Ennis and some more scalps to get on Manny's level thats all

[The Big Dunn]

Crawford has a decent resume at ww but he needs more scalps could he even crack top 20 all time with that list

Needs Ennis and some more scalps to get on Manny's level thats all

Naw. His resume is fine given context xt when compared to Manny’s in context.

[djtmal]

Naw. His resume is fine given context xt when compared to Manny’s in context.

Well of course you think so Manny hater but fortunately in this poll you are a gross minority

Sugar Ray Leonard looked at Crawford's weak resume one time and went back to sipping on his mint julep

[QueensburyRules]

Naw. His resume is fine given context xt when compared to Manny’s in context.

- - Manny fought, beat, and KOed more Ring P4Pers in history with nobody even close, but of course since U don't really follow boxing as much as salivate over your favs, boxing history is like the Twilight Zone for U.

[The Big Dunn]

Well of course you think so Manny hater but fortunately in this poll you are a gross minority

Sugar Ray Leonard looked at Crawford's weak resume one time and went back to sipping on his mint julep

I don’t mind being in the minority on this because, as the posts show, there was little analysis done by those that voted.

I asked the TS about losses because he didn’t factor them in. I think that makes his analysis incomplete at best and problematic at worse. I think that is a very fair and reasonable question given a resume is who you fought, did you win or lose, and the context of the fight.

If all we’re doing is asking who has the better name value on their resume, it is Manny clearly, no question.

That is what people seem to be answering even though it wasn’t the question asked.

[djtmal]

I don’t mind being in the minority on this because, as the posts show, there was little analysis done by those that voted.

It was nothing to discuss or analyze really.

[The Big Dunn]

- - Manny fought, beat, and KOed more Ring P4Pers in history with nobody even close, but of course since U don't really follow boxing as much as salivate over your favs, boxing history is like the Twilight Zone for U.

Sorry but I watch far more boxing than you and have likely been a fan far longer.

The question is about his we resume, not his whole resume. Learn how to read and comprehend English.

You as a poster often criticize resumes based on the context of the opponent. Yet here you are not because it is Manny.

That is very biased and ignorant.

[djtmal]

I asked the TS about losses because he didn’t factor them in. I think that makes his analysis incomplete at best and problematic at worse. I think that is a very fair and reasonable question given a resume is who you fought, did you win or lose, and the context of the fight.

Only you would factor in a guy you hate losses when he is past his prime, and what's worse, not care that Crawford hasn't even had a post prime career.

Manny had damn near 3 careers. Crawford ready to cash out after 1 decent win over a name fighter.

He better squeeze back down to ww and make that Ennis fight. Add some more meat to that undernourished resume

[The Big Dunn]

It was nothing to discuss or analyze really.

Huh. It’s a discussion thread so of course it is something to discuss.

Losses are a vital part of a resume. Otherwise, this makes his analysis incomplete at best and problematic at worse. I think that is a very fair and reasonable question given a resume is who you fought, did you win or lose, and the context of the fight.

If all we’re doing is asking who has the better name value on their resume, it is Manny clearly, no question.

That is what people seem to be answering even though it wasn’t the question asked.

[The Big Dunn]

Only you would factor in a guy you hate losses when he is past his prime, and what's worse, not care that Crawford hasn't even had a post prime career.

I am only counting the ww losses, other than Ugas, because the question is about his ww resume bs another ww’s resume.

If Crawford had losses at ww I would factor them in.

Crawford had had a post prime career. You just will not admit it because you want past prime wins to count more to give Manny an edge.

Admitting Crawford was out of his prime gives him an edge because Porter and Spence are better wins than post prime Manny has.

The thread is only about his ww resume. Stay on topic.

He needs not to do that. He unified all 4 belts at ww. Manny failed to do so.