Jermain Taylors opponents for the last 4 years.
Collapse
-
froch???froch wont get another point..........he wouldve had 0 if he didnt get a gift........and even in a rematch, if jermain's not shot(which he probably is) he would beat his ass.......remember people were saying pavlik was gonna end jt's career in an immediate rematch......and pavlik barely scaped with a d....(u need a knockdown kelly!!!)....abraham?now that would be scary.Comment
-
-
I have to disagree with that.Dominicano and Bringer are good posters and I consider them friends, but now is the time to keep it real.
Bernard Hopkins didn't ruin Jermain Taylor as a fighter, if anything it gave him the experience to at least compete with the top level of opposition he fought for the next four years.
Defending your Middleweight crown against the likes of Wright, Ouma, and Spinks is pretty damn ******ed, to me.
I always find it funny that the same people who **** on Bernard for fighting "smaller men", never say anything about Taylor's impressive "reign" at 160.
I mean, yeah, Bernard had Tito and Oscar @ 160. But at least he beat the **** out of every other viable contender in his own division, first.
Comment
-
Co-sign. That's the very thing I brought up on this thread earlier on page four. Jermaine Taylor was forced to raise the quality of opposition, because the fans and the media got onto his case. And once he lost those fights to Pavlik, Dibella took him out of the protection bubble because the 0 was gone.I have to disagree with that.
Defending your Middleweight crown against the likes of Wright, Ouma, and Spinks is pretty damn ******ed, to me.
I always find it funny that the same people who **** on Bernard for fighting "smaller men", never say anything about Taylor's impressive "reign" at 160.
I mean, yeah, Bernard had Tito and Oscar @ 160. But at least he beat the **** out of every other viable contender in his own division, first.
Comment
-
That's because nobody is measuring Jermain Taylor to the all time greatness of Bernard.I have to disagree with that.
Defending your Middleweight crown against the likes of Wright, Ouma, and Spinks is pretty damn ******ed, to me.
I always find it funny that the same people who **** on Bernard for fighting "smaller men", never say anything about Taylor's impressive "reign" at 160.
I mean, yeah, Bernard had Tito and Oscar @ 160. But at least he beat the **** out of every other viable contender in his own division, first.
When you want to talk about one of the "ATG's" then Bernard is going to be more scutinized, as he should... nobody is talking about Jermain as an ATG. Just someone who didn't duck or dodge anybody, regardless if he had what it took to win.
Bernard is a better fighter, and has a better legacy than Jermain, he has a case to be made for top 50 or under, of all time. His legacy is going to be more closely scrutinized because of the other top 50 ATGs he is often compared too.Comment
-
and the tasteless hop huggers should get the **** out this thread..........that includes you, michael
hopkins didnt ruin ****.......it was the ****** baseless criticism for "gifts"(that even hopkins hugger warp knows the first fight couldnt be scored better than a draw for clinchman hopkins) on the hopkins fights that started a little bit of a downfall in taylor though...Comment
-
LOL at people saying Hopkins ruined Taylor.
The only way Hopkins might have ruined Taylor is by getting him in the mindset that the guys he is gonna be fighting aren't gonna throw more than 10 punches a round and that therefore he doesn't need to train too hard for his fights.
LOL, ruined him. Standing in front of a guy and throwing fakes and the odd single shot ruins a guy? Haha.Comment

Comment