Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Manny Pacquiao: true champion? or just a belt winner?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    Originally posted by Ch@mpBox@PR View Post
    Vacant or not it means ****. Its the opposition you face for the belt. Lets say Quintana was the WBA champ because in the Julio fight he wont it vacantly when Cotto steam rolled him, what difference whould have made?
    Let's just put it this way. Cotto is going to be one of Pacquiao's toughest challenges. I'm not dis*****g that. But the belt that Cotto has around his waist is even more watered down than the belt that David Diaz had around his waist. At least Santa Cruz was a top ten Lightweight when Diaz KOd him and Santa Cruz beat Casamayor who was the linear champ in a lot of people's opinions. Michael Jennings was not even ranked in the top 50 at 147 for fuck's sake.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by Ch@mpBox@PR View Post
      Fools dont understand sarcasm!!!

      Cotto is a belt holder too, idiot!!!1
      it's hard to know when dumb people are trying to be a smart ass.

      i apologize.




      and NEW welterweight title holder of the world..........Manny Pacman Pacquiao!!!!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by Iceta View Post
        Let's just put it this way. Cotto is going to be one of Pacquiao's toughest challenges. I'm not dis*****g that. But the belt that Cotto has around his waist is even more watered down than the belt that David Diaz had around his waist. At least Santa Cruz was a top ten Lightweight when Diaz KOd him and Santa Cruz beat Casamayor who was the linear champ in a lot of people's opinions. Michael Jennings was not even ranked in the top 50 at 147 for fuck's sake.
        Jennings actually turned down a title fight against Paul Williams when he first became the #1 contender .

        Comment


        • #84
          Originally posted by Iceta View Post
          Let's just put it this way. Cotto is going to be one of Pacquiao's toughest challenges. I'm not dis*****g that. But the belt that Cotto has around his waist is even more watered down than the belt that David Diaz had around his waist. At least Santa Cruz was a top ten Lightweight when Diaz KOd him and Santa Cruz beat Casamayor who was the linear champ in a lot of people's opinions. Michael Jennings was not even ranked in the top 50 at 147 for fuck's sake.
          And who is dis*****g that?

          Comment


          • #85
            Originally posted by IMDAZED View Post
            Eww?


            He fought David Diaz at 135. What people are trying to say is that if he was going to make a pit stop at 135, Guzman/Campbell would've been a more recognizable name and win. Bringing up what occured at 140 and above is irrelevant, Mr. Eww.


            The real question is...why are YOU lying? What you said was:

            1. "I've always stated that the only way to beat Joe Calzaghe is to KO him."

            2. "No one under cruiser can KO Joe Calzaghe"

            So what does that mean?

            I think I'd watch who you were calling a liar - your post isn't so hard to find. Just stand by it; it's not like we don't know you're a Joe d*ckrider.
            And it's not like we don't know you're a Joe hater. So what the ****. Now we're even.

            But yes, I still stand by what I said before... because it means exactly the same ****ing thing!

            "I don't see any SMW or light heavy keeping Calzaghe on the canvas" or "no one under cruiser KO's Calzaghe."

            It's the same thing, isn't it?

            I think you should quit with this **** to be honest, it's not cool to thread-****. Dan made some good points and you're talking garbage about Joe Calzaghe instead and trying to make me out to be an idiot. Grow up man, it's not worth the time.



            100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by IMDAZED View Post
              Jennings actually turned down a title fight against Paul Williams when he first became the #1 contender .
              Did he? I didn't know that. I just thought that HBO kicked the fight to the curb like they did when Cotto fought him. This was after HBO didn't want to put up the cash for the Clottey-Williams fight. And yet Williams gets accused for ducking this guy. But I am not going to go into that. The focus on this thread is Cotto and Pac.

              Comment


              • #87
                Originally posted by joartcc5 View Post
                Lineal titles shuts u up like the gayweather coward-lover that u are.

                What u have are excuses.
                You shut the fuck up. I recommend the banning of this guy......lol

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by aether View Post
                  pac's performance in the Hatton and Oscar fight i think is making some people discredit his legacy. it is as if he beat them so bad, people refuses to give him the credit he deserves.

                  unlike most people here, i give pacquiao all the credit in the world for beating that version of Oscar. it was determined that the weight maybe a factor in that fight, but he was still supposed to ko li'l pac.

                  i think the weight thing is blown way out of proportions. people make it seems like the only reason oscar lost was because he was weight drained, in which i disagree. it was because pacquiao trained his ass off, and his camp came up with a great game plan. de la hoya showing up the way he did just made it easier. he made a "money fight" a "legacy fight".

                  pac was the favorite over ricky, but he wasn't supposed to ko him in 2 rounds. now, people are saying that hatton was exposed and has always been overrated. i'd rather think pacquiao has beaten a guy who never lost at 140, who was the linear champion, in the way no one expected.

                  that is why im picking him over cotto. im done doubting the little guy. he always performs in a way more impressive than what is expected of him. if he lost, it won't surprise me at all. it would never take away his previous accomplishments anyways.

                  all this nitpicking on his legacy is a waste of time. its just an opportunity for some of his critics to discredit pac as a great fighter.
                  nice post!!!

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by Iceta View Post
                    Did he? I didn't know that. I just thought that HBO kicked the fight to the curb like they did when Cotto fought him. This was after HBO didn't want to put up the cash for the Clottey-Williams fight. And yet Williams gets accused for ducking this guy. But I am not going to go into that. The focus on this thread is Cotto and Pac.
                    No its not. Its only Pacquiao, but you want to make it about Cotto

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by aether View Post
                      unlike most people here, i give pacquiao all the credit in the world for beating that version of Oscar. it was determined that the weight maybe a factor in that fight, but he was still supposed to ko li'l pac.
                      Yeah, exactly. The reason why he should be given credit is because he actually had the balls to take that fight. Oscar ****ed up. That's not Manny's problem and he should not be criticized for turning up and doing his job.



                      100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP