It needs to be said again it seems

[Syf]

why on earth would this need to be said again??

lol.


Both sides have their respective views, and that ain't gonna change

[odogg8121]

Floyd knows his cherrypicking days are over, I think he will surprise people in the future with some of his opponents. Shane is a good start, but if he ever fights Matthew Hatton then it really is game over.

im a big PBF fan if he fight Hatton b4 SSM or another good WW the **** EM

[TommyGunn']

never tried to fight spinks Zab had spinks lined up already...keep tryin dude im waitin

Oh and PS click the link in my sig and see how ur guy really feels lmao

Stop embarrassing yourself kid, Zab and Spinks had already fought twice the year before. No need to lie to try and make your hero seem credible. He was supposed to face Spinks untill it fell through for Spinks IBF 154 title.

http://floyd-mayweather-news.newslib.com/story/4925-3153085/

http://floyd-mayweather-news.newslib.com/story/4925-3153073/

[jpunieves]

im a big PBF fan if he fight Hatton b4 SSM or another good WW the **** EM

damn... tsk tsk...

[odogg8121]

what these floyd fans dont to seem to understand is that this hand was forced unto him. if it wasn't for pac fighting the best floyd would still be fighting the mathew hattons paulie malignaggi's of this world. they should actually thank pac for saving his legacy.

LMAO but there could be some truth to it...coming from a PBF fan

[Nota Loka PR]

You're right, it hasnt been said enough. You should make another thread.

[TommyGunn']

You're right, it hasnt been said enough. You should make another thread.

It'll sink in eventualy.

[odogg8121]

on somebody's lap... 50 cent?

Bout to sign to fight SSM something PAc wudnt do at 140

[BLooDCalibuR]

It wouldnt have mattered how many days they said, Mayweather still wouldnt have fought Manny. History proves me right.

You found an angle to where you could duck directly arguing his point and chose to beat around the bush instead.

By stating it wouldn't have mattered how many days they said is:

1- Biasedly and blindly ignoring the fact that Pacquiao disagreed to the 14 day cutoff despite Freddie Roach was on record stating all he needed was 3-5 days. Regardless of what you want to GUESS of what would've happened after he would've agreed to that is null, because it wasn't agreed to. The one who laid the "No" is Pacquiao.

2- A coward's way of copping out of directly arguing a point because you can't. Not only that, but you're aware you can't, but despite that active awareness you choose not to man up and admit it was at least a good point regardless of what you may believe Mayweather's intention was, because you care about how you look on the internet. You care, despite being behind an anonymous standpoint. Which makes it sadder to be a pacard really.

P.S.
I don't expect a logical rebuttal to this either.
And I'll just go right ahead and counter your next post to this to save you time so that you can move on to the next dumb response:

You: "Yeah you're right, I'm not gonna reply to that because you said you don't expect one anyway."
Me: "That's what I thought."

Next.

[odogg8121]

damn... tsk tsk...

naw not tsk tsk, I know fightin Hatton in England wud be big for Hatton and PBF but it does nothing for boxing and i will not buy ppv for that fight if he dont fight SSM or another good ww first, im sorry I know Pac ducked true but I thk PBF cuda won regardless so there is bad **** form both camps to b honest...im just keeping it real