~Floyd and Manny Pacquiao: FOTD Year by Year~

[cortdawg25]

you cant give floyd 2006, the fact that he fought judah before baldomir, and for the belt was already a big mismanage of his career by his handlers. Fighting baldomir was great but considering that margarito (who was percieved to be the best next to floyd in ww) was challenging
him already tells you he didnt fight the best. You can say that it was because of arum that the fight didnt push through but pac was involved in a major lawsuit against golden boy but he still found a way to fight jmm and mab in a rematch. Everything can be done through negotiations if the fighters really want to fight.

Bwaa awards are votes from different boxing scribes in the country so you cannot take that award for granted. Floyd won in 2007, you sayin' that award is a farce, cmon??

And before you criticize pac for fighting morales, you have to remember that a) pac lost the first fight, so he needed a rematch, b) morales was still a heavy favorite going to that fight, and c) morales lost was more of a style mismatch against raheem. You also have to add that morales was fighting at lw, which is not his best weight at that time. He looked bloated and out of shape.

so mismanagement is fighting both undisputed champs in consecutive fights. U got to be silly to really think that! And margarito was never perceived to be the next best fighter at ww. He done nothing at the time to prove or even suggest that. Let's make argument off of facts and the facts is that floyd beat both undisputed champs at 147 back to back. Pacman beat up a worn down morales and larios then morales again. It was shell of morales...look at his decline in the ring and losing streak!


I'm not saying the award is a farce but i am questioning it. It makes no logical sense to award pacquiao fighter of the decade. I can make a serious argument that mosley and hopkins are more deserving than pacquiao is of that award. It just doesn't add up or make any sense whatsoever.

Then u make my point to an extent....how is our fighter of the decade taking lumps to a morales after mab within the decade when other fighters had been way more dominating than him. It just don't add up and it makes the bwaa lose some credibility!

[cupocity303]

Lets have a different look at this, just mathematically:






Floyd's overall record from 2000-2010: 19-0

- Four WBC Super-Featherweight Title defenses - (4 defenses starting with first fight in the year 2000 and not including 1999)

- Three WBC Lightweight Title Defenses -

- Won the WBC Light-Welterweight - (0 defenses)

- Won the WBC Welterweight Title and made one defense -

- Won the WBC Light-Middleweight Title - (0 defenses)


Total Titles held/won from 2000-2010: 5


Total/Combined Title defenses 2000-2010: 8 (4 at 130lb, 3 at 135lb, 1 at 147lb)



VS


Manny Pacquiao's overall record from 2000-2010: 24-1-2 draws

- Three IBF Super-Bantamweight Title defenses -

- Won Linear & Ring Magazine Featherweight Title - (Vs Barrera)

- Won WBC Super-Featherweight Title - (0 defenses)

- Won WBC Lightweight Title - (0 defenses)

- Won Linear & Ring Magazine Light-Welterweight Title - (0 defenses)

- Won WBO Welterweight Title and made One defense -


Total Titles held/won from 2000-2010: 6

Total/Combined Title defenses 2000-2010: 4 (3 at 122lb, 1 at 147lb)



Head-to-Head Statistics

More titles won: PACQUIAO with 6

More total/combined title defenses: MAYWEATHER with 8

More fights won: PACQUIAO with 26 vs Floyd's 19

Less fights lost: MAYWEATHER with 0 Vs Manny's 1 wind & 1 draw











Conclusion: it's too close to call, each have strong points and weak points.

[Bee Keepz]

Mayweather = PEDestrian
Pacquaio = PEDs-like

Mayweather = UD's
Pacquiao = TKO's

Mayweather = FOTY once
Pacquiao = FOTY 3x

Mayweather = "Retired" from the best.
Pacquiao = "Retires" the best.

[P. Rick]

If I here another noob say Pac was ahead in 2006 because he beat Morales twice. Ima pull my hair out...lol.

He was shot fellas.

I'm a noob and I can tell you that Erik Morales in 06 was a better win than Carlos Baldomir and Zab Judah. Despiste being shot and his loss to Raheem, Morales was ranked ahead of both Zab Judah and Carlos Baldomir when he fought Manny Pacquiao than Zab and Baldo were when they fought Mayweather...

[Chups]

LOL@ Burner still crying about Mayweather's loss as FOTD.



Just look at the resume from 2000-2009 and you'll see. The only HOF Mayweather fought was Oscar and Marquez.


Pac has Barrerax2, Moralesx3, Oscar, Marquezx2.

Not even comparable.

[OpaiSoma]

Let it go

Pac has a better opposition, just let it go....

[chinoy]

im 100000% sure that both BWAA and The Ring has more credible than a ***** like you....

stop crying....let it go....

Those that picked Pacquiao for fighter of the decade do not know how to distinguish a year from a decade plain and simple.

It's simply laughable to say that he has been dominatating for the past decade.

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

LOL@ Burner still crying about Mayweather's loss as FOTD.



Just look at the resume from 2000-2009 and you'll see. The only HOF Mayweather fought was Oscar and Marquez.


Pac has Barrerax2, Moralesx3, Oscar, Marquezx2.

Not even comparable.

Chups is this a serious post??

2 out of 3 Morales fights Erik was shot.

1 out of 2 MAB fights, MAB was shot.

Oscar was shot and drained.

He arguably lost both JMM fights.

Cmon man.

[Dan...]

I think its a tough call personally. I lean toward Pacquiao in terms of his resume but Floyd has a significant edge in terms of his level of dominance over top opposition. Floyd taking that extended break and Pacquiao taking those gigantic leaps in weight towards the end of the decade are probably the deciding factors. Still, I wouldn't have complained at all if Floyd got it.

[mikemurni]

so mismanagement is fighting both undisputed champs in consecutive fights. U got to be silly to really think that! And margarito was never perceived to be the next best fighter at ww. He done nothing at the time to prove or even suggest that. Let's make argument off of facts and the facts is that floyd beat both undisputed champs at 147 back to back. Pacman beat up a worn down morales and larios then morales again. It was shell of morales...look at his decline in the ring and losing streak!


I'm not saying the award is a farce but i am questioning it. It makes no logical sense to award pacquiao fighter of the decade. I can make a serious argument that mosley and hopkins are more deserving than pacquiao is of that award. It just doesn't add up or make any sense whatsoever.

Then u make my point to an extent....how is our fighter of the decade taking lumps to a morales after mab within the decade when other fighters had been way more dominating than him. It just don't add up and it makes the bwaa lose some credibility!

Margarito had victories over Cintron and Santos. They were rated highly in WW during that time. The media were clamoring for Floyd to take the fight. It doesnt add up that Floyd will take Baldomir, when every knows that Margarito was the best fight for Floyd at that time. If you want to say that Floyd was taking an easier fight against Baldomir because he was waiting to fight Oscar, then there is no problem. But you cant have it both ways. You cant give Floyd full credit for beating Baldomir when Margarito was clearly the more dangerous fight.

Baldomir was suppose to be a tune up for Judah before takin' on Floyd. Judah ****ed up so Baldomir was place in a position as the linear champ despite the fact that there were other fighters who deserved the title ahead of him. Judah was suppose to take an immediate rematch but chose to fight Floyd instead..

The 130 lb. scene were dominated by 4 guys in the early to mid 2000. Pac, MAB,EM,JMM. They were the version of Duran, Leonard, Hagler, Hearns in the lower weights. So any fights between all 4 of them would have generated great interest for any fans of the sport. Not to mention that all 4 were in the p4p list at the same time. Credit should be given to any win by those four against each other.

BWAA will just be fine. They always have been. I dont think they actually give a **** about a ***** or ******* opinions anyway.