Was Erik Morales in his prime for the 2nd and 3rd Pac fights?

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

Ofcourse not. just like Mosley wasn't in his prime when he fought Mayweather.

Sifference is that you will never hear a Floyd fan say otherwise. But there are guys here who think that Morales wasnt shot.

[ADP02]

That means very, very little. Erik Morales was way past it for the second and third bouts. This is not difficult to see. In fact, I'm stunned this is even a debate.

Morales was leading the fight. Sorry but if Manny didn't pick it up a notch, he would have lost. You are looking at the fight backwards. You are seeing first that he was weak then saying that Morales was shot. I doubt anyone was saying that before Manny picked it up. Morales was winning the fight by 3 rounds on HBO's unofficial scorecard.

Yesterday, you guys were all agreeing that Floyd had a good year because he beat a Judah that lost to Baldo and Baldo himself.

This is about the fighter of the decade continuation of yesterday ......THIS IS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT, so don't try to discredit Manny's when you are not discrediting Floyd's last 6 years!!! No choice if you discredit Manny vs Morales II

[P. Rick]

Why are we comparing Floyd and Pac? Let's try and keep it separate for once, ok?

My original arguemant was that Pacquiao had a better 2006 than Floyd Mayweather. That was what I was discussing from the get go with No Ceilings. This thread was created because there was a big discussion yesterday about who had the better '06

Back to Morales...he had just finished getting his ass royally whupped by Zahir Raheem. Logic tells you that Manny (who was the co-feature on that PPV) should've tried to make a fight with Raheem. Or that Morales would've sought revenge. But Morales was not the same fighter. Even worse, he could no longer make 130. He begged Top Rank to make the rematch at a catchweight. They refused. Even worse, they hit him with a huge fine if he came in over. So - as is the case with most weight drained fighters - Morales started strong out the gate and it was all downhill from there.

But do you really think that a win over Raheem would have done anything for Pacquiao? A guy who was unknown and I don't even think was a top five lightweight. Pacquiao made the right move fighting Erik. He beat the number 2 130 pounder and the number 6 ranked p4p fighter, along with avenging his loss and getting a big name under his belt.

[Doctor_Tenma]

Difference is that you will never hear a Floyd fan say otherwise. But there are guys here who think that Morales wasnt shot.

You already know what I think about Mosley. You make a good point with this post, **** if Pacquiao would have beaten the Gatti Mayweather faced, that would have been a notable win

[IMDAZED]

Morales was leading the fight. Sorry but if Manny didn't pick it up a notch, he would have lost. You are looking at the fight backwards. You are seeing first that he was weak then saying that Morales was shot. I doubt anyone was saying that before Manny picked it up. Morales was winning the fight by 3 rounds on HBO's unofficial scorecard.

So what? That doesn't mean anything. He was leading...and? He did what most weight drained fighters do - tail off.

Yesterday, you guys were all agreeing that Floyd had a good year because he beat a Judah that lost to Baldo and Baldo himself.

WTF are you talking about? Point specifically to where I said that. Either that or STFU.

[B]This is about the fighter of the decade continuation of yesterday ......THIS IS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT, so don't try to discredit Manny's when you are not discrediting Floyd's last 6 years!!! No choice if you discredit Manny vs Morales II

Aww man, I should've known. I'm talking to a d*ckrider. Carry on.

[IMDAZED]

My original arguemant was that Pacquiao had a better 2006 than Floyd Mayweather. That was what I was discussing from the get go with No Ceilings. This thread was created because there was a big discussion yesterday about who had the better '06

Ok, I had no idea. And personally, I thought Floyd's 2006 was one of his weakest years ever.

But do you really think that a win over Raheem would have done anything for Pacquiao? A guy who was unknown and I don't even think was a top five lightweight. Pacquiao made the right move fighting Erik. He beat the number 2 130 pounder and the number 6 ranked p4p fighter, along with avenging his loss and getting a big name under his belt.

You are admitting that Pac cherry-picked. Sorry but Morales got his a** kicked by Raheem. That's that.

[P. Rick]

Ok, I had no idea. And personally, I thought Floyd's 2006 was one of his weakest years ever.

You are admitting that Pac cherry-picked. Sorry but Morales got his a** kicked by Raheem. That's that.

I'm not Pac's defender. I'm not even a big fan.

If Pac had fought Raheem though, you would hear "Pac's ducking Morales because Morales beat his ass"..

[IMDAZED]

I'm not Pac's defender. I'm not even a big fan.

If Pac had fought Raheem though, you would hear "Pac's ducking Morales because Morales beat his ass"..

No, you wouldn't have. Actually, I'm not sure if you remember but people were quite surprised he fought Morales anyway. Then a THIRD TIME!!! UGH!! Anyway, it wasn't as if Morales won a round against Raheem or something. Then you might say it was the weight class or something. He was beaten from pillar to post. **** that, he was straight up embarrassed. Nah man, Pac should've left it alone or fought Zahir. I was quite disgusted by that move but hey, Top Rank likes to keep it in house, regardless of what we think.

[BillyBoxing]

He wasn't in his prime in their first fight either.

Based on what??

He signed his best win and maybe performance of his career,so how was he past it.

A bunch of ignorants and biased haters,that's what *****s are.

[BillyBoxing]

Sifference is that you will never hear a Floyd fan say otherwise. But there are guys here who think that Morales wasnt shot.

Because it's more obvious Burner.

Be fair.

Morales was 29 in the first fight,Mosley 39.
Let's keep it real huggers.