horus is the kind of person who, even if he can afford to buy a ferrari will most probably prefer buying a used car because of the salesman who even if he sells him a lemon he will still go back for another car.
a ferrari is a well known machine that does what its supposed to do and need not any elaborate salestalk to convince people to buy it if its within their means.
floyds like a used car salesman who uses his mouth to convince you to buy afterwhich if youre gullible enough you will later realize you have just bought yourself a lemon.
pacquiao on the other hand is a ferrari, you know what it is and what its supposed to do, and he does it. nuff said
forget all the numbers and stats and what not. In an interview format Pacquiao is pretty boring and dull. He is not very intriguing when being interviewed. He is only entertaining in the ring so lets just show Manny in the ring and forget these 24/7s with him because they suck!
Im American, So I speak from a American Point of View.
Pacquiao before the bell is boring. English or Not.
I can only go by what I see and what I hear.
I have Eyes
and
I have Ears
If he'd been involved in all the controversy and police-related incidents that Mayweather has, no doubt you'd be critising Pac for his conduct. Give me a boring Pac over what Mayweather's giving us anyday.
Doesn't get anymore entertaining than that. If Pacquiao shot himself in the foot more often and inserted his foot in his mouth more, then I'd say he would be just as entertaining as Floyd.
only floyd fans are entertained on his ****** trash talk.. Most boxing fans are annoyed so cut the crap!
The point was, if u find Pacquiao's goodie-two-shoes uptight ass where he literally says nothing in all his interviews more entertaining than Floyd's trash talking and joke cracking, and tripping over himself, and putting his foot in his mouth, than ur biased. It means u don't like Floyd and that's why it doesn't entertain u. Of course if ur a Floyd fan u find it entertaining, but that's also being biased. And if ur neutral and unbiased (like most boxing fans) u find it entertaining. But if u don't like him, obviously u won't like him being ****y and talking shyt. But in that case u r biased. Is that an inaccurate assessment?
The point was, if u find Pacquiao's goodie-two-shoes uptight ass where he literally says nothing in all his interviews more entertaining than Floyd's trash talking and joke cracking, and tripping over himself, and putting his foot in his mouth, than ur biased. It means u don't like Floyd and that's why it doesn't entertain u. Of course if ur a Floyd fan u find it entertaining, but that's also being biased. And if ur neutral and unbiased (like most boxing fans) u find it entertaining. But if u don't like him, obviously u won't like him being ****y and talking shyt. But in that case u r biased. Is that an inaccurate assessment?
Comment