Comments Thread For: Floyd Mayweather's Return Rekindles Years-Long Firefight

[PacTard]

Cotto - a win against Jennings??? who didn't even deserve a VACANT title shot (and btw lost by TKO in his last outing against Kell Brook... - that's a QUALITY WIN if i ever saw one!! And a lackluster fight against Clottey that he could have easily lost if Clottey didn't stop fight at the end.

And then we have Margarito who you Dumbass*******s still refer to as a threat! he was coming off of a fight against Roberto Garcia! Really?!?!? Roberto Garcia?!?!?!!? please tell me how that fight meant anything to the sport of boxing??? and based on that performance... he was considered the BEST OPPONENT FOR PAC!! enough with this ****... without the plaster, Margarito is nothing more than a punching bag! he's a statue, with ZERO movement and ZERO defense. take away his power (which was the only thing he had) and you get the result that happened....

Ugh. I hate getting involved in this circle-jerk logic. So let me get this straight:

Mayweathers win over Mosely was legitimate because Mosely was coming off an impressive victory over Margarito (Nevermind Shane's 18 month lay-off).

Now, as you just stated; "without the plaster, Margarito is nothing more than a punching bag."

So how then is that an impressive victory for Mosely, and thus how did that make Mosely a game opponent for Floyd?

Mosely was the exact same opponent for Floyd as he was for Manny. Either Margarito is a legit opponent and both Mosely and Pacquiao's victories over him are legitimate, or Margarito was merely a "punching bag" in which NEITHER Floyd nor Pac's wins should be considered a legitimate victory over a "live" opponent in Mosely.

Logic dictates that you can't have it both ways, bud!

[hitking]

Ugh. I hate getting involved in this circle-jerk logic. So let me get this straight:

Mayweathers win over Mosely was legitimate because Mosely was coming off an impressive victory over Margarito (Nevermind Shane's 18 month lay-off).

Now, as you just stated; "without the plaster, Margarito is nothing more than a punching bag."

So how then is that an impressive victory for Mosely, and thus how did that make Mosely a game opponent for Floyd?

Mosely was the exact same opponent for Floyd as he was for Manny. Either Margarito is a legit opponent and both Mosely and Pacquiao's victories over him are legitimate, or Margarito was merely a "punching bag" in which NEITHER Floyd nor Pac's wins should be considered a legitimate victory over a "live" opponent in Mosely.

Logic dictates that you can't have it both ways, bud!

You can't really look at it like that. You have to judge fights according to the climate of the sport when the fight took place. Whether Mosley was fighting at the same level for the Mayweather and Pac fights is irrelevant. Whether he deserved to be or not, when Mosley fought Mayweather, he was considered by most the #3 P4P fighter in the world. He was coming off an impressive win. Pac is considered Mayweather's equal by some and he's better according to others. Therefore, he clearly showed that he couldn't compete at that level against Mayweather, then struggled to a draw against a C Class opponent to stamp home that point prior to fighting Pac. That's why Mayweather's win over Mosley is hisorically significant and Pac's isn't.

[PacTard]

You can't really look at it like that. You have to judge fights according to the climate of the sport when the fight took place. Whether Mosley was fighting at the same level for the Mayweather and Pac fights is irrelevant. Whether he deserved to be or not, when Mosley fought Mayweather, he was considered by most the #3 P4P fighter in the world. He was coming off an impressive win. Pac is considered Mayweather's equal by some and he's better according to others. Therefore, he clearly showed that he couldn't compete at that level against Mayweather, then struggled to a draw against a C Class opponent to stamp home that point prior to fighting Pac. That's why Mayweather's win over Mosley is hisorically significant and Pac's isn't.

What? He clearly did NOT deserve to be #3 P4P, and he certainly wasn't a "live" opponent after such a long layoff. There is no historical significance to either of those fights with Mosely. He was a washed up fighter before he fought PBF, and he was the same washed up fighter when he fought Pacquiao.

Furthermore, you missed the point of the post. You cannot say that Margarito was a punching bag, and then turn around and give credit to Mosely for beating him (and ultimately give PBF credit for beating Mosely) while saying that Pacquiao's victory over Margarito deserves no credit. I really don't care one way or the other, but people need to be consistent.

[GRUSTLER]

In your opinion. How is this "the sport of boxing"? It's a ridiculous conclusion to draw, seeing as though you likely aren't spending a lot of time in both the Phillipines and Mexico where the two fighters in one of the fights are from.

Any way you want to spin it; Mayweather and Pacquiao are the same draw. When you get within a certain realm of PPV buys, it becomes impossible to distinguish how many of those buys will be attributed to the opponent. 1.5 vs 1.3 is inconsequential without being able to differentiate the viewing audience.

Manny Pacquiao has yet to break the Floyd Mayweather Jr/Oscar De La Hoya PPV record. Every opponent that they shared, Floyd outsold him. Manny is definitely more likeable in the public eye but PPV numbers, Floyd can out do Pac at anytime.

[hitking]

What? He clearly did NOT deserve to be #3 P4P, and he certainly wasn't a "live" opponent after such a long layoff. There is no historical significance to either of those fights with Mosely. He was a washed up fighter before he fought PBF, and he was the same washed up fighter when he fought Pacquiao.

Furthermore, you missed the point of the post. You cannot say that Margarito was a punching bag, and then turn around and give credit to Mosely for beating him (and ultimately give PBF credit for beating Mosely) while saying that Pacquiao's victory over Margarito deserves no credit. I really don't care one way or the other, but people need to be consistent.

To my knowledge, this is this first time I've talked to you, therefore we don't know each others' histories. But personally, I've been saying Mosley was washed up since he lost those fights to Winky and I have been hammered for it around the net. Its kinda funny to me that when Mayweather was "ducking" Mosley, Mosley wasn't washed up. Hell, people weren't saying Mosley was washed up when he jumped up in Money's face at the end of the JMM fight. People were saying Mayweather was scared of him. Yet, eight months later when Money taxes that ass, everyone all of a sudden declares Mosley washed up. Not saying you're one of those people. But, there are a lot of them that dramatically changed their opinion of Mosley around round four of his fight with Money.

To your second paragraph. I think it is absolutely fair is someone wants to give Money credit for Mosley and not give Pac credit for Margarito seeing that Margarito wasn't in the least bit competitive against Mosley. A lot of Money's critics and Pac's diehards fail to realize that if you put Pac equal to or better than Money, you can't credit him for beating a guy that didn't win a single second of a single round against a guy that Mayweather embarrassed. Like you said, you can't have it both ways.

[PacTard]

Manny Pacquiao has yet to break the Floyd Mayweather Jr/Oscar De La Hoya PPV record. Every opponent that they shared, Floyd outsold him. Manny is definitely more likeable in the public eye but PPV numbers, Floyd can out do Pac at anytime.

And again. WHY DO YOU CARE? You won't see a dime of that money. I don't care if one fighter makes $100 million while the other makes $1 million. It's not my money. I want to see the two best fighters in the world fighting each other. The rest of it means nothing to me.

My point in responding to your post was in regards to your flawed logic. You, like most people on this board, have no clue what the PPV numbers mean. There are so many variables that go into counting PPV buys, that it is impossible to conclude that one fighter is more popular than the other. You have no idea how many buys get counted from other countries. You have no idea how many bars buy fights and pack people in. You have no idea how many people are buying a fight to watch a certain fighter.

It's ridiculous for you to say that one fighter is more popular than another fighter based solely on PPV numbers you see reported on a weak boxing website.

[big_james10]

By Lyle Fitzsimmons - “*****s” and “*******s” of the world… rejoice.

With last week’s announcement that Floyd Mayweather Jr. would emerge from his cocoon and challenge Victor Ortiz for a share of the welterweight championship empire later this summer, the dueling factions in boxing’s most timely gang fight renewed cyber hostilities.

The Mayweather sycophants automatically chimed with the claim that the path from sabbatical to Ortiz would ultimately continue to a showdown with the pound-for-pound Filipino next spring.

On the other side, the Manny militia contrasted with the idea that fighting Ortiz was just another showy pit stop for a still-reticent “Money,” a move dictated more by fear than strategy.

And given all that as preamble, I’m still not exactly sure where I stand.

While I remained steadfast through delays that the superfight would indeed get made, I’d be lying if I said the resolve wasn’t shaken during what were surely out-of-character silences from a heretofore microphone-seeking Mayweather camp.

Rather than a signed contract, Team Pacquiao’s consent to stricter drug testing in the hoopla’s early phase was met with stony silence – giving swelling credence to an at-first silly claim that Floyd was more focused on protecting a 0 than risking his reputation.

And while I still don’t buy in that a guy with his resume shies from any challenge, the cracks in my foundation were becoming visible. [Click Here To Read More]

Your headline is misleading. You can't rekindle a fire that was never extinguished. This argument between the *****s and *******s has been taking place every since Pac beat ODLH and will continue to take place long after both men have retired, whether they fight or not. The *******s will continue to claim Floyd is scared, just as they did before he fought Hatton and Baldomir. After he beat them, they discounted his wins. After he KO's Pac, they will make excuses to discount the win - some crap like Pac has been in too many wars while Mayweather was on vacation.

On the other hand, *****s will continue to discount Pac's accomplishments. If Pac wins against Floyd, most will say it is because Floyd was rusty after his layoff. I personally will give him the credit he deserves, even though I don't expect it to happen. As a *****, I am just glad that Floyd is back, so I can actually watch a quality fight on PPV instead of the crap we have been getting from Pacquaio since his last fight with Marquez.

[PacTard]

To my knowledge, this is this first time I've talked to you, therefore we don't know each others' histories. But personally, I've been saying Mosley was washed up since he lost those fights to Winky and I have been hammered for it around the net. Its kinda funny to me that when Mayweather was "ducking" Mosley, Mosley wasn't washed up. Hell, people weren't saying Mosley was washed up when he jumped up in Money's face at the end of the JMM fight. People were saying Mayweather was scared of him. Yet, eight months later when Money taxes that ass, everyone all of a sudden declares Mosley washed up. Not saying you're one of those people. But, there are a lot of them that dramatically changed their opinion of Mosley around round four of his fight with Money.

To your second paragraph. I think it is absolutely fair is someone wants to give Money credit for Mosley and not give Pac credit for Margarito seeing that Margarito wasn't in the least bit competitive against Mosley. A lot of Money's critics and Pac's diehards fail to realize that if you put Pac equal to or better than Money, you can't credit him for beating a guy that didn't win a single second of a single round against a guy that Mayweather embarrassed. Like you said, you can't have it both ways.

What's funny to me is that people mention how Shane would have beat either PBF or Pac in his prime, while at the same time admonishing Pacquiao for being a steroid user without any proof.

Mosely was CAUGHT CHEATING! How can people say that he would have beaten these guys in his prime, knowing that he was cheating? And then turn around and accuse Pacquiao of cheating without any proof in attempts to undermine his accomplishments?

The logic on this site is atrocious.

[billfifty]

Your headline is misleading. You can't rekindle a fire that was never extinguished. This argument between the *****s and *******s has been taking place every since Pac beat ODLH and will continue to take place long after both men have retired, whether they fight or not. The *******s will continue to claim Floyd is scared, just as they did before he fought Hatton and Baldomir. After he beat them, they discounted his wins. After he KO's Pac, they will make excuses to discount the win - some crap like Pac has been in too many wars while Mayweather was on vacation.

On the other hand, *****s will continue to discount Pac's accomplishments. If Pac wins against Floyd, most will say it is because Floyd was rusty after his layoff. I personally will give him the credit he deserves, even though I don't expect it to happen. As a *****, I am just glad that Floyd is back, so I can actually watch a quality fight on PPV instead of the crap we have been getting from Pacquaio since his last fight with Marquez.

I don't think anyone can argue against you on that because I certainly have had enough of Pac fighting fighers thats on the Bucket List. Lot of young lions out there to tame...B-Hop did it, Mayweather is about to do it, so enough of the old heavy bags already.

[hitking]

What's funny to me is that people mention how Shane would have beat either PBF or Pac in his prime, while at the same time admonishing Pacquiao for being a steroid user without any proof.

Mosely was CAUGHT CHEATING! How can people say that he would have beaten these guys in his prime, knowing that he was cheating? And then turn around and accuse Pacquiao of cheating without any proof in attempts to undermine his accomplishments?

The logic on this site is atrocious.

Personally, I think the lightweight version of Mosley beats Mayweather and Pac. But, both are historically better. I think sometime people blur the line between a fighter's physical prime and whether they're still fighting at a high level and scew it to fit their arguements. Take Roy Jones. A diehard RJ fan won't give Tarver credit for beating RJ because he was no longer in his physical prime, which is true. But, he was still considered the best fighter in the world when Tarver starched him. So to not give Tarver credit is ridiculous, IMO. The same will happen when and if Mayweather and Pac fight. I've been watching both for 15 years and I'll tell anyone that ask Mayweather isn't nearly as good as he was as a lightweight and Pac isn't as good as he was at 130, which IMO were both fighters physical primes. I think most would agree. So if Mayweather wins, the *******s will scream that Money waited out and fought an "old" Pacquaio. If Pac wins, the *****s will scream that Pac beat an old, inactive fighter. In the end, it will all be nonsense because both are still fighting at a ridiculously high levels, even thouigh their physical primes are long gone.