Was Barrera as great as jrosales13 says he is?

[jkaisen41]

Calling Barrera great is a fool's opinion. and that fool is jrosales13.

I'm not calling jrosales13 a fool lightly or without cause.

Let's examine this.

Barrera padded his record with 35 fights before he stepped up to the world championship stage.

Then once he won the WBO BW championship, he got his asss handed to him twice by Junior Jones, who BTW never amounted to a hill of beans.

If that wasn't bad enough, Barrera licked his wounds and went on to compete for guess what? You got it ... a vacant title. He defended it against against an assortment of nobodies until Erik Morales took it from him.

This is what I've been saying all along: Erik Morales and Prince Naseem Hamed ARE Marco Antonio Barrera's career.

How did Barrera regain the WBO title? LOL .. Erik Morales vacated both the WBC and WBO titles he held after beating Barrera, so the WBO "reawarded" the WBO title to Barrera! How embarrassing!

Barrera then defended his bogus title against more nobodies until he got a chance to face the hype that was Prince Naseem Hamed.

Barrera shined in that fight. The fact that Barrera beat a fighter who had NEVER EVER proven anything against any world class fighters made Barrera a star. The biggest name on Hamed's resume was a aged Kevin Kelley.

Barrera then went on to avenge his loss to Morales. He fought and took pity on a drugged up version of Johnny Tapia who really had no business in the ring at that point in his life and then fought the same aged Kevin Kelley.

Barrera tried to step it up again and got wrecked in Pacquiao'a first big fight in America. Yet another loss when he ventures to the top.

Barrera went on to beat Paulie Ayala, whose biggest claim to fame was beating Johnny Tapia. Barrera fought Erik Morales. Again. As I said, Barrera's fights with Morales are what made him and what he's really remembered for. Barrera also beat Rocky Juarez, whose biggest win came over Zahir Raheem, but Raheem never amounted to anything except for a dominating performance against Morales.

After that, Barrera stepped up to face more world class competition.

Barrera tried to REALLY step up to the real talent.

First he fought a man that both he and Morales had been ducking for YEARS: Juan Manuel Marquez. They both avoided Marquez because he was twice the boxer that Barrera and Morales could hope to be. Suffice to say, Barrera got outclassed and showed why he had been avoiding that match-up for years.

Then, Barrera thought he could find redemption against Manny Pacquiao. The difference in ability was apparent and of course .. Barrera lost as he usually does at the highest level unless its against Morales.

So, in a last hurrah effort, Barrera decided to face a young lion in Amir Khan. A headbutt caused a cut on both fighters, but the truth from what boxing fans got to see was that Barrera was no match for Khan.

So .....

I'm calling you out jrosales13!

I'd like jrosales13 to show us why Marco Antonio Barrera is a so-called "great" fighter. In order to be great, you have to do great things. Barrera NEVER did great things.

The pentacle of Barrera's career were wins over Morales, and Morales himself was not great. Hamed? Juarez? Ayala? Tapia? You think THOSE wins made Barrera great?

No sir, you are the fcuking moron. You have no idea about boxing or what makes it or the fighters great. You're a hype whore, who buys into promotion and ranks fighters according to how much buzz their was about their fight.

I've read plenty of your posts, and you consistently show that you reason with your emotions which are based on your hype whore addiction. You did it with Barrera. You did it with Cotto.

You are beneath me as are your unfounded warped opinions.

Ponder that Pinky.

Not from a boxing standpoint but from just a personal point of view I never do liked Barrera... I think it is funny how ppl blame Mayweather now for punching Ortiz - have you ever watched Barrera's career... I guess his outgoings are considered some kind of mexican pride or stuff... I saw the dude Suckerpunch (if you wanna see a textbook suckerpunch look for this) Morales on a press conference - he butted Pacquiao and punched him afterwards (2nd fight) and and and... I never like Barrera...

He is a very good fighter though and fought some good competition... but I think pretty much if you look at this - you can make the argument with Morales, Marquez as well...

They all made each other somewhat that what they are... which is not wrong... I mean what would be Ray Leonard without Hearns, Duran, Hagler...

I think all of them fought champions and respected contenders but without Morales there is no Barrera... and without Barrera there is no Morales... without Morales there is no Pacquiao probably... and without Pacquiao there is no Marquez... even though Marquez and Pacquiao went up and had success there too but more against good champions and worthy challengers and not against fighters in the hall of fame class like Morales and Barrera...

This four pretty much made each other... they are all deserving because they were for a long time the best at their weights... if Barrera is the worst of the four is up for grabs... but even be the fourth best of this four is still pretty good

[QADASHBANYAH]

Not from a boxing standpoint but from just a personal point of view I never do liked Barrera... I think it is funny how ppl blame Mayweather now for punching Ortiz - have you ever watched Barrera's career... I guess his outgoings are considered some kind of mexican pride or stuff... I saw the dude Suckerpunch (if you wanna see a textbook suckerpunch look for this) Morales on a press conference - he butted Pacquiao and punched him afterwards (2nd fight) and and and... I never like Barrera...

He is a very good fighter though and fought some good competition... but I think pretty much if you look at this - you can make the argument with Morales, Marquez as well...

They all made each other somewhat that what they are... which is not wrong... I mean what would be Ray Leonard without Hearns, Duran, Hagler...

I think all of them fought champions and respected contenders but without Morales there is no Barrera... and without Barrera there is no Morales... without Morales there is no Pacquiao probably... and without Pacquiao there is no Marquez... even though Marquez and Pacquiao went up and had success there too but more against good champions and worthy challengers and not against fighters in the hall of fame class like Morales and Barrera...

This four pretty much made each other... they are all deserving because they were for a long time the best at their weights... if Barrera is the worst of the four is up for grabs... but even be the fourth best of this four is still pretty good

I agree, I simply feel saying all time great is too much. Hall of Famers? Yep ATG's nope. Also I have seen Barerra put a muth****a in athe goddamn full Nelson (wrestling move). Yet all these racist homes are up in arms about a "legal" punch from Floyd...

[jkaisen41]

I agree, I simply feel saying all time great is too much. Hall of Famers? Yep ATG's nope. Also I have seen Barerra put a muth****a in athe goddamn full Nelson (wrestling move). Yet all these racist homes are up in arms about a "legal" punch from Floyd...

Yeah, I think you really have to be careful with ALL-time greats... like you said HOF's yes... but ATG careful... I think sure ATG's of this era are Pacquiao, Mayweather and Hopkins... other fighters like Mosley, DLH, Morales, Barrera and stuff are HOF's no doubt and belong to the best of their time but still... ATG's IDK...

There was a very interesting article in the history section where this topic was handled about if older fighters are not as good as new fighters... because everybody says the technogoly has changed and stuff... it made some interesting points that older fighters were indeed better then today's fighter... so I have to think that guys like Mayweather and Hopkins simply have the overall ability when it comes to smarts, boxing ability and defense to hang in there with a lot of fighters...

[Kagami Taiga]

Not really because Zaragoza was a Champion coming off good performances unlike Eubank who wasn't even in the Top 10.

i disagree, after the sanchez fights, in which it could be argued he lost one or even both, he fought a few no hopers. very similar to eubank who had tough fights with collins but then proceeded to destroy a bunch of no names. sure he might have been a champ and even ranked but, it wasnt as if he was beating any real top fighters even close to morales level.

[MARKBNLV]

Type whatever you want about Barrera my eyes saw his work,my eyes saw a hall of fame blood and guts warrior.you can nitpick his record all that you want i know as well as most fans know the legend Marco is.

[bojangles1987]

I am questioning him being an all time great. All time greats don't get whooped by people like Zahir Rahim... Don't get heart confused with greatness. Morales skill set us far from ATG you can't deny that!!!! How else can a man fighting cans in Asia come whoop an all time great in Barrera and morales ???? Great isn't all time great. Come on man it's not hard, simply look at when he Barrera fought some of these people..... That's the truth. I don't see people running round here saying Trevor Berbick was ATG because he beat Ali!!!!! It seems people only call the truth in the heavyweight division. There people realize when fighters are past their prime..

Barrera had a 43 fight win streak , but who were those fighters???

Is junior jones an ATG????

In 1998 he won a vacant title. Didn't berto get PAC get one of those in his 154 fight? What does that mean???

In 1999 he was fighting mutha****as from his own team!!!! That's how he got that no contest!!!!! This is fact!

Morale beat Barrera in 2k and the WBO REINSTATED HIM AS CHAMPION LOL!!!!

He defended his ring title instead of going for the WBC title... He beat Johnny tapia and an old Kevin Kelly .. Do I lie???? In 2003!!!!

Have I lied once?? Go back and look.

He lost to pacquiao and Marquez.... PAC beat him x2!!!

I won't touch on khan he was done by then.....

ATG fighters get whooped by guys like Zahir Raheem all the time when they are three divisions and a couple years past their prime like Morales was. So that's not true. I'm not sure what you're rambling about in the rest of the post. It seems you're saying losing to Pacquiao should be held against both Barrera and Morales, when Pacquiao is one of the greatest fighters of all time so it absolutely shouldn't.

[IronDanHamza]

i disagree, after the sanchez fights, in which it could be argued he lost one or even both, he fought a few no hopers. very similar to eubank who had tough fights with collins but then proceeded to destroy a bunch of no names. sure he might have been a champ and even ranked but, it wasnt as if he was beating any real top fighters even close to morales level.

What, like a prime Wayne McCullough just months before he lost to Erik Morales? Who went on to give very good showings against Top level compeition just a year later and was ranked in the Top 5?

Daniel Zaragoza was ranked #2 at Super Bantam and was a legit Champion, HOF'er, coming off yes impressive victorys int he last few years over Top ranked opposition.

Chris Eubank wasn't even ranked in the Top 10 at 168 and hadn't had a legit win in years at 168 when Joe Calzaghe fought him.

It's a terrible comparison and nothing alike.

[big paulie]

Calling Barrera great is a fool's opinion. and that fool is jrosales13.

I'm not calling jrosales13 a fool lightly or without cause.

Let's examine this.

Barrera padded his record with 35 fights before he stepped up to the world championship stage.

Then once he won the WBO BW championship, he got his asss handed to him twice by Junior Jones, who BTW never amounted to a hill of beans.

If that wasn't bad enough, Barrera licked his wounds and went on to compete for guess what? You got it ... a vacant title. He defended it against against an assortment of nobodies until Erik Morales took it from him.

This is what I've been saying all along: Erik Morales and Prince Naseem Hamed ARE Marco Antonio Barrera's career.

How did Barrera regain the WBO title? LOL .. Erik Morales vacated both the WBC and WBO titles he held after beating Barrera, so the WBO "reawarded" the WBO title to Barrera! How embarrassing!

Barrera then defended his bogus title against more nobodies until he got a chance to face the hype that was Prince Naseem Hamed.

Barrera shined in that fight. The fact that Barrera beat a fighter who had NEVER EVER proven anything against any world class fighters made Barrera a star. The biggest name on Hamed's resume was a aged Kevin Kelley.

Barrera then went on to avenge his loss to Morales. He fought and took pity on a drugged up version of Johnny Tapia who really had no business in the ring at that point in his life and then fought the same aged Kevin Kelley.

Barrera tried to step it up again and got wrecked in Pacquiao'a first big fight in America. Yet another loss when he ventures to the top.

Barrera went on to beat Paulie Ayala, whose biggest claim to fame was beating Johnny Tapia. Barrera fought Erik Morales. Again. As I said, Barrera's fights with Morales are what made him and what he's really remembered for. Barrera also beat Rocky Juarez, whose biggest win came over Zahir Raheem, but Raheem never amounted to anything except for a dominating performance against Morales.

After that, Barrera stepped up to face more world class competition.

Barrera tried to REALLY step up to the real talent.

First he fought a man that both he and Morales had been ducking for YEARS: Juan Manuel Marquez. They both avoided Marquez because he was twice the boxer that Barrera and Morales could hope to be. Suffice to say, Barrera got outclassed and showed why he had been avoiding that match-up for years.

Then, Barrera thought he could find redemption against Manny Pacquiao. The difference in ability was apparent and of course .. Barrera lost as he usually does at the highest level unless its against Morales.

So, in a last hurrah effort, Barrera decided to face a young lion in Amir Khan. A headbutt caused a cut on both fighters, but the truth from what boxing fans got to see was that Barrera was no match for Khan.

So .....

I'm calling you out jrosales13!

I'd like jrosales13 to show us why Marco Antonio Barrera is a so-called "great" fighter. In order to be great, you have to do great things. Barrera NEVER did great things.

The pentacle of Barrera's career were wins over Morales, and Morales himself was not great. Hamed? Juarez? Ayala? Tapia? You think THOSE wins made Barrera great?

No sir, you are the fcuking moron. You have no idea about boxing or what makes it or the fighters great. You're a hype whore, who buys into promotion and ranks fighters according to how much buzz their was about their fight.

I've read plenty of your posts, and you consistently show that you reason with your emotions which are based on your hype whore addiction. You did it with Barrera. You did it with Cotto.

You are beneath me as are your unfounded warped opinions.

Ponder that Pinky.

You are a ***in clown to question Barreras standing as an all time great and second to Ricardo Lopez the best boxer to come out of Mexico (Barrera v Enrique Sanchez is one of the most complete performances ive ever seen) I'm struggling with the seriousness of this post

[Cash Cow]

kill yourself

You have the nerve to question Barrera's standing as a HOFer/ATG and you call yourself a boxing fan?

The 2 are incongruous.

so you didnt read but you comment?

[-MAKAVELLI-]

Calling Barrera great is a fool's opinion. .

i stopped right here...whatever the rest of your rant is became invalid with this opening statement


and judging by that hemorrhage of words that followed, it's safe to say that JRo got you pretty riled up