Tweet
Originally posted by Brother Jay
View Post
[/size]
Well by that reasoning then Hatton gets in because of his win over Tszyu.
My question to you Walt is who did Pacquiao beat that would warrant him being in the HOF?
I mean, if we are going to be critical, let's be critical across the board.
Barrera's only notable win is over Morales. If he is a future HOF'er, then Corrales is definitely a HOF'er for his fights with Castillo.
Morales' greatest win comes over Pacquiao. Take that away and he's no better than Corrales who's greatest win comes over Castillo. Does that qualify him for the HOF?
DLH doesn't count because he was drained. I'm sure we agree on that.
Hatton ... I don't know. Hatton was already contemplating retirement after Floyd. He knew he had little left to give. That's why he hired the Mayweathers to "fix" him. That was a clear cut sign. A win over Ricky at that point didn't hold any real legacy value IMO.
Cotto's only win in his career that holds any legacy value comes over Mosley. That decision, like you said earlier, was arguable. I won't attempt to devalue the win. I will only say that without it Cotto wouldn't even be a top commodity.
Clottey has never beaten a world champion in his career. He's a step above a gatekeeper, but he doesn't quite have the stuff to be a champion.
Margarito has only one noteworthy win in his entire career and that comes over Cotto. Six months later he was humiliated because his skills don't pay bills. His cement does.
Mosley is a HOF'er without a doubt. However Shane's status when Pacquiao faced him was he was dominated by one guy, and had an awkward fight against another that resulted in a draw. The timing was too convenient for a guy who's trainer openly stated that he would not let Manny fight Shane because Shane was too good.
JMM ... what can I say? The guy has shown himself to be the better boxer in three different occasions against Pacquiao. He just doesn't get the nod. The fans know it. The press writes about it. The pundits speak about it whatever medium they have access to.
To be able to receive ANY HOF glory from his three bouts with JMM, Pacquiao would have had to have been perceived as winning any of those three matches .. and not just getting the nod from the judges.
In the first match, he floored JMM 3 times. That's the last good thing you could say about Pacquiao in that match. JMM came back and took over by teaching a boxing lesson. The judges felt that the three knockdowns were too much to come back from obviously. Manny had other moments, but not enough to win many rounds outside of that insane first round.
In the second, they went toe to toe with JMM in most opinions getting the better of Manny more so than in the first. He definitely outboxed Manny, but again the knockdown kept Manny relevant enough to get the nod from the judges.
In the third ... forget about it. Manny got taught a complete boxing lesson. JMM didn't run. He didn't hide. He fought 12 rounds. Manny was just upset because JMM didn't fight like a Mexican and hit and moved in favor of standing and trading. JMM showed that he could take all of Manny's weapons away and not have to stay on his bicycle like Mosley did simply by moving to the side after counterpunching.
Manny may have fought JMM three times, but he certainly NEVER beat him once. Just because a judge gives you the nod doesn't mean that fans are dumb, deaf and blind. Pacquiao didn't get in the face with a water bottle because he won. The world has chimed in and Pacquiao has been found wanting my man.
So if you're going to say that Manny is a HOF because of his wins over Barrera and Morales, then you've got to recalibrate your list of who is getting in the HOF. Manny certainly better not get in because of ANYTHING he did at WW or jrMW.
We may not always agree on everything Walt, but you know like I know that weight manipulation along with targeting 6 different fighters who were coming off career losses and minor tune ups makes Manny's campaign at WW and jrMW entertaining but not HOF or ATG worthy.
Manny looked like a gladiator in those fights, but the tactics used@ WW & jrMW rendered any legacy-defining value obsolete in those 2 divisions.
This is not trashing Manny Pacquiao as a fighter. This applying the same distinction that you have across the board.
I look forward to your reply.
Well by that reasoning then Hatton gets in because of his win over Tszyu.
My question to you Walt is who did Pacquiao beat that would warrant him being in the HOF?
I mean, if we are going to be critical, let's be critical across the board.
Barrera's only notable win is over Morales. If he is a future HOF'er, then Corrales is definitely a HOF'er for his fights with Castillo.
Morales' greatest win comes over Pacquiao. Take that away and he's no better than Corrales who's greatest win comes over Castillo. Does that qualify him for the HOF?
DLH doesn't count because he was drained. I'm sure we agree on that.
Hatton ... I don't know. Hatton was already contemplating retirement after Floyd. He knew he had little left to give. That's why he hired the Mayweathers to "fix" him. That was a clear cut sign. A win over Ricky at that point didn't hold any real legacy value IMO.
Cotto's only win in his career that holds any legacy value comes over Mosley. That decision, like you said earlier, was arguable. I won't attempt to devalue the win. I will only say that without it Cotto wouldn't even be a top commodity.
Clottey has never beaten a world champion in his career. He's a step above a gatekeeper, but he doesn't quite have the stuff to be a champion.
Margarito has only one noteworthy win in his entire career and that comes over Cotto. Six months later he was humiliated because his skills don't pay bills. His cement does.
Mosley is a HOF'er without a doubt. However Shane's status when Pacquiao faced him was he was dominated by one guy, and had an awkward fight against another that resulted in a draw. The timing was too convenient for a guy who's trainer openly stated that he would not let Manny fight Shane because Shane was too good.
JMM ... what can I say? The guy has shown himself to be the better boxer in three different occasions against Pacquiao. He just doesn't get the nod. The fans know it. The press writes about it. The pundits speak about it whatever medium they have access to.
To be able to receive ANY HOF glory from his three bouts with JMM, Pacquiao would have had to have been perceived as winning any of those three matches .. and not just getting the nod from the judges.
In the first match, he floored JMM 3 times. That's the last good thing you could say about Pacquiao in that match. JMM came back and took over by teaching a boxing lesson. The judges felt that the three knockdowns were too much to come back from obviously. Manny had other moments, but not enough to win many rounds outside of that insane first round.
In the second, they went toe to toe with JMM in most opinions getting the better of Manny more so than in the first. He definitely outboxed Manny, but again the knockdown kept Manny relevant enough to get the nod from the judges.
In the third ... forget about it. Manny got taught a complete boxing lesson. JMM didn't run. He didn't hide. He fought 12 rounds. Manny was just upset because JMM didn't fight like a Mexican and hit and moved in favor of standing and trading. JMM showed that he could take all of Manny's weapons away and not have to stay on his bicycle like Mosley did simply by moving to the side after counterpunching.
Manny may have fought JMM three times, but he certainly NEVER beat him once. Just because a judge gives you the nod doesn't mean that fans are dumb, deaf and blind. Pacquiao didn't get in the face with a water bottle because he won. The world has chimed in and Pacquiao has been found wanting my man.
So if you're going to say that Manny is a HOF because of his wins over Barrera and Morales, then you've got to recalibrate your list of who is getting in the HOF. Manny certainly better not get in because of ANYTHING he did at WW or jrMW.
We may not always agree on everything Walt, but you know like I know that weight manipulation along with targeting 6 different fighters who were coming off career losses and minor tune ups makes Manny's campaign at WW and jrMW entertaining but not HOF or ATG worthy.
Manny looked like a gladiator in those fights, but the tactics used@ WW & jrMW rendered any legacy-defining value obsolete in those 2 divisions.
This is not trashing Manny Pacquiao as a fighter. This applying the same distinction that you have across the board.
I look forward to your reply.
Comment