Paulie Malignaggi Hasn't Lost Since 2010 Should Mayweather Consider Him After Khan?

**Normanconqueror** · 12-09-2013, 06:54 AM

Wouldn't be interested in that fight. There are a lot more exciting potential fights from boxers overseas or in South America than what we have here in America.

**Mike D** · 12-09-2013, 06:56 AM

HELL NO. Considered to be on the undercard somewhere? Yeah fine. Against Floyd tho? bwahahahahaha

Just no.

**Rahat** · 12-09-2013, 06:58 AM

I had broner beating mallinagi so imagine why mayweather woul do to him. Khan out boxed mallinagi with ease

**mozzer101** · 12-09-2013, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by F!x

I had Malignaggi beating Broner clearly in their fight, although it was close but Broner was just too inactive to deserve the W so Malignaggi should have stepped away the clear winner. What happened instead is boxing politics. Since Broner is being touted as a rising superstar he was awarded the victory to preserve the potential money he could generate in future fights for the network and promoters. In fact, Cano did better against Paulie than Broner did, I had the Cano fight a draw but Paulie just managed to win a split decision.

So question is, if Mayweather is able to get past Khan in their upcoming fight, should Paulie Malignaggi be considered as the subsequent opponent?

Common man use your head for once.

**Weebler I** · 12-09-2013, 07:30 AM

If Malignaggi can beat Garcia or Broner and Mayweather beats Khan (or whoever), then why not?

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather see Floyd v Thurman but he's running out of opponents at 147 on the GBP/Shotime side of the fence.

**shenmue** · 12-09-2013, 07:42 AM

Cano hurt and dropped Paulie and won on my scorecard, he didn't find Paulie that hard to hit like Broner says he did. No thanks to a Paulie and Floyd fight, no excitement there.

**Black Barty** · 12-09-2013, 08:11 AM

Malignaggi was in the running to fight Pacquiao once (TR eventually went with Clottey), so it wouldn't be as outrageous as some would make it out to be, but personally I wouldn't care much for this fight. Everything Paulie can do Floyd can do better, and Paulie wouldn't even have a puncher's chance because, as we all know, he has no punch.

Ps. Come on, Malignaggi didn't beat Broner and you know it. There is a difference between a better than expected effort and an actual upset.

**F!x** · 12-09-2013, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by Black Barty

Malignaggi was in the running to fight Pacquiao once (TR eventually went with Clottey), so it wouldn't be as outrageous as some would make it out to be, but personally I wouldn't care much for this fight. Everything Paulie can do Floyd can do better, and Paulie wouldn't even have a puncher's chance because, as we all know, he has no punch.

Ps. Come on, Malignaggi didn't beat Broner and you know it. There is a difference between a better than expected effort and an actual upset.

Malignaggi beat Broner, there's a reason that fight was a split decision - one judge had Paulie winning 115-113, another judge had Broner winning 115-113, while the third judge should be banned from judging a boxing match.

On top of that - Malignaggi was the belt-holder and there is no way that Broner did enough to take the belt from the champion in that fight.

**LacedUp** · 12-09-2013, 08:58 AM

Worst fight of the century.

Paulie should count himself lucky he gets to commentate!

Paulie Malignaggi Hasn't Lost Since 2010 Should Mayweather Consider Him After Khan?