The Man, The Myth, The Legend...... Miguel Cotto.
Collapse
-
-
dude corley lost 2 of 3 before cotto. lost 6 following year and year after. how good do you think he was at the time?Right here you can tell you're biased.
First you say that the Ring ranking matters more than the belt rankings. That Cotto had only one top 10 win which was Corley.
Then you go & say "Oh mosley & judah were just names". But don't bother to mention that they're ranked 5th & 3rd respectively by ring magazine.
Yes Urkal. As much as you might not like it, he was ranked 7th welterweight by ring magazine. The same rankings you said are the ones that matter.
and again you're being biased on the Clottey fight. "oh it shows what level he is". Yea sure. Bad cut above his eye from 3rd round on and still pulled off the victory.
judas was winless in 2 yrs before the cotto fight.
mosley ppl thought he was shot. he went 1-4 in 2002-2004. also why cotto management picked mosley. a name.
ring rankings are solid but also influenced by name/popularity.Comment
-
Comment
-
ppl need to understand rankings and belts are meaningless sometimes.
sometimes the division is weak. or sometimes a title is a meaningless paper belt.
yeah urkal was #7 but who was in the division?
delahoya, forrest, winky, tito, vargas, etc. all left 147.
cory spinks and carlos baldimir were the top guy at 147 around the same time for crying out loud.
margarito who is good but not great was one of the top guys. so what does #7 really mean.Comment
-
when you're trying to make a case for greatness and you're mentioning OKTAY URKAL......
you need to reassess.Comment
-
Comment
-
Hard to disagree with this. Warrior who always comes to fight though.listen. everyone is crying because i'm trashing cotto.
i think cotto is a good fighter. good skills.
but he's NOT great. skillswise or resumewise.
skillswise. when he's in there with a great fighter or good fighter, the disparity shows. either he is outmatched by a great or competitive with a good fighter. that shows his level.
resumewise. to be great, you have to either beat great fighters or if no greats around, dominate your division and beat all the good fighters around.
cotto was never the best in any division he was in.
he was never #1 or #2 or #3 p4p. he was top 10 p4p for a brief period.
how can a guy who never beat a great fighter, never the top guy in his division, never a top guy in his era be a great fighter?Comment
-
-
-
listen. everyone is crying because i'm trashing cotto.
i think cotto is a good fighter. good skills.
but he's NOT great. skillswise or resumewise.
skillswise. when he's in there with a great fighter or good fighter, the disparity shows. either he is outmatched by a great or competitive with a good fighter. that shows his level.
resumewise. to be great, you have to either beat great fighters or if no greats around, dominate your division and beat all the good fighters around.
cotto was never the best in any division he was in.
he was never #1 or #2 or #3 p4p. he was top 10 p4p for a brief period.
how can a guy who never beat a great fighter, never the top guy in his division, never a top guy in his era be a great fighter?
So what do you get by "trashing a professional boxer? How does that make you feel? Does it empower you? Were you that guy everybody ignored or made fun of in school? Didn't your parents tell you they love you often or maybe, they didn't hug you enough? Just curious how this makes you a better poster, that all!Comment

Comment