ESPN's Dan Rafael P4P List

[Pigeons]

I know it's sacrilege to suggest it but with names like Judah,Morales,Khan,Mathysse,Peterson,Hererra (we know, we know) how is it that a guy like Danny Garcia could be left off that list for so long and GGG gets ranked 3 in the world on his bum of the quarter tour...

Undeserved decisions vs. Herrera and Peterson which happen to be the last two legitimate fighters he has faced.

If he had legitimately beat those fighters, he would be a top 3 P4P fighter in this sport IMO.

[boliodogs]

Does this mean a boxing expert doesn't think GGG is a hype job like his haters say he is?

[Eff Pandas]

I think Ward & GGG are high. Ward ain't did P4P **** in awhile & ain't did virtually anything in far too long & GGG ain't really did P4P **** at all either (imo). Can't argue with Wlad at #1. Kov & Manny in the top 5 seems solid. I'd probably have Gonzalez & Rigo rounding out my top 5, but I know most cats don't give the lil guys their respect.

[HanzGruber]

Does this mean a boxing expert doesn't think GGG is a hype job like his haters say he is?

He's no more of an expert than anyone here. He just gets paid for it

[PAC-BOY]

For those crying about Roman Gonzalez being #1 P4P.

Here's Dan's Top 5 P4P:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Andre Ward
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Sergey Kovalev
5. Manny Pacquiao

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat...ith-dan-rafael

Does that look better to you?

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2.
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Sergey Kovalev
5. Manny Pacquiao

[boliodogs]

He's no more of an expert than anyone here. He just gets paid for it

That's true but I couldn't resist saying that.

[Left Hook Tua]

He's no more of an expert than anyone here. He just gets paid for it

that's just goofy.

dan has covered boxing for espn for 10 yrs.

before that he covered boxing for yrs. at usa today.

he talks to fighters, promoters, managers, trainers and boxing media.

he is ringside for tons of fights or orders the ppv for fights he's not at.

dan covered his first fight 20 yrs. ago.

some guys here are barely over 20 yrs. old.

you might not like his opinions but to say he's not more knowledgeable than guys here is ludicrous.

[Left Hook Tua]

Ok, well I maybe your right, but I still think the dude is a fraud.. His coverage of WLad over the years has more flip flops than a politican.. And don't get me started on his expert opinion of Rigo. I honestly hink the guys in the history section are much better than Dan. Take away the espn credentials and the guy is nothing but your typical fanboy on boxingscene

dan is quite professional in his articles and reporting.

you're confusing his reporting with chats and tweets.

they're not the same thing.

reporting, you have to be fair, unbiased, report with no commentary.

tweets/chats is different.

[Phenom]

dan is quite professional in his articles and reporting.

you're confusing his reporting with chats and tweets.

they're not the same thing.

reporting, you have to be fair, unbiased, report with no commentary.

tweets/chats is different.

http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id...-donaire-bores

[HanzGruber]

that's just goofy.

dan has covered boxing for espn for 10 yrs.

before that he covered boxing for yrs. at usa today.

he talks to fighters, promoters, managers, trainers and boxing media.

he is ringside for tons of fights or orders the ppv for fights he's not at.

dan covered his first fight 20 yrs. ago.

some guys here are barely over 20 yrs. old.

you might not like his opinions but to say he's not more knowledgeable than guys here is ludicrous.

Just cause he gets scoops doesn't make him an expert. Karceno talks to arum sometimes. Doesn't make him any more of an expert of boxing knowledge