Comments Thread For: GGG's Promoter: Canelo Faces Anyone, Cotto is Selective

[aboutfkntime]

Oh yeah the fans were begging for Trout Vs Cotto
You get beat by those type of opponents and you're trying to tell me Cotto has a better resume than GGG, get the fuq outta here!
Cotto is an overrated side-show who is going to get exposed by Canelo, he doesn't give THE FANS what they want, he is doing it for his own gain why else would he demand the huge lionshare of profit against Canelo when Canelo is the draw and Canelo has better wins and has been more relevant than Cotto who's best accolades are fighting leftovers and beating a one knee old man.

Are you serious ?

You think that Golovkins resume > Cottos resume ?

Jeez, if you are looking for something to bash Cotto with, you might want to look around for something a bit heavier.

[aboutfkntime]

Yeah, keep ducking the question, bítch. That tells me all I need to know.

Bottom line: Cotto got beat by B-class fighters.

Cotto isn't even the best fighter at 154. Lara would do the same thing Trout did to him.
The only guy that can give Gennady problems is Ward. The best guy in the next weight class. If Cotto hadn't taken the belt, no one would even entertain the idea of a Golovkin-Cotto fight. What would be the point? Cotto wouldn't have a chance in hell.

P4P, Golovkin > Cotto.

Get over it, and get on with your life.

-----------------------------

Then why the fcuk do you want to see it ?

I am here for the boxing, I just want good fair fights.

But you think that Cotto should fight Golovkin, most likely at 160, despite the fact that he "wouldn't have a chance in hell"?

I am going to spend the next 3 months bashing Golovkin for blatantly ducking Ward, just because of your post

[b00g13man]

Are you serious ?

You think that Golovkins resume > Cottos resume ?

Jeez, if you are looking for something to bash Cotto with, you might want to look around for something a bit heavier.

He actually said that with a straight face.

[LacedUp]

Cotto has fought infinitely better competition that Canelo.

That's all I'm going to say about this.

[radioraheem]

Are you serious ?

You think that Golovkins resume > Cottos resume ?

Jeez, if you are looking for something to bash Cotto with, you might want to look around for something a bit heavier.

They have quite the imagination.

[M Bison]

Cotto has fought infinitely better competition that Canelo.

That's all I'm going to say about this.

Fighting better and losing to better doesn't make your resume good, Cotto doesn't have a better win in his resume than Trout or Lara that's a fact.
Resume is more about losing to good fighters, losing to good opponents doesn't make your resume good it just exposes you as not being the best of our time.

[LacedUp]

Fighting better and losing to better doesn't make your resume good, Cotto doesn't have a better win in his resume than Trout or Lara that's a fact.
Resume is more about losing to good fighters, losing to good opponents doesn't make your resume good it just exposes you as not being the best of our time.

Look at the headline and look at my post.

[M Bison]

Look at the headline and look at my post.

I know I'm just saying, I think some consider a better resume based off of just opponents faced but I think its got more to do with that fair play if you're winning some but If you're losing your two biggest defining fights it doesn't do much for you.

[LacedUp]

I know I'm just saying, I think some consider a better resume based off of just opponents faced but I think its got more to do with that fair play if you're winning some but If you're losing your two biggest defining fights it doesn't do much for you.

Sure, but even Cotto's winning resume craps all over Canelo's relatively average resume.

I just think it's funny to say Cotto is selective when he's fought Mayweather, Pacquiao, Margarito twice, Martinez, Judah, Malignaggi, Foreman, Clottey, Mosley and now Canelo, whereas Canelo has fought Mayweather, Kirkland, Angulo and Lara... I mean, I don't think that's fair comment at all.

[M Bison]

Sure, but even Cotto's winning resume craps all over Canelo's relatively average resume.

I just think it's funny to say Cotto is selective when he's fought Mayweather, Pacquiao, Margarito twice, Martinez, Judah, Malignaggi, Foreman, Clottey, Mosley and now Canelo, whereas Canelo has fought Mayweather, Kirkland, Angulo and Lara... I mean, I don't think that's fair comment at all.

Would you think Trout and Lara wouldn't beat the likes of Margarito, Zab Judah, Yuri Foreman, Mosley and Clottey

I think Clottey gave Cotto a hiding in that fight, extremely generous decision he got off from the judges.

Pacquiao is a good fight but he lost it
Mayweather another good one but he lost it

Bare in mind he did get took to school by Austin Trout just imagine what Erislandy Lara would have done to him?
I think and I just can't help it think it that his best wins are overrated a good bit.