140lb Terence "Bud" Crawford vs 140lb Floyd "Pretty Boy Mayweather

[SCEN3RY]

...has crawford fought anyone in the stratosphere of a mid 20s floyd?

come on bro...thats a weak argument lol

floyd is clearly faster with his hands, reflexes, better inside fighter, counters etc.....

did you even watch floyd in his prime or you just watched the guy in his mid 30s lol

oh god, are you on of those, "floyds prime, gatti performance doe doe" There's a bunch of contenders in Floyd's prime too, and at 140 psht.

Your response is weak. you respond with a question then "lol" over a "weak argument" and then you end with another question that made you "lol" And somehow you walked away from your computer thinking you've convinced me otherwise - now that's a laugh out loud moment. You type like a deluded school girl.

Crawford has not fought anyone like Floyd and neither has Floyd. Before Prescott I said Crawford is the real deal and it's an empty statement nowadays cause I think everyone's convinced of that too. I lean towards Crawford stylistically and that makes you angry? You're just another fan boy that's convinced himself Floyd's prime was greater than it actually was. And that's your issue. Your mind is made up, idgaf, be dumb.

[Sp0rty Cr@ig]

Bruh....if they fought in 09 it would've been a better version of mayweather as well....younger, more punch output, faster hands, reflexes and legs

Go through my history, only shot Manny had in my eyes was a 1 punch Roy vs Tarveresque ko

He was never gonna outhink, outwit Floyd who is the more versatile fighter.

Hell he couldn't even beat JMM clearly once and lost to and got outboxed by morales... Who is great but isn't as good or talented as mayweather

I agree bro.

Everyone was riding Pac's nuts back then aswell. Especially HBO. Bookies always had Floyd favorite.

[The Big Dunn]

We not talking Lennox, or GGG, we talking Floyd, and fair or not, everybody is not going to share your same Floyd sentiments.

Corley, imo, was a beltholder, and a low level one at best, not what I would consider a world champ,and thats all he ever was going to be. I give the olympic gold medalist more credit here because normally dudes who have won gold like oscar, sweet pea, sugar, ali, were highly touted prospects, atg's and hof's and boxing's best skilled guys overall, and crawford trounced this guy..

What sentiments? I'm fine if you don't like Floyd. But judging a legacy using another mans decisons and actions has nothing to do with Floyd.

That you would be ok with that just because it's Floyd we are discussing speaks volumes.

Diaz hasn't even been a beltholder at the pro level. He may be an Olympic gold medalist but that doesn't matter in the pros. Corley is the better pro. Besides, Diaz is no where near as skilled as prime Floyd.

Your opinion is fine, the reasoning doesn't make much sense.

[All in]

Not a fan of Floyd but he wins easy
10 rounds to 2

[therealpugilist]

I agree bro.

Everyone was riding Pac's nuts back then aswell. Especially HBO. Bookies always had Floyd favorite.

Imo only guy I saw with the best chance of beating Floyd was a prime Mosley @ 135-147 in 1998-2003

They fought too late for Mosley.

Anyone with a brain saw Manny struggle with boxers with less talent boxing like Bradley, JMM, morales, , and didn't fight guys like zahir raheem, or guys who relied on boxing n being sharp. He fought a lot of flat footed guys

Mayweather was all wrong ...could match him as an athlete and a quicker mind and ring IQ

[djtmal]

[QUOTE=The Big Dunn;17702924]What sentiments? I'm fine if you don't like Floyd. But judging a legacy using another mans decisons and actions has nothing to do with Floyd.

Why does everything have to be based on whether I like Floyd? I'm just giving my opinion just like everybody else on here, and I'm not using another man's decisions, floyd just didn't fight 'em, or the timeline went past the due date. I'm not getting into what guys did or didn't do because all that is speculative, and mainly biased depending on who you favor.

That you would be ok with that just because it's Floyd we are discussing speaks volumes.

I do that for anybody, not just Floyd. That's why you dudes are so sensitive. Roy Jones missed a lot of the UK guys @ 168. The Gman. Ppl say he fought a ton of cab drivers and civil service workers. You think that don't hurt him legacy-wise?
You think ppl are just picking on Mayweather because they ain't got nothing else better to do. If I say Crawford is the kind of dude that Floyd would most likely try to wait out, you best believe I have good facts to back that up.

Diaz hasn't even been a beltholder at the pro level. He may be an Olympic gold medalist but that doesn't matter in the pros. Corley is the better pro. Besides, Diaz is no where near as skilled as prime Floyd.

Your opinion is fine, the reasoning doesn't make much sense.

Again, who said Diaz is as skilled as Floyd? That's not the point at all. The point is, Crawford handled Diaz in such a way that suggests to me he could handle anybody from previous eras at that weight. Floyd, Pernell, Zab. I give him that much respect. Now if his career don't pan out the way it looks like it will then I stand to be corrected.

[therealpugilist]

[QUOTE=djtmal;17704438]

What sentiments? I'm fine if you don't like Floyd. But judging a legacy using another mans decisons and actions has nothing to do with Floyd.

Why does everything have to be based on whether I like Floyd? I'm just giving my opinion just like everybody else on here, and I'm not using another man's decisions, floyd just didn't fight 'em, or the timeline went past the due date. I'm not getting into what guys did or didn't do because all that is speculative, and mainly biased depending on who you favor.

That you would be ok with that just because it's Floyd we are discussing speaks volumes.

I do that for anybody, not just Floyd. That's why you dudes are so sensitive. Roy Jones missed a lot of the UK guys @ 168. The Gman. Ppl say he fought a ton of cab drivers and civil service workers. You think that don't hurt him legacy-wise?
You think ppl are just picking on Mayweather because they ain't got nothing else better to do. If I say Crawford is the kind of dude that Floyd would most likely try to wait out, you best believe I have good facts to back that up.

Diaz hasn't even been a beltholder at the pro level. He may be an Olympic gold medalist but that doesn't matter in the pros. Corley is the better pro. Besides, Diaz is no where near as skilled as prime Floyd.

Your opinion is fine, the reasoning doesn't make much sense.

Again, who said Diaz is as skilled as Floyd? That's not the point at all. The point is, Crawford handled Diaz in such a way that suggests to me he could handle anybody from previous eras at that weight. Floyd, Pernell, Zab. I give him that much respect. Now if his career don't pan out the way it looks like it will then I stand to be corrected.

because your posts are emotionally and opinion driven with very little in the area of boxing facts, techniques and history.....

[The Big Dunn]

[QUOTE=djtmal;17704438]

What sentiments? I'm fine if you don't like Floyd. But judging a legacy using another mans decisons and actions has nothing to do with Floyd.

Why does everything have to be based on whether I like Floyd? I'm just giving my opinion just like everybody else on here, and I'm not using another man's decisions, floyd just didn't fight 'em, or the timeline went past the due date. I'm not getting into what guys did or didn't do because all that is speculative, and mainly biased depending on who you favor.

That you would be ok with that just because it's Floyd we are discussing speaks volumes.

I do that for anybody, not just Floyd. That's why you dudes are so sensitive. Roy Jones missed a lot of the UK guys @ 168. The Gman. Ppl say he fought a ton of cab drivers and civil service workers. You think that don't hurt him legacy-wise?
You think ppl are just picking on Mayweather because they ain't got nothing else better to do. If I say Crawford is the kind of dude that Floyd would most likely try to wait out, you best believe I have good facts to back that up.

Diaz hasn't even been a beltholder at the pro level. He may be an Olympic gold medalist but that doesn't matter in the pros. Corley is the better pro. Besides, Diaz is no where near as skilled as prime Floyd.

Your opinion is fine, the reasoning doesn't make much sense.

Again, who said Diaz is as skilled as Floyd? That's not the point at all. The point is, Crawford handled Diaz in such a way that suggests to me he could handle anybody from previous eras at that weight. Floyd, Pernell, Zab. I give him that much respect. Now if his career don't pan out the way it looks like it will then I stand to be corrected.

I dont know why you have a special filter when Floyd is the subject of the discussion. You absolutely are using decisions made by people to evaluate Floyd's legacy. If you say you do this with other fighters as well, so be it. I think that is utterly ******ed but to each his own.

No, you have no facts. you have only your opinion. As you stated you don't care about the facts (you called it what guys did or didn't do) and don't factor them into your opinion. I think that is always a problem. Everyone can have an opinion, but the opinion should at least be an educated one.

I only asked because Diaz ihas not shown elite skill and has not been that great a pro. Most of his fights at 140 have been against journeymen and low level pros. I did think he got robbed against Petersen but that was a WW fight not JWW.

[NYG]

Floyd was the favorite over Pac since he was born. Floyd is just a better fighter overall. Smarter, moves better, reads his opponent better.

[djtmal]

[QUOTE=therealpugilist;17704446]

because your posts are emotionally and opinion driven with very little in the area of boxing facts, techniques and history.....

says the head cheerleader...