Golovin is so overrated it's hilarious

[Robbie Barrett]

I'm sorry it is quite strange when a moron like you calls someone a ******..
Roy jones was overrated?
Gtfoh.. you either don't know boxing or you are a noob..

Yes he was, time has corrected that though. He used to be in everybody's top 10 ATG. Now hardly anyone has him there. OVERRATED.

[dan_cov]

You do know people who claim he would beat Hagler, Roy Jones are as lunatic as fans calling Floyd TBE right?
They make up what 10-20% of the fan base and they should be called nuthuggers not fans..

I'm not sure why people can't make their own opinion of any fighter and need media or haters to help make their decision..

Floyd has a great resume though and I think there is enough there to make some sort of legitimate claim for that, he is certainly up there after proving himself as the best in the sport over several eras. He's up there man. He is in that discussion.

GGG on the other hand what are they going off? Beating Brook?
lol He hadn't even beat Jacobs yet and they were saying this.
Not just a few, almost every GGG fan. The sheer hype was brainwashing most boxing fans who should know better.

These polls are lopsided too.

One guy has about 20 wins over world class opponents spanning multiple weights, the other has zero and is being already labelled as an ATG, the best MW ever, etc see the difference?

[dan_cov]

Sorry, off that list only Cotto stands out.. Mosley was old as Warren Buffet's balls and Trout is decent fighter at best.. Lara is a good scalp but the result was as debatable as it can get..

So what are GGGs wins then?
Jacobs is no Cotto, he's no Lara either. Trout at the time was deemed a legitimate threat having just shutout Cotto.

[BoxingFan85]

Yes he was, time has corrected that though. He used to be in everybody's top 10 ATG. Now hardly anyone has him there. OVERRATED.

You do know that ROY fought in the 90s, that was his prime..
Just because Ali got beat by some no hopers at the end of his career doesn't make him an ATG.. SMDH
It's like saying If Floyd had lost to Connor he would not be one of the best of this generation..
Do your research on Roy before you utter such drivel..

[Robbie Barrett]

You do know that ROY fought in the 90s, that was his prime..
Just because Ali got beat by some no hopers at the end of his career doesn't make him an ATG.. SMDH
It's like saying If Floyd had lost to Connor he would not be one of the best of this generation..
Do your research on Roy before you utter such drivel..

Nothing to do with that. When the fans are no longer caught up in hype people can assess how good a fighter really was. Tyson was viewed as one of the best ever when he was on top, now he doesn't even make it into most people top 10 HW's. Pacquiao about 4 or 5 years ago was voted #2 all time ahead of ALi in an online poll. Put that same poll up today and there's no way in hell that would happen.

[BoxingFan85]

Floyd has a great resume though and I think there is enough there to make some sort of legitimate claim for that, he is certainly up there after proving himself as the best in the sport over several eras. He's up there man. He is in that discussion.

GGG on the other hand what are they going off? Beating Brook?
lol He hadn't even beat Jacobs yet and they were saying this.
Not just a few, almost every GGG fan. The sheer hype was brainwashing most boxing fans who should know better.

These polls are lopsided too.

One guy has about 20 wins over world class opponents spanning multiple weights, the other has zero and is being already labelled as an ATG, the best MW ever, etc see the difference?

Again who is making ATG for GGG? How many are making those claims?
You can't bundle everyone under one umbrella and say they are all like that.. if you know any better you wouldn't do that ofcourse..

Floyd arguably was one of the best of this generation no ***in way he is TBE and only a nuthugger would claim that..

If a guy beats every other guy in his division then he is the best in his division no holds barred.. just because he didn't move doesn't make his skill or dominance any lesser... SMDH..

[BoxingFan85]

Nothing to do with that. When the fans are no longer caught up in hype people can assess how good a fighter really was. Tyson was viewed as one of the best ever when he was on top, now he doesn't even make it into most people top 10 HW's.

Tyson was ***in overrated.. beat a bunch of no hopers and a retired former champ.. when he stepped up to someone who could punch he lost.. if there is a claim to the most overrated boxer it's got to Mike Tyson..

[BoxingFan85]

Nothing to do with that. When the fans are no longer caught up in hype people can assess how good a fighter really was. Tyson was viewed as one of the best ever when he was on top, now he doesn't even make it into most people top 10 HW's. Pacquiao about 4 or 5 years ago was voted #2 all time ahead of ALi in an online poll. Put that same poll up today and there's no way in hell that would happen.

Yeah because PAC lost to Floyd while both were still being active.. You are telling me if Floyd had lost to Connor it would tarnish his legacy?
Ali lost to Spinks and Berbick so what's your claim to his ATG status?

[Robbie Barrett]

Tyson was ***in overrated.. beat a bunch of no hopers and a retired former champ.. when he stepped up to someone who could punch he lost.. if there is a claim to the most overrated boxer it's got to Mike Tyson..

Yes but he was still a good fighter. Which proves my point that good fighters still can be overrated. That's what Golovkin is. He's a good fighter but people are getting caught up in the hype and making ridiculous claims of ATG/P4P.

[Robbie Barrett]

Yeah because PAC lost to Floyd while both were still being active.. You are telling me if Floyd had lost to Connor it would tarnish his legacy?
Ali lost to Spinks and Berbick so what's your claim to his ATG status?

Again you're proving my point. People thought Pacquiao was the 2nd greatest of all time, he lost to Mayweather and now that's changed. So those fans claiming he was so great were overrating him.