If PAC wins over 2 top WWs this year, is he FOTD again?

[chrisJS]

Fair point. I thought he beat Bradley clearly. The Horn fight he probably won as well.

I just don't see how you can go 12-4 in a decade and be in the running for FOTD just off a win against Thurman given the context-Thurman coming off a 22 month layoff.

Usyk , Ward and Crawford may not be considered but IMO they had a better decade. I left Canelo off due to the positive test. I don't think the writers will be as forgiving as the WBC.

Holyfield was 13-3-1 in the 1990's and with no controversial wins or losses (the Lewis draw really being a loss) and IMO he was in the running maybe as high as #3.

I think Pacquaio had some high peaks again and with this decade being so weak it is enough to be in the debate IMO with a win over Thurman. I don't think he'd beat Thurman though.

[The Big Dunn]

Where in the rule book does it say you cant be the FOTD, if you get robbed in other fighters countries, a couple of time, and get knocked out once?
Floyd never fought in anyones backyard so he doesn't even qualify as FOTD.
Floyd fans thought Floyd was too old to even mention floyds and Thurmans name in same sentence at 38 years old. So by floyds fans own admission Pac would be FOTD no question if he beats Thurman, at 40 and with 70 fights under belt and being a former flyweight.

What a ******ed question about the rule book.

Thurman isn't even the #1 ranked ww anymore. You want to give Manny a FOTD award during a decade where he never defeated the best in his division?

You have no real point. You like Manny and want to give him FOTD for that reason. Why not just be honest and post that.

[The Big Dunn]

Holyfield was 13-3-1 in the 1990's and with no controversial wins or losses (the Lewis draw really being a loss) and IMO he was in the running maybe as high as #3.

I think Pacquaio had some high peaks again and with this decade being so weak it is enough to be in the debate IMO with a win over Thurman. I don't think he'd beat Thurman though.

I know you know from 1990-2000 Holyfield beat Bowe, Douglass, Holmes, Foreman, Mercer, Tyson, Moorer. Manny's resume in this decade is no where near that.

Also you have guys like Crawford who unified multiple divisions during the decade, Usyk that cleaned out a division in a way no one has in a long time, Loma with his resume, Ward who went undefeated. Hell I'm not even counting Floyd and he had the 3 biggest fights of the decade and won all 3 (canelo, Manny, conor) or AJ.

I honesty don't see how Thurman moves him past that when Thurman isn't the #1 ww anymore.

[hugh grant]

I honesty don't see how Thurman moves him past that when Thurman isn't the #1 ww anymore.

Do you know what weight Pac started at? Its like when RJJ beat Ruiz, Ruiz maynot have been best heavyweight but you better admit that people were going to give RJJ credit for even doing things people aren't supposed to do, regardless if he didn't beat no1 heavyweight.
Thurman is more comparable to Spence and Crawford than a Ruiz was to Lennox Lewis or prime holyfield.
Do you think people care if on paper Thurman isn't no1? Spence and Crawford haven't beat Thurman to justify that they really deserve to be above Thurman.
If Pac beats Thurman he is in for a shot at being FOTD. In a fair world he will be. But as you know the world isn't always fair.

[The Big Dunn]

Do you know what weight Pac started at? Its like when RJJ beat Ruiz, Ruiz maynot have been best heavyweight but you better admit that people were going to give RJJ credit for even doing things people aren't supposed to do, regardless if he didn't beat no1 heavyweight.
Thurman is more comparable to Spence and Crawford than a Ruiz was to Lennox Lewis or prime holyfield.
Do you think people care if on paper Thurman isn't no1? Spence and Crawford haven't beat Thurman to justify that they really deserve to be above Thurman.
If Pac beats Thurman he is in for a shot at being FOTD. In a fair world he will be. But as you know the world isn't always fair.

You can delete the part of the post but it doesn't make it go away. Even if Manny beats Thurman his decade doesn't eclipse the decade of the guys I mentioned.

You keep babbling about Manny but have yet to take an honest look at what other fighters have done this decade. Look at everything each of them has accomplished and compare. Then add a Manny win over Thurman.

In a fair world, you'd make it about what was done, not who you like.

[hugh grant]

You keep babbling about Manny but have yet to take an honest look at what other fighters have done this decade. Look at everything each of them has accomplished and compare. Then add a Manny win over Thurman.

.

Many fighters have had a good decade, and its a case of take a pick. But youd better believe people will take into consideration Pacs age and what hes willing to do, and what hes doing past prime.

[IceTrayDaGang]

I know you know from 1990-2000 Holyfield beat Bowe, Douglass, Holmes, Foreman, Mercer, Tyson, Moorer. Manny's resume in this decade is no where near that.

Also you have guys like Crawford who unified multiple divisions during the decade, Usyk that cleaned out a division in a way no one has in a long time, Loma with his resume, Ward who went undefeated. Hell I'm not even counting Floyd and he had the 3 biggest fights of the decade and won all 3 (canelo, Manny, conor) or AJ.

I honesty don't see how Thurman moves him past that when Thurman isn't the #1 ww anymore.

wtf?????

and those guys you mention, they beat up on bums who got a gift decision belt. example jeff horn.

[The Big Dunn]

Many fighters have had a good decade, and its a case of take a pick. But youd better believe people will take into consideration Pacs age and what hes willing to do, and what hes doing past prime.

No it isn't. It's a case of comparing what they all did and making a fair choice. You whine about Manny being robbed yet want to rob people who have accomplished more.

Yes, you can take his age into consideration. If that is the case, then Floyd's win over Canelo needs to be elevated the same way. But of course you will try and lessen that.

look, you aren't interested in anything fair. You want to slurp Manny and give him something because you like him, regardless if it means a more deserving person loses out.

[The Big Dunn]

wtf?????

and those guys you mention, they beat up on bums who got a gift decision belt. example jeff horn.

You are no different than hugh grant. You like Manny. Cool. there are other men that had far better decades if you list everything they all did.

Basically you and hugh grant are arguing that Manny should win FOTD when he never won a FOTY award during the decade.

GTFOH !

[hugh grant]

Yes, you can take his age into consideration. If that is the case, then Floyd's win over Canelo needs to be elevated the same way. But of course you will try and lessen that.

look, you aren't interested in anything fair. You want to slurp Manny and give him something because you like him, regardless if it means a more deserving person loses out.

I bought the idea up Pac should get extra brownie points for beating these young prime lions, from the very fact Floyd fans boasting that ancient 35 or 36 year old Floyd beat young nelo. But the difference is Nell wasn't prime, in fact he was green and largely untested, with a cw.
So how much credit do you want us to give floyd?
Thurman is in prime and a pfp guy, not green and untested and drained. Spence and crawford have no win over thurman, so don't even know if they deserve to be rated higher.
You keep saying I like pac, and I do, but why don't you admit you hate Pac with a passion? Because you know PacS greater than floyd. Admit it. Of course you don't want Pac to be fotd. Because you don't like pac. And fotd escaped Floyd twice. Floyd didn't even hang around to 2020 to have chance. It must really get to you. Pac getting fotd again would psychologically destroy you, so if course you will try to deny Pac at any cost.