After Pacquiao Beats Spence and/or Crawford. Where would u rank him?

[hugh grant]

7

Because we all know thats not the truth, I dont even have to say what the truth is we all know who the best fighter of this era is.

Even simpletons know because it echos in their empty head like a ball bouncing of a wall.

Continue your delusional journey the ball wont stop bouncing until your wall is see through, and some walls are too thick.

Floyd s too ridiculed and a figure of fun to be the best.
I'm sure many historians think floyds best of era. But boxing fans opinions can't be discounted. By far more boxing fans think Pac is greater around world. I wouldn't lie to you. Probably for every 1 person who thinks floyds the best of era, 90 people think pac is. I'm sure some people are biased for PAC, but I'm as sure there are people as biased for Floyd.

[El_Mero]

IF, and thats a big if, he beats both Spence and Crawford, I would have to rank him as the best of his generation....period

[FredRekk]

Pacquiao is TOP 3 ATG.

[hugh grant]

IF, and thats a big if, he beats both Spence and Crawford, I would have to rank him as the best of his generation....period

Imaginery barrier game again beat both, spence and crawford ha ha?. We both know that's not happening. SR R and SRL wouldn't beat thurman, spence or crawford at 41. So why does Pac have to? Why not beat Nelo now also for good measure?
But we knows Pac s best of era already. It's the worst kept secret in the world. Floyd being naturally bigger than PAC maybe Floyd should beat PAC at least 3 times, at least 2 which should be by ko to be considered as good as PAC?

[Roadblock]

7

Floyd s too ridiculed and a figure of fun to be the best.
I'm sure many historians think floyds best of era. But boxing fans opinions can't be discounted. By far more boxing fans think Pac is greater around world. I wouldn't lie to you. Probably for every 1 person who thinks floyds the best of era, 90 people think pac is. I'm sure some people are biased for PAC, but I'm as sure there are people as biased for Floyd.

You gotta be on drugs .

Define Greater, I said best fighter of this era !

Its not about what the masses think lol, its what the inside boxing people think, you keep referring to fansville where sheep follow sheep.

[FredRekk]

You gotta be on drugs .

Define Greater, I said best fighter of this era !

Its not about what the masses think lol, its what the inside boxing people think, you keep referring to fansville where sheep follow sheep.

You’re a sheep.

[El_Mero]

Imaginery barrier game again beat both, spence and crawford ha ha?. We both know that's not happening. SR R and SRL wouldn't beat thurman, spence or crawford at 41. So why does Pac have to? Why not beat Nelo now also for good measure?
But we knows Pac s best of era already. It's the worst kept secret in the world. Floyd being naturally bigger than PAC maybe Floyd should beat PAC at least 3 times, at least 2 which should be by ko to be considered as good as PAC?

I dont know wtf I just read. Gtfoh

[The Big Dunn]

Floyd s great. An ATG I wouldn't argue against. But he's not the best of era. He's one of the best. Why isn't that enough?

It isn't enough because Floyd has been voted the best of the era in every credible poll because his resume is better than Manny's. He has decisive wins over JMM, Shane, Hatton, Cotto, and Fishnets, the other top guys in and around his weight from the era.

The consensus #2 from the era is Manny. Remind you when Manny won FOTD, Floyd had a better record than he had during the decade. He then decisively beat Manny, no matter how much you try to dilute the victory.

You can't make a credible case for Manny being the best of the era over Floyd. You should be satisfied with him being #2.

[Zaroku]

You’re a sheep.

pull pac's lumpia outta your azz..

you are a ****ing idiot.

[hugh grant]

It isn't enough because Floyd has been voted the best of the era in every credible poll because his resume is better than Manny's. He has decisive wins over JMM, Shane, Hatton, Cotto, and Fishnets, the other top guys in and around his weight from the era.

The consensus #2 from the era is Manny. Remind you when Manny won FOTD, Floyd had a better record than he had during the decade. He then decisively beat Manny, no matter how much you try to dilute the victory.

You can't make a credible case for Manny being the best of the era over Floyd. You should be satisfied with him being #2.

OMG and Pac hasn't got decisive wins? He also has 3 wins if not scorecard error against JMM. Whilst Floyd was a cheated scales bloated win!
YOur really not making a good case. Maybe you shouldn't say anything in case you dig a bigger hole.
People don't think you can make a case for Floyd being better than Pac, so your twisting logic again and trying to play reverse phcology again.