Comments Thread For: Arum: Pacquiao is FOTD - NOT Mayweather - It's Not Even Close!

[Skyway71]

^^^ If that's the case then Crawford, Spence or any undefeated fighter who complete the decade should be on the list. They're not. Try again.

[bngsdad]

^^^ If that's the case then Crawford, Spence or any undefeated fighter in this decade should be on the list. They're not. Try again.

But they wont because their big fights started 2nd half of the decade.

You don't think its strange that in spite of those 4ls Mannys on the list? Why? Now again, if floyd had those 4 you think even esnews will talk to him?

[pasawayako]

Anyone who isn't bias will say that pac is the FOTD but this award is only the lowest achievement for pac since he is the one and ONLY..

8 DIVISION CHAMPION
5 DIVISION LINEAL CHAMPION
4 DECADE CHAMPION
FLYWEIGHT CHAMPION UPTO JR MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPION
OLDEST WW IN THE HISTORY OF BOXING..

[Skyway71]

But they wont because their big fights started 2nd half of the decade.

You don't think its strange that in spite of those 4ls Mannys on the list? Why? Now again, if floyd had those 4 you think even esnews will talk to him?

Well it seems to some ppl that 0 on Floyd's record is a significant criteria towards FOTD. I said all I can to prove that criteria isn't enough. There's nothing strange about a fighter who is on the list who has evolved from his losses and coming back breaking more records no other fighter can match. And to prove you theory wrong about Pacs losses as a negative criteria toward being a candidate, Pac was the last FOTD with a loss and a draw. Being undefeated is not everything as I used Spence as an example of that.

[hugh grant]

Floyd s unbeaten record is useless, he's fought so much less and got controversial decisions, whilst not even fighting abroad. I really wish Floyd fans would stop going on about it.
Unbeaten records don't make people fawn over you they make people feel su****ious of you.

Even Floyd with his unbeaten record peple feel Floyd is overated and too cautious. Floyd should have beat people he wasnt supposed to and then we'd eat humble pie. When Pac lost to jmm people said i told you he was overrated all along. But then Pac came back and did great things to prove the praise he got before losing to jmm was justified by coming back from adversity.

Floyd don't want adversity, wants cws. Likes beating smaller, more worn fighters whove had longer careers and more fights and dining on them, passing them off as great wins?
If Floyd wins Fotd the bwaa better take long look in mirror at themsekves

[hugh grant]

If floyd had those 4 losses he wont be in any topic



That's how they differ

If Floyd had 4 losses and only fought 6 years, and much less than his peers he wouldn't be Fotd candudate.
But if he took risks beating opponents in their bacjyard, not ducking young lions and setting records like Pac he would be.
Without unbeaten record to protect Floyd couldve done some great things Every boxing decision he made seemed to revolve around that record, it held him and legacy back

[Combat Talk Radio]

I just told you... and also the fact that he is more accomplished than Floyd. You are not comprehending to well. Ali, Robinson, Leonard... just to name a few also have losses yet they are still recognized. And I never said Manny should win it. You can't justify why a guy who had an incomplete decade should even be considered in the list which was the point I was making.

They were recognized AFTER the fact. Not during the run. Manny is still active, first of all. Floyd's run is DONE - and in that run, he accomplished that anyone, because he never lost any fight, and only 2 in the generation would be logically scored anything lower than a B-.

Whereas Manny took

Bradley - F
Bradley 2 - C
Marquez 4 - F
Mayweather - F
Horn - F
Broner - B
Vargas - B
Thurman - C+

Meanwhile, Floyd:

Oscar - C
Guerrero - A+ with honors
Ortiz - A+
Carnelo - A+ with honors
Maidana 1 - C
Maidana 2 - B+
Marquez - A+ with honors
Berto - A+
McGregor - A
Hatton - A+ with honors
Mosley - A

Then Carnelo, who basically has a bunch of B minuses, and an F.

Come on man, it's not close.

If floyd had those 4 losses he wont be in any topic



That's how they differ

Good point.

It's just funny dude. A guy who took 4 losses in a decade is still a great fighter, but FOTD over a guy who only took 1 loss to The Best to Ever do it (Carnelo) and a guy who beat the other two (Floyd)? It's silly. The hatred is too clear.

[Dosumpthin]

Floyd beat Manny. Therefore although Manny is great, Floyd has proven to be greater.

Nothing can change that.

[hugh grant]

Floyd beat Manny. Therefore although Manny is great, Floyd has proven to be greater.

Nothing can change that.

Nah, logic don't work like that. Horn ain't greater than pac. When Bradley beat pac he wasn't considered greater as Pac got a better resume. Nobody who's beaten Pac is considered greater, neither is floyd.
Pac mostly beat common opponents more dominant unless Floyd cheated scales. Floyd being unbeaten.means nothing as he was cautious throughout career and if everything rests on his unbeaten record nobody thinks he's unbeaten anyway with gift decisions. Losses isn't a problem.any, it's being cautious getting things in your favour, not fighting abroad which hurts floyd

[Skyway71]

They were recognized AFTER the fact. Not during the run. Manny is still active, first of all. Floyd's run is DONE - and in that run, he accomplished that anyone, because he never lost any fight, and only 2 in the generation would be logically scored anything lower than a B-.

Whereas Manny took

Bradley - F
Bradley 2 - C
Marquez 4 - F
Mayweather - F
Horn - F
Broner - B
Vargas - B
Thurman - C+

Meanwhile, Floyd:

Oscar - C
Guerrero - A+ with honors
Ortiz - A+
Carnelo - A+ with honors
Maidana 1 - C
Maidana 2 - B+
Marquez - A+ with honors
Berto - A+
McGregor - A
Hatton - A+ with honors
Mosley - A

Then Carnelo, who basically has a bunch of B minuses, and an F.

I can see how bias you are when you include Delahoya and Hatton, the fights that happened before 2010. The topic is for 10' - 19' decade. You even credit the McGregor fight as legit. Gtfo. And taking a real good look at both their opposition in the decade in question, you'll realize Pac took more chances against more undefeated fighters than Floyd, more highly ranked WW and p4p fighters than Floyd, and more younger Lions than Floyd. Floyd did not even give the new gens the chance to take the torch. Instead he relinquished them and cut out early 4 yrs before the decade ends. Not only that, Floyd has a history of retiring early when the competition got tough. The undefeated fighter Floyd has is Canelo and I'll give him that even when Canelo was green and undefeated. You can spew more BS but it won't change the fact that Pac is the one taking on the real competition at any given time.