Originally posted by hugh grant
View Post
I'm saying that if - IF - the fights Floyd had in the last decade matched up with the fights others had in the last decade, then it doesn't matter if he only fought for 5 of those years.
Discounting a fighter for only fighting part of the decade is nonsense. All that matters is what they achieved within that decade.
If you want to say that what he achieved in those 5 years doesn't equal what some other fighters achieved - that's a totally different discussion, and you could probably make some good points. That's just weighing up his achievements from 2010-2019 against the achievements of others from 2010-2019, which is what we should be doing.
If people don't believe Floyd should be FOTD, that should be because of what he achieved compared to what others achieved. It shouldn't be based on the faulty reasoning that he only fought for part of the decade, so must be disqualified.
His achievements are limited by only fighting for half of the decade. That makes it harder for him to be FOTD. It doesn't outright disqualify him though.
Comment