Pac vs Floyd: Who had the better career BEFORE Welterweight?

[O Prophet]

Both Pacquiao and Mayweather were already Hall-of-famers before even moving up to 147. So who had accomplished more in their careers pre-welterweight?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Pacquiao easily. Most of Floyd’s best work came at 147 and above.

[RespekonMyName]

Pacquiao easily. Most of Floyd’s best work came at 147 and above.

I can dig that. I feel Pac's resume was smoke and mirrors at welter after Cotto though.

Floyd arguably had the better wins with Corrales, JLC 2x, Hernandez, Manfredy. But Pac had those exciting fights with Morales and JMM, while punishing Barrera. Those are legendary names. But I think Corrales would've wiped out all of Pac's great opponents if they met at 130.

[Vodkaholic]

Pacquiao. People need to stop asking this dumbass question over and over. Pacquiao has the better resume and better legacy. That simple.

[hugh grant]

I can dig that. I feel Pac's resume was smoke and mirrors at welter after Cotto though.

On the contrary Floyd s resume his whole career is smoke and mirrors. Everyone Floyd beat didn't do anything after losing to floyd, apart from pac, nelo, jmm and corrales, which suggests Floyd fought people at end of career or they weren't all that good in first place.

Pac s got better career and legacy. Cotto said Pac would have beat floyd in prime, dlh said it also, jmm said Pac be st of era etc.
If it's any consolation to floyd, he's probably the greatest unbeaten fighter. Above marciano, ottke, Calzaghe etc

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I can dig that. I feel Pac's resume was smoke and mirrors at welter after Cotto though.

Floyd arguably had the better wins with Corrales, JLC 2x, Hernandez, Manfredy. But Pac had those exciting fights with Morales and JMM, while punishing Barrera. Those are legendary names. But I think Corrales would've wiped out all of Pac's great opponents if they met at 130.

147 and above I’d give it to Floyd. overall it’s very close, probably depends whether you value names alone or context. I think you can legitimately make a case for either as both have ATG resumes.

I think Marquez would have done a job on Corrales at 130 tbh. He would have counterpunched the f*** out of him IMO.

[O Prophet]

Pacquiao. People need to stop asking this dumbass question over and over. Pacquiao has the better resume and better legacy. That simple.

“That simple” is not a coherent argument. What are you 6? You were obviously breastfed by your Dad which messed up your brain. (That wasn’t milk)

Back your viewpoint up like everyone else or stfu, tool.

[pretty boy_]

Both greats below 147 but I'd say Mayweather. He would beat Manny at any weight.

[O Prophet]

147 and above I’d give it to Floyd. overall it’s very close, probably depends whether you value names alone or context. I think you can legitimately make a case for either as both have ATG resumes.

I think Marquez would have done a job on Corrales at 130 tbh. He would have counterpunched the f*** out of him IMO.

I have Marquez beating Corrales as well.

[Roadblock]

On the contrary Floyd s resume his whole career is smoke and mirrors. Everyone Floyd beat didn't do anything after losing to floyd, apart from pac, nelo, jmm and corrales, which suggests Floyd fought people at end of career or they weren't all that good in first place.

Pac s got better career and legacy. Cotto said Pac would have beat floyd in prime, dlh said it also, jmm said Pac be st of era etc.
If it's any consolation to floyd, he's probably the greatest unbeaten fighter. Above marciano, ottke, Calzaghe etc

Here is a very simple thing for you to do, when you say Floyd did this or did that, ask the very same question of Manny in the same circumstances.

If you do the above you will not come of as a complete one eyed idiot that is ALWAYS showcasing the Kettle calling the Pot black.