Comments Thread For: Keith Thurman To Errol Spence: Fight Me Or Leave The Division!

[Stev3]

How does it feel Keith? Roles reversed now

[HewJohnson]

Keith would drop Spence.

[SUBZER0ED]

————
You can deflect all you want which is typical but you’re responding to Thurman’s idea of a rematch with PAC.
You stated he needs a big relevant fight in order to warrant a fight with PAC (or anyone for that matter).

I’m literally using your own logic of PAC doing exactly the same thing by granting irrelevant fighters a chance to fight him.
If you believe Rios was relevant then Thurman has to be even if he was coming off a loss to PAC. Rios was coming off a loss just like all the other examples I listed.

But do your thing, deflect. As always.

Apparently, you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills or stop getting high. I never said Thurman needs a big relevant fight in order to warrant a fight with Pacquiao. They already fought, so why would I say that? What I said was after his long layoff and subsequent loss to Pacquiao, Thurman needs a big win in order to prove his relevance.

[Oregonian]

Apparently, you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills or stop getting high. I never said Thurman needs a big relevant fight in order to warrant a fight with Pacquiao. They already fought, so why would I say that? What I said was after his long layoff and subsequent loss to Pacquiao, Thurman needs a big win in order to prove his relevance.

——————

Alright. I’m just going to use this very post.

“Thurman needs a big win to prove his relevance”.

Did Brandon Rios or Mathysse or Mosley or Clottey or Margarito or Broner have a big win to prove their relevance prior to fighting PAC?
They were all coming off losses or draws or garbage win.

How is Thurman any different or worse than those guys I just listed?
Do you understand my question? I’m not sure how else to explain it to you but I used your very own logic.

[Walexhris]

I surely hope you're not saying Terrance would be stepping up to washed up Keith?? If this fight ever happens which I seriously doubt, Keith would look for a way out faster than Khan did vs Terrance!

Yeah I consider Keith to be a serious step up, when compared to Crawford's previous opponents.
Wait, you watched the fight against Pacquiao and said to yourself, " Wow, see how washed up Keith is" really?

[Ca$ual Fan]

——————

Alright. I’m just going to use this very post.

“Thurman needs a big win to prove his relevance”.

Did Brandon Rios or Mathysse or Mosley or Clottey or Margarito or Broner have a big win to prove their relevance prior to fighting PAC?
They were all coming off losses or draws or garbage win.

How is Thurman any different or worse than those guys I just listed?
Do you understand my question? I’m not sure how else to explain it to you but I used your very own logic.

Yeah I think everybody got your point. You have so much obsession with Pacquiao even though the topic of thread is about Thurman and Spence

You know your logic also applies to Spence and others but you just have to stick with your Pacquiao rants when he’s kinda irrelevant here

[Rome-By-Ko]

Hahahahahaha,is this guy serious..Is he not injured anyway??

[Rome-By-Ko]

——————

Alright. I’m just going to use this very post.

“Thurman needs a big win to prove his relevance”.

Did Brandon Rios or Mathysse or Mosley or Clottey or Margarito or Broner have a big win to prove their relevance prior to fighting PAC?
They were all coming off losses or draws or garbage win.

How is Thurman any different or worse than those guys I just listed?
Do you understand my question? I’m not sure how else to explain it to you but I used your very own logic.

Well Thurman actually loss to Pac already..In a clear fashion..So I do think that makes a difference,no??

[Oregonian]

Yeah I think everybody got your point. You have so much obsession with Pacquiao even though the topic of thread is about Thurman and Spence

You know your logic also applies to Spence and others but you just have to stick with your Pacquiao rants when he’s kinda irrelevant here

————

Welcome to The party Mr Johnny Come Lately!!

The point of this thread is about Thurman returning to being relevant by fighting someone relevant. Two, Thurman is asking for a rematch. His fight with PAC was a close fight and could potentially warrant a rematch. Are you with me so far, Johnny?

I gave examples of irrelevant guys that PAC fought because the guy I was responding to said for Keith to get a rematch with PAC, he needs to fight and beat someone relevant. None of those bums fought anyone relevant yet they all got to fight PAC.

I understand your first language is Tagalog but I hope I was as clear as can be?

Now, do your thing and come back gun blazing pretending to be so offended.

[Oregonian]

Well Thurman actually loss to Pac already..In a clear fashion..So I do think that makes a difference,no??

———

I agree with you. But that guy kept saying that Thurman needs to fight someone relevant to stay relevant.
Thurman did lose in a good fight but it doesn’t mean he’s no longer relevant.

And I gave examples of bums that PAC fought when they were no longer relevant.