Tweet
Previously on P4P:
We saw how Mike Tyson clearly qualified for P4P and dwarfed anything Terence Crawford had achieved.
We also saw how Floyd Mayweather Jr. clearly qualified for P4P and dwarfed anything Terence Crawford had achieved.
Recently, I got to thinking. Crawford - or at least how the media and his fans present him - reminds me a lot of John 'The Beast' Mugabi. And it is this man, that everyone knows and remembers fondly, that we'll cover.
Mugabi went pro at 19-20 - same as Crawford. So he's a good parallel.
Mugabi had 25 fights, 25 wins, 25 KOs, by the time he hit 25-26. But once Mugabi had faced quality names such as Hagler, Norris and Gerald McClellan, he lost every time he stepped up to these A-level contenders, all by some form of knockout.
The vast majority of his resume consists of safe opposition that he looked excellent against as a result - he only went the full distance 4 times in 50 fights, which is shocking.
While Crawford has not lost, his level of opposition is very similar to 'The Beast' minus these A-levels, and since he has not yet stepped up to an A-level, he doesn't have the experience under fire, possibly resulting in a similar loss risk as with Mugabi. Hagler was the worst opponent to put in front of him at that time and arguably too large a leap. Any A-level Crawford faces would likely be the same, because Crawford hasn't been tested.
However, nobody ever considered John 'The Beast' Mugabi to be a P4P level fighter, even given an amazing KO ratio and excellent fighting form. He's rightfully recognized as one of the best punchers all time, one of the hardest hitters all time, and in general a threat to 95% of the roster. But none of that equated to a P4P status for him - because his resume in general didn't warrant it. He only looked unstoppable against C-levels and sometimes B-levels.
In closing: we see that while Mugabi lost every A-level fight he ever had, he at least had them. He at least tried. Despite getting sparked out every time, he tried. Crawford has NOT tried.
Both looking good against the C and B-levels. But Mugabi stepped up after 25 fights, Crawford has not after 36 fights.
I thus ask: why do you consider Crawford P4P #1 now? Especially if you accept that Beast Mugabi was never #1?
We saw how Mike Tyson clearly qualified for P4P and dwarfed anything Terence Crawford had achieved.
We also saw how Floyd Mayweather Jr. clearly qualified for P4P and dwarfed anything Terence Crawford had achieved.
Recently, I got to thinking. Crawford - or at least how the media and his fans present him - reminds me a lot of John 'The Beast' Mugabi. And it is this man, that everyone knows and remembers fondly, that we'll cover.
Mugabi went pro at 19-20 - same as Crawford. So he's a good parallel.
Mugabi had 25 fights, 25 wins, 25 KOs, by the time he hit 25-26. But once Mugabi had faced quality names such as Hagler, Norris and Gerald McClellan, he lost every time he stepped up to these A-level contenders, all by some form of knockout.
The vast majority of his resume consists of safe opposition that he looked excellent against as a result - he only went the full distance 4 times in 50 fights, which is shocking.
While Crawford has not lost, his level of opposition is very similar to 'The Beast' minus these A-levels, and since he has not yet stepped up to an A-level, he doesn't have the experience under fire, possibly resulting in a similar loss risk as with Mugabi. Hagler was the worst opponent to put in front of him at that time and arguably too large a leap. Any A-level Crawford faces would likely be the same, because Crawford hasn't been tested.
However, nobody ever considered John 'The Beast' Mugabi to be a P4P level fighter, even given an amazing KO ratio and excellent fighting form. He's rightfully recognized as one of the best punchers all time, one of the hardest hitters all time, and in general a threat to 95% of the roster. But none of that equated to a P4P status for him - because his resume in general didn't warrant it. He only looked unstoppable against C-levels and sometimes B-levels.
In closing: we see that while Mugabi lost every A-level fight he ever had, he at least had them. He at least tried. Despite getting sparked out every time, he tried. Crawford has NOT tried.
Both looking good against the C and B-levels. But Mugabi stepped up after 25 fights, Crawford has not after 36 fights.
I thus ask: why do you consider Crawford P4P #1 now? Especially if you accept that Beast Mugabi was never #1?
Comment