Originally Posted by Flea Man
But that doesn't mean Johnson should be recognised as the best flyweight of that time, even if I think he'd have a very good chance at beating the top guys. Where do you stand on that? I don't think Morel was the no.1 either.
My knowledge below 122 is pretty poor and I'm no authority on flyweight, so in terms of details I can't comment, but just watching MJ I see something very special. Was he the best of his time, well if they didn't fight we'll never know, was SRR the best of his time above Burley? We'll never know.
People have compared him to Hamed, saying the latter achieved more, which may well be the case, I rate Hamed highly as you know, but MJ as a boxer just looks better to me, although Hamed's power is ofcourse the X Factor and he should make the Hall too
Still if you're criticising Too Sharp for not unifying you can criticise all manner of HOFamer's (half or more?) from all eras for not facing the best in their division. The standard isn't that high, most boxers missed fights get overlooked and the 20s and 30s seem to have fringe contenders making the Hall. Not a high standard at all, I see the reaction as here more of it being his straight election