Originally Posted by Royal-T-Bag
It's now undeniable that Broner is a better fighter than Valero. Much more rounded, just as powerful (maybe moreso considering he took out Demarco quicker with less punches and actually dropped him), just as quick, far better defensively, physically stronger, equal chin, better infighter.... You name it, at 22 Broner just surpassed Valero's career best win and did it in more impressive fashion vs a better more seasoned version of Demarco.
I would love to see Broner dismantle Rios in his first fight at 140 after decimating Burns in a few rounds. Rios would get beaten so badly especially after Broner proved he's got an inside game, what could Rios possibly do? Funny how before the fight Demarco was considered the best LW by many and people were saying he was gonna give him a tough fight and now he's being written off as bum hahaha Broners one of those guys that some people will never give him credit no matter what they'll always look for ways to discredit him on his inevitable rise to face of boxing and the upper echelon of the P4P list.
valero was a wild fighter, pacman before he fought jmm is what valero reminded me of. he was good fighter but to compare him to boxer like broner was always some dumb ****. they asked that question many of times on different sites. could broner beat demarco worse then valero did ? the answer is yes but now you will here valero ruined him and demarco was a chump. its funny how you read one thing before the fight and something different in the next fight. broner can fight and box, he dont have to run, has power and speed and a smart fighter in the ring. late them hate, the hated on floyd and it would not be right if they aint hate on broner as well.