Re: Is George Foreman the a masive underaceiver?
I think Gil Clancy could have worked with him to better shore up his defense earlier on, and perhaps his stamina too. with improvements in those areas, he would have been very difficult to beat, and was already a monster as it was. In addition, taking 15 months off after Zaire was a mistake. He should have climbed right back into the saddle and gotten right back into the mix of things by facing some of the top contenders, to keep his persuit of the title alive. The Jimmy Young affair was disgraceful. Apparently some other clown, and not Clancy was calling the shots in his corner and as result, Foreman failed to take advantage of some key oppertunities in that fight.
So yes, I do think that if certain roads were taken, Foreman may have acheived more than he actually did. As for being an underacheiver, I'd also have to say yes, but its not by much.