Yeah he probably should be on the list tbh,if Flanagan and selby are options so should Khan even though he did very little at lightweight. Hypothetically if Khan was on the OP list where would you have him?
Campbell fought better fighters at 135, Garcia would have destroyed Khan`s opponents with ease, Khan would not have been a champ at 135 if he could figt at that weight now, the division is far better than it was when Khan was at 135, Khan got knocked out in one round at 135 by a nobody.
Flanagan remind's me of Norman Greenbaum who did the song "spirit in the sky". One good hit (magdelano) and that's it really.
Why not Spartacus? Mitchell dropped a younger,fresher linares than the one luke fought and gave him a hella fight years after burns walked through and dominated Mitchell.styles make fights we know but it's likely/probable imo that version of burns would have done just as good if not better than Luke.
Voted Ricky Burns. Wouldn't disagree that Campbell was a better boxer, technically, but for an overall ranking of their careers it has to be Burns.
Burns struggled against a good technical fighter in Crawford and he would likely have struggled against Loma. Linares not in the same class. However I don't see the point in comparing losing efforts and Burns had more grit and will to win than Campbell who had an Olympian style and I think prime Burns would push Campbell beyond his comfort zone. If Campbell was capable of beating a fighter at that level he would have a win at that level.
I think burns was better than a lot of people give him credit for but that's just my opinion.also wouldn't categorise Campbell's performance against Garcia as doing well tbh and imo he should've done better.