You could could make a strong argument that Max Baer hit harder. Whether he did or not, Morrison obviously wasn't in a different category.
Agreed. I personally have Baer and Morrison fairly close in overall power rankings. It's asinine to have one much higher than the other by a huge amount.
If Morrison lost to Michael Bentt how can he be favored over everyone Louis beat? He wasn't even able to beat Ross Purrity
I can see no possible justification for that claim. Morrison has very few elite wins, and he got destroyed by Michael Bentt. His best wins in the real world are not all that, and we have to conclude that anybody with a whiff of power had a good chance against him.
Bent would KO any opponent if he landed that many punches on him. And Morrison's defense might look poor for the 90s, it would be great in Louis's era
Ruddock and Bowe both had poor defense and were from Morrison's era. Where is the evidence for some advance in defense? The 1990s have an advantage in size and athleticism over prior eras perhaps but there is plenty to be criticized in terms of skills. Moreover, you had fighters from earlier eras like Foreman, Holmes, and Tucker having some success
No it wouldn't. The best defensive fighters of Louis's era, were better than anybody around at heavyweight in Morrisons era. Much smaller than most of them, but dedicated defensive specialists. There might have been advances in size, and athleticism, but there has been no advance in defense.
This is biggest load of bull**** I've ever seen. Bent would KO anyone if he landed like that? So Danny "El Intocable" Wofford and his 100+ defeats was too good for him to land like that? I mean, he had to be better defensively than Morrison. Plus, he fought all the way until the mid-late 2000s so he's essentially a deity. So you throw Morrison in a different era and he goes from getting his face smashed in by Joe Hipp to Pernell Whitaker? Give it up, you clown. This agenda is embarrassing.
