After watching all of Crawford's and Spence's fights, this is my conclusion.

One thing I've noticed about the boxing community is that the more "flashy" fighter is always favored. Based on the eye test, Crawford's boxing is just "prettier". Crawford mesmerizes you with his beautiful counter-punching and timing while Spence makes you cringe with his relentless pressure and bone-crushing power. But, when you look at both fighters and study who they fought (when they fought them), it is clear that neither guy is really more "skilled" than the other. Crawford is more twitchy, has slightly faster hands and feet, has exceptional timing, and is great at judging distance. Spence has better defense, chin, jab, better in the pocket, better at cutting off the ring, and he seems to have much better stamina (he threw 110 punches in round 9 against Ugas).

If you were to put a gun to my head, I would favor Spence by SD or late-round stoppage. Here's the issue I have with Crawford, if you compare the resumes of both (including the Kell Brook and Porter fight), it is clear that Spence has fought the better competition. Now, I am not saying that Crawford wouldn't have beaten the same versions of Kell Brook, Porter, Danny Garcia, Mikey Garcia, and Ugas that Crawford the Spence did, I'm just saying we have not seen him fight anyone as good as the version of fighters that Spence has fought.

Let's look at Crawford's best wins excluding Porter and Brook (I'm excluding these two to prove a point).
1. Gamboa: Gamboa (the fighter that Crawford said hurt him the most) came up two weight classes and buzzed Crawford. This is not a good sign if you're fighting someone like Spence who is arguably a top 10 puncher in the sport (Top 3 at WW).
2. Postol: Postol had a terrific win but nothing really special (would've lost to Danny and Ugas at 140). I actually think Josh Taylor did better even though it could be argued that Postol was a better version compared to the Postol that fought Craw
3. Benvidez: It took Crawford 12 to Stop a one-legged Benavidez (Spence would've taken care of him in 6". Crawford struggled with the length of Benavidez who was literally fighting on one leg. The guy could barely pivot.
4. Diaz: Diaz was a one-hit wonder who was extremely hyped up.
5. Horn: Everyone knows that he lost that fight to Manny 9-3. Horn was never anything special and would've gotten battered in the rematch.
6. Khan: Way past his prime and not the same Khan that was at 140.
Now, let's look at two common opponents (Porter and Brook).

Brook: Just being objective, neither guy fought the best version of Brook. Brook went up two weight divisions to fight the Number 1 P4P fighter in GGG and came back down to 147 to fight Spence. Crawford, on the other hand, fought a version of Kell Brook who was past his prime, had three fights at 154, and took the fight at 147 on a 6-week notice (Even Ingles refused to coach him). Since Kell Brook was much fresher at 147 when he fought Spence, you have to say that Spence fought a much better version of Kell Brook.

Porter: Porter was one foot away from retirement and Kenny Porter admitted that Porter did not train as hard as he did when he fought Spence( If you watch both fights, you can tell). Plus, I had it tied when Crawford fought Porter before the knockdown. With Spence, even before the knockdown, I had it 9-3 for Spence (Porter was missing a lot of shots and Spence put on a defensive masterclass utilizing his jab and shell defense.

To sum it up, in almost every fight Crawford has had, he had some type of advantage whether it be a huge disparity of skills, power, size...etc, or fighters just simply being past their best.

Crawford has never faced anyone who possesses the perfect combination of power, fundamentals, jab, defense, and pressure that Spence brings. Had Crawford defeated Manny, Prime Porter, Prime Kell Brook, and Prim Thurman, I would probably give him the edge. But based on how many times he has been hurt and the level of competition, I have to side with Spence in this fight. Plus you are only as good as your recent opponent David Ava was defeated by Mean Machine (who Crawford knocked out) and Spence defeated a top 5 WW in Ugas, who is better than anyone Crawford has faced in his career.

This fight will probably be similar to Hurd vs Lara, with much more skill and more action-packed. My gut tells me that this fight will be a controversial draw, but my head tells me that Spence is going to win by decision or late stoppage.

 

No, my point is every fight Crawford has fought there is an excuse why he has won. With Shawn Porter, Porter was already contemplating retirement and he did so after the defeat. With Brook, Brook had three fights at 154 and took the fight on a 8 week notice (his coach didn't even travel with him). Jose Benavidez was decently competitive on one leg. I'm not even going to mention Horn, Postol, Khan, or DIaz. Every fighter Spence has defeated (when he defeated them) would beat every fighter Crawford has fought at 147. If Crawford had defeated a prime Thurman, Pacquiao (the version that fought Thurman), Virgil, Ennis, I would favor Crawford. But there is so much of a disparity between competition and Spence is a lot more skilled than people give him credit for. Go watch the video I posted about Spence's skills.

 

He has shown that against lesser opposition and what evidence do you have that he is "meaner" than Spence? What evidence do you have that he fights to the level of his opposition (sure because he has fought poorer opposition)/ No he doesn't have a higher IQ. Hearns had everything you stated and look at what Hagler did to him.