IF Crawford becomes undisputed at 154 where does he rank?

"Other than haters"

As I said, I believe my reply accurately characterised it.

 

Well Pacman is above Floyd, and if Crawford does this, so will he be.

This isn't a subjective opinion, it's a definitive objective statement.

I can load up my spreadsheet to prove to you without any shadow of a doubt that I rank Pacman above Floyd.

 

Most reasonable people favor Floyd.

Most reasonable people+haters might fraudulently swing it in Pac's favor.

 

I showed you the stats and you pretended it was only about Duran and Floyd.

 

No, pacman is not above floyd. It is not a fantasy match, they fought and pacman lost. And he lost in a boring fight, but in a way that was pretty clear that pacman would NEVER win to floyd no mater the scenario, time or parallel universe.

You are biased. Ok, that's cool! As I said, that's what sports are about. But you come here, you state your biased point of view, and the rest of us tell you that you are biased and that your point of view is wrong. And everything is perfectly fine. No problem.

 

At this point you're not really saying anything worth replying to.

 

I have both inside my top 25, with Pacman higher.

But if I'm biased, it isn't for Pacman, I have Sugar Rat Robinson number 1, so I'm biased for him if anything.

 

Neither Floyd nor Pacman are the #1 pfp. But they fought and Pacman lost. I repeat, it is not a fantasy fight, so ranking Pacman above Floyd can only be done from a very biased point of view. And I repeat that it is fine, because that's how we live boxing. That's all.

 

Plenty of people beat Robinson but I'm not ranking a single one ahead of him. So like I said, if anything I'm biased for him.

 

I don't actually think Pac has a win that's of similar caliber to Floyd's win over Canelo. Being 36 and in your fifth weightclass, and dominating an undefeated unified champion at a huge weight disadvantage is unheard of. And Canelo went on to be pfp 1 if that weren't enough.

 

Both Floyd and Pacquiao have a ton of accomplishments. Why I would personally rank Floyd higher is because he was a more consistent fighter. Floyd won more world titles than Pacquiao, beat more world champions, rated higher on the P4P list (Ring) more often, beat more hall of famers, had more title defenses, unified in more weight classes, etc. and he did it in significantly less fights. Both won fighter of the year numerous times (Floyd 5 times combined between BWAA and Ring and Manny 6 times). Both were fighter of the decade. Manny in the 2000s and Floyd in the 2010s. Both were lineal champion 5 times (Floyd 2x at WW). Obviously Manny climbed more weight classes. Floyd climbed his fair share though. To me, their accomplishments aren't far off from each other to the point that accomplishments should rate one over the other. The difference is one fighter did all of this while never losing while the other had numerous losses. Then when you add in the fact that they actually fought each other, it makes who is greater clear for me. I have great respect for Pacquiao but he was 2nd best in his era. No shame in that.

In terms of Crawford rating higher than Floyd or Pacquiao by being 3x undisputed, I don't see it because the opposition is not there. Winning belts is great but it matters way more who a fighter beats for the belt.

 

Let's see what people are saying if Crawford does unify LMW

 

Around Whitakers level

 

I think people will initially say he is because of recency bias. Similar to how some were saying Crawford was greater than Floyd after beating Spence. But I think as time passes, that accomplishment will be put into context. For most people, it's always going to matter who you beat first.

 

I think if Crawford can unify LMW, and maybe even beat Canelo for the SMW belts there won't be many ranking Floyd higher imo