What's puzzling me is that he keeps calling Spence a great based on what ? Resume wise ? H2H ability ? I don't think he's a great in any of those categorises. Put it this way if I were to name some very notable Weltweights like.... Quartey Mosley Tito Leonard Hearns Duran Whitaker Mosley Forrest Curry Starling Napoles Would anyone really favour Spence against any of those fighters at their best ? And that's what I mean.....I don't think Spence is a great at all certainly not on a H2H ability.
Canelo beat GGG before GGG fought Dervynchenko I actually thought Canelo lost or draw but as an official win it ranks highly Ill give Toney the edge cause he knocked out Nunn
No they werent. Kalambay mightve been (might) and McCallum split with him. Mike McCallum having a better resume than Crawford is an interesting take to say the least.
Canelo would be a better win than any Maywether win considering the weight disparity. I think Spence is a better win than Corlaes too but it is debatable
Canelo had a 15 pound weight advantage over Mayweather and Mayweather was 36 years old and at the end of his career. Canelo is probably past his prime now and ready to be beaten that's why he's been ducking Benavidez and hasn't fought a real top name in ages. Canelo's very competitive fight vs Munguia has aged terribly for example as Munguia recently got flattened by an unremarkable feather fisted Frenchman.
When you talk about the goat conversation you are comparing their whole career. Wins, loses, skillset performances and context. Also Roy Jones failed a drug test which I value negatively.
I always say Mayweather beating Canelo is one of his best achievements. Look at what Canelo achieved after and Mayweather probably won 10/12 rounds.
Watson decisively beat Benn and was a mile ahead on points vs Eubank until tragedy struck in the 11th round. I think a prime Watson is better than Porter. Kalambay is definitely better than Porter that's not even debatable Kalambay is one of the finest Middleweight champions of all time.
That's not a good argument though context of the win matters alot in regards to how highly you rank a win. So when you say "as an official win it ranks highly" but yet when more people think Canelo lost 2 fights to Golovkin I don't think it does rate super highly.
Id favor Spence vs Quartey, Forrest, and Starling cause of style Those are some great names you have on there though
Crawford is older now than Mayweather was then so that point by you is kind of weak Canelo was no where near his prime when fought Mayweather so once again weak point Mungia getting unexpectedly kod doesnt really make that much of a difference to me as its boxing and things happen.
I guess it is arguable maybe. Think youre underrating Shawn Porter a little. No one ever came close to stopping Shawn Porter and Crawford did it
The catchweight isnt even the main thing. Canelo wasnt Canelo back then and Mayweather was fighting at a weight he had fought at before If Crawford were to beat this version of Canelo it would be way better than Mayweathers win over Canelo Not even close