Unfortunately for Pacquiao's legacy he has many losses even before he got old. At 135 he avoided the best opponents and instead beat a paper champ who was gifted a title. Not good. At 140 sure he beat reining champ who had gotten his chin annhaliate by Feather fisted Mayweather. Small asterisk. 147 was decent, but it comes with several asterisks. 154 was just a complete sham. Borderline criminal. Huge asterisk.
Daniel Dubious beat Jarell Miller by ko who outweighed him by nearly 100 pounds so this is terrible logic. Fury nearly lost to a MMA fighter making his pro debut Usyk fights against heavyweights with limited skillsets and weak gas tanks Usyk dominated in 2 of the least skilled divisions in boxing no matter what anyone says
Yes this! It stopped on here for about a week after Crawford beat Spence but then it went back to downplaying Crawfords resume once again The knew narrative was "Spence was shot after the car accident"
Henry Armstrong is one of the greatest of all time If Crawford would beat Canelo he'd be ahead of Armstrong for me More difficult to do it in this era I don't care what anybody says
I agree that Toney is better than anyone who Crawford beat career wise but it's not a career comparison It's about who you beat when you beat them Bernard Hopkins had a better career than James Toney but Roy Jones win over James Toney is better than Roy Jones win over Bernard Hopkins
We're getting into semantics about good or very good but knocking out Porter is huge I'll ask you this Who would be the last welterweight prior to Crawford that would knock out that version of Porter? Pacquiao? Trinidad? There wouldn't be many
Ya the whole 8 division champ thing is overblown Obviously Pacquiao covered a lot of weight but there was some manipulation in the process
Mosley, ODLH, Cotto, Quartey, Lopez, Tito, Pacquiao. Forrest maybe aswell although he had trouble vs Mayorga so he may struggle vs Porters wild aggression aswell.
I dont think any of those guys stop him accept roided up Pacquiao and Tito Trinidad and im not sure who you are referring to with Lopez
The official accolades shut down nothing. It doesn’t matter what the official accolades are. It doesn’t matter how they read. Context is needed. Terence has an average resume. And compared to many other greats of the past, it’s weak. He’s beaten no prime ATG’s. His resume hasn’t got depth. They mostly B level guys, and guys on the decline. That is a fact. And his official accolades will not change that.
Neither has Floyd Mayweather, Manny Pacquiou, Roy Jones, Pernell Whitaker and can be argued neither has Sugar Ray Leonard
Terence has no win over a prime ATG, OR a deep resume. He has neither. You need to absorb this information. It’s not a criticism of him personally. But it’s just how it is. The official accolades sound incredibly impressive. Until you see who he fought to obtain them.
It's deeper than you are giving credit for and resume isn't everything which is information that you need to absorb
No, it isn’t. I have no issue with Terence. I think he’s a great fighter. But he has a weak resume, compared to many other great fighters. An end of career Khan. A shot Kell, who had zero punch resistance. Ricky Burns. Postol. A tough B level Porter. Spence. That is poor compared to MANY other greats. It IS mostly about resume. Do you know why? Because as great as Terence looks, we don’t KNOW if he could beat an Oscar, a Floyd or a Manny etc. Read CAREFULLY: If you haven’t got an extremely good resume, then under traditional ranking criteria, you haven’t got a hope of being considered the GOAT.