The "All Things Mayweather/Pacquiao" Express!!!!!!

Great...no fight was signed. Cool, because I didn't say there was. I said They were in talks w/ Cotto to fight. Can't fight every guy who calls you out at the same time.

 

Except when that trainer does the same with other fighters that he is not training, only discussing, and then backs it up with how they perform...and uses historical fights as examples as to why he thinks the way he does...and then repeats it after the fight in a "I told you so" manner because he is right on many things. Not saying he doesn't play it up a bit to play mind games or is right all the time but the odds of him being right are greater than many.

He said Duran beats Pac. No mind games in that. Just his opinion.

Floyd is Floyd. Different people we are talking about.

 

you are a fool if you think that bradley was a bigger win for pacquiao then at the time when he fought hatton. hatton had just stopped the #2 jr. welter in malignaggi (which was never stopped before even by cotto) thus making him the top 140 that time. the fight with floyd at 147 doesn't count because we knew hatton is not suited at that weight. if pac fought bradley then, then you fools would complain why he did not fought the best 140 that time in hatton.

so again, tell me a fighter who looked good against clottey even in winning? many people are expecting clottey to beat cotto then because they felt he was already ruined. but surprise, cotto boxed him off and even showed his hear fighting on with a terrible cut. is that a beaten fighter to you? again youa re just looking at things to discriminate on pacs opponents based on what you perceived on hidsight. you are no different from the other joyboys or haters.

so you think that roach accepted this fight because floyd has slowed down? i guess you will be the first to whine when pac happened to make foyd fight and pac wins because you feel floyd has declined.

 

So Shane becomes Champion and you are in talks with Cotto who just got beat by Margarito???

If they were in talks, how come Cotto would go on to fight two fighters prior to Pac and Pac would fight Hatton prior to Cotto?

Unless you are playing the Arum card with his, keeping it all in the family style.

SHANE WAS CHAMPION; FIGHT THE CHAMPION.

 

He didn't just get beaten, he had won a couple fights after. When I say they were in talks, I meant BEFORE They fought each other. Shane's been calling out most anybody forever. What time period are you suggesting Pac ducked him?

Besides, you can look at it this way, Pac beat the guy who beat Shane. Not terrible.

BTW, Shane wasn't the Champ. He was A Champ at WW.

 

More of a threat. Bigger win legacy wise, because the way most judge things, Hatton is obviously bigger. But unlike Hatton, Bradley wasn't KTFO in one of his last 3 fights and didn't look bad against a sub-par opponent like Lazcano.
Threat = Bradley.
Challenge = Bradley
Money/Legacy = post-Ko'd Hatton


It's the way Cotto acted in that fight that had people talking...not just Roach.


Why Clottey and not Williams?

Why even fight Clottey?

Acutally, it is not on hindsight. I just can't prove it to you because I haven't been on this site to long.

Anybody that has recently been KO"d and/or lost in devastating fashion, I'm not going to be looking at them back to normal until they prove it against a worthy opponent with a great performance of their own.
Neither Hatton and Cotto did that.
Hatton looked terrible against a fighter that stepped it up, Lazcano, and Cotto looked bad against Clottey. If Clottey wasn't so damn mentally flawed (compared to some other elite fighters), he would have had a chance to take out Cotto. People said that right after the fight.

 

Shane vs. Margarito was in January 2009: Shane calls out Pac from that point on.

Cott's next fight after he lost to Margarito was in February 2009.
Cotto vs. Pac was in November 2009. Both Pac and Cotto fought other fighters prior to them facing off.

Shane was left out in the cold despite becoming the Champion by beating Margarito who beat Cotto.
Shane had Margarito's belt who took that belt from Cotto.


Fight the Champ.

 

And Pac fought Hatton for the 140 title instead after SHane beat Margarito. And that's bad...why? :huh

 

How about Cotto...why not Shane instead of Cotto?
Shane, The Champion, was still looking for the fight.


Listen, overall, if I were Pac and/or his team, I would have chosen Hatton as well because there is more money, higher points in legacy (since people tend to forget what came yesterday and Hatton was established), boost in fame/PPV, and it is an attempt to one-up what Floyd did (in quicker fashion). It was the smart move, the right move.

What I am saying, as a fan, is that version of Hatton wasn't the biggest threat at 140 at the time.

Fan perspective is different than what should be done from a boxing business stand-point. I separate the two.

 

hatton just beat the #2 140 at that time :good

 

you are looking for excuses. pac can fight thses guys only one at a time. i know your style. if pac fought mosley, you will be the first one saying he ducked cotto. if pac fought bradley, you would look for an excuse yet again. pac will never win with guys like you.

hatton looked good in the malignaggi fight. cotto looked ok in tough fight with a bad cut against an opponent who is very tough defensively. i doubt if floyd would even look good against clottey. you are clutching at straws just to discredit pac's opponents looking for some holes. but at the time pac fought them, no one complains of the match-up bar clottey.

what you are doing is i can do it to any fighter who picked up an opponent rather than pick another one.

 

Why did he avoid Shane?

 

why not floyd? he wants floyd as early back then but floyd needed a tune-up with marquez.

 

NO, I wouldn't. Cotto was already taken out of the picture when he was KTFO by Margarito. You drop your position.

Shane was CHAMP. Shane was the MAN. You fight The Champ/The Man.
Shane had no fight set for all of 2009 because he wanted Pac. Pac refused to face him. Instead, after Hatton, he went after a paper belt and fought Cotto late 2009.

Looked good against Paulie?
It was Paulie.
Paulie is not going to test how worn torn you are. Paulie is not a puncher. And Paulie himself felt he wasn't right for that fight. Yes, fighters make excuses, and Paulie could as well, however; Paulie had no excuse when he lost to Cotto and Khan....but still, to this day, doesn't think much of himself for that fight with Hatton and felt Hatton was not good on that night.


FIGHT SHANE, NOT COTTO
FIGHT WILLIAMS, NOT CLOTTEY
FIGHT THE BEST IN THE DIVISION...from a fans perspective.

Yes, go after the Lineal Title. So yes, it was Ok for him to go after Hatton. However, Hatton I don't think was the best in the division at that time anymore nor the fighter he was pre-Floyd, like Roach said even before the fight with Pac was set-up.. There were greater threats.
Just like Baldomir was a must fight for Floyd for the lineal title but Baldomir was not the best in the division.

The point of the thread was to say both have/are doing the same thing.

 

yet you are arguing that he should of sought bradley instead of ahtton who was the best in the division?

i do not get why cotto is suddenly below mosley. cotto has a win over mosley and is a good win for pac. only whiners like you criticize him for fighting cotto instead of mosley. at least cotto is prime, mosley is old and past it. and why would he fight williams who was fighting already at 160 that time? clottey makes sense as a substitute since he is the best welter available that time next to floyd.

again you are stubborn not to realize this and the circumstances. if pac doesn't fight fighters B, C and D, he automatically ducked them all because he fought fighter A in your mind.