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

Floyd was coming off a long-layoff so even fighting JMM was a bit of a surprise. But he did it for two reasons: One, JMM gave Pac two tough fights and Floyd wanted get-back for Pac going after two of his last opponents/big wins, Hatton and Oscar. A win over JMM was to show he can outshine Pac just like Pac did with Hatton and Oscar.

Roach: Roach admitted he wanted the fight because Floyd would be rusty coming back off a layoff and someone like Pac (who was active) would get the edge. Just like Roach would say later that Floyd may not have taken the fight yet because he was not yet ready for the fight.

Either way, Pac wanted that fight instead of his fight with Hatton according to Roach because Floyd already beat Hatton. So yes, Pac, if true, wanted to step up and fight Floyd.

What's that have to do with Pac avoiding Shane?

unless you are saying Pac did want to fight the best at WW in fighting Floyd...however, you have to remember that Floyd retired and was off so the spot went to someone else.

 

yet you are fine with floyd fighting marquez while crucifying pac for fighting cotto? that shows your bias. the point is pac is willing to fight floyd then. he is willing to fight the winner of cotto-clottey. and there was even a video of him (not roach) that he is ok with mosley also. but you fail to realize the circumstances why cotto was the fight that was made. and people don't think it was any lesser than a fight with mosley or floyd.

you are crucifying pac based on roach but pac's willingness to fight any of them has been established. it's just that he cannot fight all of them at the same time like you wanted to. and you seem not to know the circumstance of each events on how they unfold.

 

Bradley was more of a threat. He had a title and was not KTFO in one of his last two fights...nor did he look bad in either one.

But yes, overall, I agree with the fight with Hatton for several reasons. But that is different than going after the biggest threat at the time.

This content is protected

Not hard to figure out.
Oh, and Shane lost a close fight against Cotto who had yet to face Margarito and get KTFO. different versions.

Shane is past his prime but he still was never KTFO and he destroyed the man that destroyed Prime Cotto, Margarito. Shane was Champ. Fight the Champ. Cotto's title was with Margarito who lost his title to Shane. Fight the Champ....Shane "to good' Mosley.

Williams said he would have came down and only moved up because he couldn't get a big fight at 147. Even still, Pac could be facing Williams right now instead of Margarito...couldn't he?

 

First off, Floyd wasn't fighting JMM for a title and was coming off a long layoff. Pac wasn't coming off a long layoff and was fighting Cotto for a paper title and is now again, fighting for a paper title at JrMW.
Williams should be in Margarito's position. Him or Martinez.

Floyd doesn't get a pass for that fight because he should have fought a real WW. I blast him for that. He doesn't even have to face off against a top WW since it is a return fight and not for a title.
It made sense from a promotion stand-point. I understood that.

Pac was not OK with Mosley because there was never a fight made. Instead, he fought Cotto.

What are the circumstances that I don't understand why the fight with Shane didn't come off and the fight with Cotto did?
because Cotto was the easier opponent, for a paper title that people will buy into because they buy into bull**** paper titles and/or it's Bob Arum at work and Pac agrees with Arum?

Pac's willingness is bull**** because he doesn't sign to fight them.

Floyd's willingness to fight anyone is also said by him but his actions prove otherwise.

This content is protected

Shane had no fights set for 2009.

This content is protected

 

style's makes fights. you are looking at it the long way. you can just easily say that pac fought the winner of the cotto-mosley fight. so now you are backtracking with hatton when you are exposed with your agendas.

now about cotto again, he re-established himself when he beat the #4/5 welter in clottey with just one eye thus he became the #2 ranked welter just behind mosley. couple that with a win over mosley and he is a very credible opponent for pac in just his 2nd fight at the weight. floyd has not fought this kind of opposition before at welter and pac beat floyd into it. floyd at that time was baldomir as his toughest welter opponent.

you are talking like cotto did not school mosley for the firt 6 rounds of the fight. cotto made a good account of himslef fighting a margarito with a possible brick in his gloves, a well confident margo. meanwhile mosley fought an unfocused margo. mosley was #1 by default but i have no doubts that if that version of margo was the one that cotto fought, he would of won easily.

 

No you can't because that version of Cotto was undefeated and had yet been Plastered. Not only that, Shane had Cotto's belt.

Not back tracking with Hatton. Understand the two sides to the debate.
There are two ways of looking at it: One, the fan side where you want to see them take on the biggest threat in each division; Two, the boxing business side which understands the fighter will fight the opponent who has the bigger name, more established, and will get them the most money. Plus, I understood it was for the Lineal title. However, that still doesn't take away from my opinion that Hatton wasn't the biggest threat at 140, like Baldomir wasn't at WW when Floyd fought him.
Understand?


Cotto was still the man that was brutally beaten down and KTFO by Margarito who would go on to have the exact same thing done to him against Shane Mosley. Shane was The Champ. Shane was calling Pac out and Pac opted for Cotto.
Cotto could have also fought Williams but Williams was forced to move up so if you want, you can even throw in Williams in there since he continued to say he was willing to move down for the big names.
Cotto did not look good against Clottey. Even Roach said that and he wasn't the only one to say it.


If you are good enough to fight Cotto and a Paper title, how come you are not ready for a Past Prime Mosley?
Or is that down to Mosley being "to good"?

 

you are gullible if you think pac avoided mosley for cotto. if mosley was from top rank, i'm sure pac has fought mosley instead of cotto and you would be the first to complain why pac did not fought the winner of cotto-mosley and the younger prime fighter.

pac fought the best at jr. welter and the 2nd best at welter in 2009. and all you have is to complain that he didn't fought mosley?

 

NO I WOULD NOT. Shane was the Man at WW so stop telling me what I would think and say. I could never get around the fact that Cotto had been brutally beaten down by Margarito who would have the same done to him by Shane who became The Champ at WW.

Pac avoided Mosley. If Pac wanted the fight, he could have told Arum to make the fight or is he helpless?

Roach said he did not want to face Shane. He told that right to Shane's face and later to the camera in an interview.

Yes, Cotto got the shot for the same reason Margarito is getting the shot; they are both with Arum.
Doesn't mean Pac couldn't have demanded to fight someone else.

I really don't think a Post-KO'd Hatton was the best at 140 any longer. He was just seen as the best there because he still was able to keep his title because he fought Floyd at 147.

 

maybe you are one of those guys that after a loss, you think he was damaged or shot already? cotto proved that he still has it. cotto has fought more effectively against clottey and pac than when mosley fought against floyd. mosley was living on his victory against the dis-armed margo that was confused. mosley had been struggling with cotto and mayorga before that. meanwhile cotto is young and in his prime and had bounced back from that loss.

you are arguing as if mosley is head and shoulders over cotto at the time when pac fought cotto.

 

so you are now balking. you think mosley is the best but doesn't think hatton was the best? you are twisting your standards here. what if some others thinks mosley is not the best because he was beaten by cotto head to head and beat a downgraded version of margo? the margo that cotto fought was not the same as the one that cotto fought. yet head-to-head we had cotto edging shane.

 

back in 2009, pac fought the #1 jr. welter in hatton and the #2 welter in cotto enroute to bagging the fighter of the year and fighter of the decade and yet you have these ***s complaining about his opposition?

 

Translation:

This content is protected

 

It was down to the Clottey fight. It wasn't just Roach, not just Atlas, but others questioned Cotto at that point.

Clottey is not on Floyd's level and Shane hadn't been previously KTFO in a prior year

Shane wouldn't have had to live on his Destruction of Margarito if Pac would have fought him instead of Hatton and Cotto...mostly Cotto.

So why is Pac fighting a Post-KTFO version of Margarito who is also disarmed from his plaster?
Why not fight Williams, Martinez, etc?

Above Cotto. Shane was CHAMP. Shane was never KTFO either and his last fight against the #1 Champ, Margarito, he destroyed him.


Cotto did not bounce back from that loss like he was still at his best. If he had rematched Margarito and won convincingly, sure, absolutely.

 

Shane was the best because he Destroyed Margarito for the WW Title.

Hatton wasn't the best because he had been KTFO by Floyd and struggled against Lazcano at 140. Fighting Paulie doesn't prove much because Paulie does test your wear and tear.

When was Shane KTFO like Hatton was?

Still, why fight Cotto and not Shane?
That's all you really have to focus on.

PRIME/UNDEFEATED Cotto beat Shane in a close fight.
Pac fought a Post-Plastered, 1 loss, Cotto who struggled against Clottey. Margarito was not down or KTFO out in that fight. Some wear and tear? sure, why not. But on no level compared to Plastered-Cotto.
Different versions of Cotto.
Cotto never proved to be "back" to where he was pre-Margarito.

Can you come back from a KO loss and be "Back", YES...but you have to show you are back at that same level and Cotto wasn't. Something was missing in that Clottey fight. People talked about it right after that fight. Same with Hatton when people thought he should consider retiring after Lazcano.

 

again please answer me who is clottey's opponent that looked good even in winning? cotto did it with a bad cut. cotto fought pac much better than mosley fought floyd who gassed out in 3 rounds. that goes to show how mosley is not as much a threat to pacquiao as cotto.

you are complaining as if cotto is not the #2 welter at the time and was a far cry from mosley. bottoline is, mosley only got the #1 ranked welter by virtue of one fight. over-all body of work points out that cotto is as much a threat to pacquiao if not better than mosley.