you dumb****, its a BLOG. do you know what a blog is? Its Free, kind of like the unemployment check you collect each month.
you imply i have made some sort of general statement regarding the level of pacmans opposition. this just isnt true. what i said was diaz should have lost to morales. have you seen the fight? if so you will agree with me. if not then why did you bother replying?
Well...today's climate is different. The best fighters are in many ways manufactured, due to careful matchmaking, media hype, etc. Therefore, much of the praise these fighters get is somewhat premature. Back in the eras of Ali and SRL, threre was such a large pool of talent, that whoever came out on top HAD to be considered one of the greatest. And Tyson...well Tyson was a Phenom. Of today's remaining crop of elite fighters, Manny is considered, by many, the leader of the pack. It's the hype of TODAY...but, where will it rank among the stories of the legends who preceded him, in 20 years? We don't know yet. And if no fight with better competition materializes, before he retires, preferably against the other greatest fighter of this era, I suspect that he will not be on the level of importance, among these other greats, he is purported to be on now. Right now, everything is going right for Manny. But, what happens to all these glowing remarks and lofty comparisons when things go wrong? These other men experienced this at the height of their fame, and still emerged as the most important and notable figures in the sport. We won't know if the hype surrounding Manny can endure that yet, until it happens. That's why I cannot buy into this level of hype, just yet. I need to see if it's warranted first. But, to each his own.
Hagler only ever fought at one weight. He can't compare with Pacquiao who has gone through the weights blasting people out.
You mean he should have lost to a shot in the dark damage good Morales. Anybody with a f4cking brain knows Pacquiao vs Diaz when it was first announce was indeed a mismatch.