big time. people salivating over a miniscule amount of slickness. forget stamina, heart, brains, footwork, chin. and throwing a punch.
Never been a believer of broner. His best win is demerco,comes overweight to another contender escobedo,almost lost to feather fisted malinaggi,having a difficulty beating taylor who the one algieri beat convincingly and when he step up in competition he got beaten by b level fighter maidana and porter and that tells you something. He cant get a credible win above 135 were he cant impose his sized and fighting physically smaller fighters.
Broner isn't what he was made out to be, but he's still a good fighter. I'd like to see him stick to 140, and make some of the big fights that are in that division.
I disagree. Porter and Brook are closer in skills than Porter and Broner are. We have the elites A* - Brook A - Porter (I think Porter beats MM) A- - Maidana B+ for Broner is probably too generous. I'm fine with C+ He's ten 10 for me at 140lbs and top 5(if he ever makes 135lbs again) That's worthy of a C+ grade.
He was severely overhyped. The comparisons to Floyd were only good because it let you know the person's making them opinion should never be taken seriously. Just because he tried to employ the shoulder roll, people were fooled into thinking his defence was good despite the fact he's easy to hit. He has some nice shot selections as times but he's not busy enough, is flat footed can be pushed around, out-worked and out-boxed. His talent, namely his good power, speed of hand and accurate punching means he could pick up wins against decent guys at 140 but he'll never be the man there unless the division goes through a catastrophic drop on quality. The "3 weight world champion" moniker is as strong an argument against the proliferation of alphabet titles you can make. I think, in terms of rating world class fighters, I'd give him a C.