George Foreman ruined lineal

He knew he couldn't beat them.

 

Didn't Foreman say he didn't want any business with fighters signed under Don King?

 

He said Tucker was too tough for him.

 

Without a lot of luck Old Foreman has his skull turned into a drinking glass by Tyson, Tyson would melt any version of GF that’s IMO one of the worse match ups you could give GF.

 

The amount of head shots he took from the 208 lbs Holyfield would have had him on the canvas had that been Razor Ruddock era Tyson there instead.

 

Grandpa “finds a way” 70s style with the power of Jesus behind him as intended in the bible.

 

I'm wondering if either of those two hit as fast as Holy at the time.

Seems to me Foreman made the big hit and then mostly faded to palookaville.

That said, I have respect for his defeat of Briggs...probably the only semi-impressive thing he did after winning the title again. And even then, he lost lol.

 

I mean you have to be a tough SOB to go the distance with Prime Mike Tyson and an up-and-coming but already champ Lennox Lewis, so if Foreman say that I wouldn't be surprised

 

He was aiming at a Moorer rematch at the time, which was supposed to be his last fight.

 

Why are you talking to your alt account ?

 

Funny how he didn't fight Tucker when no Moorer fight got made. I don't think he wanted a Moorer fight either.

 

He was stripped by the WBA and Tucker was already scheduled to fight Seldon, so he couldn't fight him. Wouldn't be surprised if wanting to fight Moorer was just a bluff tho.

 

The kicker is his 2 title opponents were 0-7 and 11-34 which is awful by any regional title standards. The records of Grimsleys opponents(and their opponents) more generally will make your eyes bleed. Its really that bad. I think Savarese was a fine title opponent btw theres a long history of giving the North American champ a title shot.

"FECARBOX" is the WBCs Central American affiliate seperate from South America. Grimsley was their first champion.

 

Your timeline is off. Foreman chose to fight Schulz instead of Tucker and Tucker lost to Seldon before the Foreman-Schulz fight. Foreman trying to make Moorer II was after he beat Schulz as thats when Moorer won his rebound fight with Foster. At this point Tucker was no longer a viable option.

The Moorer fight really got its momentum in 1996 after Moorer beat Schulz. Remember Moorers only loss is to Foreman who he was winning against handidly. Lennox had the McCall loss, Holyfield had the Bowe loss, Tyson(who'd just got out of prison) and Bowe probably weren't fighting Foreman anyway but then they had the Holyfield loss and the Golota experience. I do think Foreman would have preferred a new opponent to Moorer but I think he was mainly looking for one big payday and the Moorer rematch was the only one on the table. Lennox Lewis v Golota and Holyfield v Moorer are the fights that changed that but these were in the last 6 weeks of Foremans reign. Foreman agreed to fight Lennox almost right away at this point but Briggs fight was already made and when Briggs got the decision that was that.

Look at it from Foremans POV do you think after the Schulz fight if you told him he'd sit for 18 months then fight Grimsley, Savarese and Briggs then retire he'd be happy with that? No he was waiting for the division to clear up which it never did. Even if you think Foreman wanted to go on a can crushing exhibition you'd think he'd be happy with 3 fights? No he was treading water waiting for clarity. If Foreman was trying to compile defenses for his legacy Vitali style he'd have gotten in more fights against Savarese level opponents in 1995 and 1996.

 

Honestly, I don’t know how you live with yourself. He dropped a belt to duck Tucker and possessed possibly the lowest risk:reward ratio in heavyweight history. He could’ve taken any fight (Maybe Tyson would’ve declined for humanitarian reasons). He fought bums on purpose at the expense of his belts and the legacies of Tucker and Moorer.