Let's say he takes a year or two off then return's, who would you be confident of Foreman beating? Let's exclude him fighting Holmes, which of the early 80 s and onwards would you see him beating?
If he took a couple of years off he’d have to have several warm up fights. Dokes’s speed might be a problem for him but he’d eventually wear him down. It would also depend on what style he fights. If he used a similar style to the one he used during his comeback then stamina wouldn’t be a problem. That is if he trained properly and not just pounding the bags. Pinklon Thomas might also prove a difficult fight. Tony Tubbs also. A highly motivated Page and Witherspoon maybe. I can’t see him staying unbeaten but you never know.
The guys like Witherspoon, Thomas,Tubbs, those I see has potentially the worst sort of opposition for Foreman. They had good chins and very good boxing skills Dokes too, tho I give George a shot there. Weaver and Coetzee are guys with power but more vulnerable. I definitely see him getting a title shot at some point, not sure how long he remains at the top. Different time and circumstances from his irl comeback.
The sky's the limit because there's no one who should be favored to beat George for 10-15 years. And going off his comeback he's got 21-22 years of elite level fighting ahead of him. Holmes did 20 defenses in 6 and a half years. No reason to think Foreman can't run the table against those 20 and then beat Spinks and keep going. Foreman beat Cooney in his comeback and Cooney is the 2nd toughest of those 20 defenses. The first HW I'd favor to beat Foreman in this span would be Riddick Bowe in 1990. The fighters with the best chance of upsetting Foreman before the 90s would be Witherspoon and Tucker. Here's a few things limiting Foreman's ceiling. None are really boxing related. 1)Foreman would take a longer time to get a title shot after the Young loss. While Foreman could beat anyone he'd just lost the NABF and his status as top contender. He'd also lost to Ali who'd stick around a few more years. This loss made him less suitable to be Ali's potential successor than Holmes or Norton. Holmes was undefeated. And Holmes didn't get the Ring title until mid 1980 for his 7th defense. Foreman retired for a reason. It would take him several years to rebound. So Foreman becoming champion would take awhile. If Foreman takes a few years off like in the OP he might not have the belt until 81 or 82. 2)Foreman isn't going to be as active as Holmes. Holmes was a late bloomer in the shadow of the 70s. He trying to be taken seriously as a champ in an era with a lack of serious challengers. Later on Holmes was in pursuit of Marciano's 49-0 record. Whatever the reason(s) Holmes was trying to defend his title as much as possible. Foreman was very active when he didn't hold titles but not in his two stints as champion. It's hard to see Foreman defending his title 3-4 times a year if the fights aren't there. He'd defend 1-2 times a year. 3)The HW division starts to turn itself around in 1984-1986. By this point Foreman might have called it quits already or be about to call it quits. Whether Foreman can keep fighting until 1998 or not it's hard to see him doing so without the gap decade.
Well the late 70s unless he pursures a Young rematch or a fight vs Holmes. I think pretty much everyone else in the top 10 is a winnable fight for him. The problems start for Foreman in the early 80s when you have some fast talented boxers who are durable. A Greg Page on form would be troublesome Pinklon Thomas with his iron chin and great jab. Michael Dokes with his blinding speed. Tim Witherspoon obviously. Foreman needed 10 years away from the sport to find himself again. I very much doubt that he would dominate especially not with a peak Holmes there. And as I said not with other upcoming talented boxers on the rise.
What you're saying is a complete fantasy and unrealistic. You're saying Foreman could consistently beat 2 top 10 ranked opponents a year. When in Foreman's actual career he only managed to beat 2 top 10 ranked Heavyweights once in a single year which was against Lyle, Frazier 2. You're suggesting Foreman could win 20 world title fights like Holmes when he only managed 5 world title wins in his actual career. And there's plenty of 1980s Heavyweights who could beat Foreman if they're in peak form. Mike Tyson Larry Holmes Greg Page Pinklon Thomas Tony Tucker Tim Witherspoon Etc. Depending on when he fights these fighters but he certainly wouldn't go undefeated in the 1980s not a chance. Foreman needed a decade away from the sport to find himself he's not suddenly going to be dominant with a 1 or 2 year break.
Oh how could I forget Leon and Michael. Michael would be awkward as hell for George. 12 rounds and Michael hops, skips and ducks and dives to a decision win. Over 15, probably the same. As for Leon, he gets knocked out in the first round. Just my opinion.
Depends on how you view Foreman post Zaire. Opinions differ on that score and that is fine, of course. At least just imo, post Zaire Foreman was still sorting himself out, in the throes of modifications and experimenting and his election to fight Young the way he did was a very poor choice, again, just imo. Post Young, I think George def. had to up his boxing IQ to know when to punch and when to back it off and pace himself and mix and match same in the one fight against the one opponent. However, unless George fought as evenly slow paced as he did in second career, stamina issues would likely still be an inherent, potential risk during later rounds. George would be capable of and best served by looking to get certain opposition out of there as soon as possible. Against certain other opponents, it would be more difficult task with George needing to integrate due, as and when required pacing alongside taking his opportunities to punch with purpose as those opportunities realistically presented themselves. Liston had the very type of boxing IQ I’m talking about…but it is a big ask, I know, such IQ being that much less a common attribute among fighters in general. I will say, even in the Frazier rematch when Foreman was clearly looking to better pace and not rush himself, he was still looking somewhat tired after he saw Joe off in round 5. And though not too heavy, George did ship some more punishment than he might’ve done if he simply dispatched Joe in 2 rounds or so. Let’s say, hypothetically, if Joe somehow managed to hang tough for another 2-3 rounds, Foreman’s more restrained approach perhaps might’ve backfired on him. Frazier was a guy you get out of there as soon as you can, if you’re capable of same - which is exactly what Foreman did in Jamaica, his utter domination proving that he was more than capable of same and very likely capable of repeating said performance with the very same application of himself, imo.
Norton would beat him again... and Shavers too. Wow, what a fight! Would Foreman vs. Shavers look like Foreman vs. Lyle?
