Better resume: Cotto or Mayweather(Read before voting)

Anyone who thought Margo is a very accomplish boxer and deserve major merits for beating him needs to get their head checked.

 

Did Mayweather fight Margarito? Pacquiao? A good version of Mosley? Clottey? No. That was Cotto. He took on all the tough tests that Mayweather eluded.

When Cotto appears in the crowd of a future fight, fans will look at him and say "that guy fought everybody."

 

Clottey was worse than Margo...... Clottey was never champion. Margo was wbo champ and cotto was his best win and he cheated. Cotto willing to fight anyone??????? He fought all comers? MORE LIKE HE FOUGHT SOMEONE IN HIS WEIGHT CLASS. Just by fighting SOMEONE in their weight class deserves more merit???? Wacky logic if you ask me.

 

did you say Clottey? He fought Mosley coming off a big win we know that. Mosley ducked him before. Who the hell is Margarito?

The crowd will say that guy Cotto got his ass beat by a cheater a midget and a ATG

 

Shane Mosley has always been overated. Floyd asked to fight him but got declined. Every big names resume is going to have names that are out of prime this is nothing new. ESB poster lacks common sense.

 

Cotto has such a **** resume compared to Mayweather Cotto fans are hyping up Clottey and Margarito

 

Top Rank fighters. Paul Williams beat Margarito long before he pushed Cottos **** in.

And Mosley was already considered past it.

Dumbasses maybe. Not those who remember when Paul Williams called him out or when Sergio told everyone hed flat out kill him.

Cotto bout the money like everyone.

 

I like Cotto a lot and i think he got a great resume but Anyone who thinks cotto's resume is over Floyd's is just crazy talk, and needs to do their homework.

1. Cotto outgrew 140 so guess what? he have to fight 147 and again WHO THE HELL SHOULD HE FIGHT IF HE DOESN'T FIGHT MARGO OR CLOTTEY????? Taking all comers.... feed that bull to someone else.

 

Mayweather has a better win/loss/draw ratio over quility oppotoents.

 

Wonder how many of the Cotto voters put down on their resumes all the things they didn't get into.

interview with a Cotto voter:
Interviewer: "So I've looked over your resume, 4.0 from Harvard, graduated President of the debate team. Dual majored in Finance and Mathematics. Worked previously at Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and interned with the Federal Reserve. Very impressive resume, now tell me about your time at each place?"

Cotto voter: "Well I actually didn't graduate from Harvard, or work at Goldman Sachs or Barclays, I also didn't intern at the Federal Reserve either. You see I think a resume should be all the stuff you ever tried to do, not the stuff you actually accomplished. "

Interviewer: "...."

Cotto Fan: "So do I get the job?"

Interviewer: "Get the **** out of my building"

 

i agree with this

 

This is precisely why DLH gets ranked highly. Not only because of who he beat, but because of EVERYONE he fought and how he fought against them even in defeat.

We could make cases that Trinidad a fighter of his era, looked INCREDIBLE going 40 and 0 but people generally rank DLH a tad higher than Trinidad because his resume is DEEP and not based on just how he looked in terms of who he "beat"

The same reason applies to Cotto, when he retires we'll respect him for everyone he fought, and realize that he was never really outclassed and he fought his ass off even in his defeats.

You shouldn't look at things so black and white, its not fair for fighters. Looking at things with this mentality will end up entirely discrediting entire careers from HOF fighters like Fernando Vargas, who if he was in this era, would probably beat the **** out of every 154lber out there right now. Vargas legitimately pushed DLH and Tito to their near limits. You can't discredit that, considering we know that Tito and DLH had legendary careers. Similarly, with Floyd, Cotto's stock rose when he fought Floyd.

 

Mayweather. Cotto is a 3 time paper champ.

 

and he got his ass whipped by both guys.