Crawford's ATG ranking: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

I will also say this about the Canelo win, and it matters for so many reasons. I picked Bud to win, so did @George Crowcroft when we were talking about it. "BS, you're just saying that now, after Crawford already did the impossi-" Shut up.

Why did we pick Bud ? Because it was a cherry pick. Yes, Canelo was a cherry pick. Crawford did what Ray Leonard did with Hagler basically, but even more shrewdly. Saw that everything fit into place and knew that this was the fight that would make him look best.

Why did Bud not fight anybody else at 154 ? Because it was risky and wouldn't make him look as good as fighting Canelo. Fundora is ****ing 6'6 and would be a pain to deal with due to that alone, even if Bud is the way better fighter. Ortiz was a young, hungry, power punching newcomer that was still mostly unproven (he had yet to beat Madrimov and Lubin), and could upset him. Same with Murtazaliev who had starched Tim Tzyu in 3 rounds, who was THE man to beat at the time at 154. Madrimov almost did upset him, and it was quickly established soon after Bud beat him that he's not the top dog we thought he was at 154. 154 was filled with risks (as it's also like, one of the top 5 or 3 divisions today in terms of overall talent).

And there's a reason he skipped 160. It's a dead division with a random Kazakh at the top that nobody cared about until hints of Bud fighting him were brought up, AFTER he had already beaten Canelo. It was risky, wouldn't have sold for **** and wouldn't give him the public acclaim he so yearned.

Canelo though ? Everything fit. Age, styles, size, narratives and greatness.

He was 35, and as Bud himself said, "I may be older than Canelo, but he is older than me in Boxing years". 20 years is a lot. Even longevity freaks like Moore, Hopkins and Pacquiao were on the decline 20 years in, even if they still had some years left. Someone like Mayweather also had incredible longevity, just a tier below the former 3, and he had called it quits 19 years in (no, McGregor does not count). Crawford knew what he was doing.

His last few performances had basically confirmed it. The 2 divisions smaller Charlo went the distance by running away. Bumlanga might have gotten knocked down, but still went the distance. Then he got sparked in 5 by Sheeraz not more than a year later. After watching "highlights" of Canelo vs Scull, I messaged George and half jokingly-half seriously told him "give me a few months to prepare and I could shutout this version of Canelo, that's how slow, old and plain awful he looked". He didn't disagree

Canelo's main problems for years were his slow feet and lack of stamina, as well as his relative inability to cut off the ring. If you want to cut off the ring against a mover that pivots and circles, you move across them, you don't move with them like Canelo does. Even prime "the juggernaut who broke Saunders' face" P4P#1 Canelo was like that. "Now Imagine what a nearly retired Canelo's legs would be like" is what Bud probably thought. Bud himself may not have been the mover he was at his peak, but he didn't need to be.

Size also played a factor. Canelo is the slightly shorter man with the shorter reach. He never had a chance of catching Bud due to longer legs covering more distance, or keeping him at his preferred distance due to length. Imagine if it was Benavidez instead. And while Canelo is the bigger, more robust fighter of the 2, people forget that he also had to bulk up to get to 168. This is a guy who could still weigh in at 154 by the age of 26. There's no "he was still naturally growing " excuse here. He's a naturally small Super Middleweight, and unfortunate enough to have bulked up to the point of being unable able to cut down to 160 without badly hindering his performance, while also being just plain too small for 175. Also, wanna know the weight difference during fight night ? Canelo was 180 to Bud's 175. Yeah, Bud was heavy enough in the ring to be considered an eligible opponent for Michael Spinks.

This ties in with the narrative that Bud was apparently too small for Canelo. He never was. The actual concern should have been whether or not Bud would feel comfortable fighting at such a high weight so suddenly, not the actual size difference (which is probably only a division's worth, if that). Honestly, Crawford's biggest mistake in his career is actually revealing how big he is outside the ring/after the weigh in, because frankly there's no way anyone would ever suspect he would look so lean at 175. He should have played with the "I'm too small" narrative for his own good. There are even available interviews with him before the Canelo fight saying that this whole thing was just him not having to worry about cutting weight.

Everything fit right into place. The fact that Crawford had the perfect style for him, the fact that Canelo was not the fighter of old, the fact that the natural size difference was far smaller than advertised, the fact that Canelo is the face of the post MayPac era and arguably the most accomplished and greatest fighter of said era, the fact that he was STILL P4P ranked despite not proving he's been at that level for years, and the whole narrative of "this is a huge risk for Crawford". Yeah, this was a cherry pick so cleverly disguised that they think David slew Goliath. I've even seen people rank Crawford in their Mt Rushmore alongside (get this) Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong and Sam Langford because he "took a giant risk and did the impossible". Bud played everyone like a fiddle.