Did the greatness of the 70s last only a year?

I think that despite some rough periods during the decade, there was a lot of amazing talent and some very good fights.

 

Uh. No. Duh.

 

When I think of “70”s I actually more think 65-75. Because you’re right the second half of the 70s was nothing special at all. But that 60-75 area to me is the golden era not necessarily the 70-80

 

The light heavyweight division alone in the later 1970s were better than a lot of decades across all weight classes.

 

With Foreman-Lyle, Holmes-Norton, Holmes-Shavers II, Ali-Spinks I, Foreman-Young, Norton -Young, Ali-Norton III, Holmes-Weaver I, and Ali-Shavers, the second half is clearly not mediocre. Duh again.

 

Bull****....and you know it! The whole damned decade was golden.

 

Problem with this is Shavers, Spinks, and Weaver aren’t exactly top tier. Norton was on the decline and Young was talented but not exactly a draw. It had a few good matches 76 but after was pretty lame in an all around sense…had we gotten Holmes v Foreman maybe I’d change my mind.

 

I think you're a bit harsh. The 70's saw the whole primes of Foreman and Norton, probably the larger part of Holmes's prime and the very best of Frazier, even though he declined fairly early. Add a past prime but very good Ali for the first half to this, and you have very strong era. Yes, their primes didn't all coincide, but it's extremely rare that the primes of so many good fighters do.

And another important aspect is that just about all the relevant fights were made, except for maybe Norton-Frazier and Foreman-Quarry.

 

Shavers was highly ranked from '76 to '79 and I agree the other two weren't too tier. But I don't really think the opposition matters so much as that there were just a lot of great fights. But it's all subjective anyway.

 

1970-1978 showcased a totally prime Joe Frazier (early on); then there was the ascendancies of ATGS Foreman, Ken Norton, Larry Holmes.

Muhammad Ali came back and took back his title against a top 10 ATG, quite probably the most powerful two-handed puncher who ever lived...

No way was it only a year. Compare the 80s: we saw Holmes and Tyson dominate. Not much else, when you really think about it.

Compare the 2000s: Lewis wasn't around long, so it was mostly the Klitschkos. Period.

Today it's Fury and basically everyone else.

 

It was best said in the Lyle book. In the 70s, any one of those guys could have been champion, and several of them were.

 

That's an interesting point and taken point by point, everything you say is spot on. But as a whole, I don't agree.

There were four champions who are staple top ten all time greats - Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes - spanning the entire decade. That's a good decade that's having more than a good year.

Let's give the 70s a slightly different spin. In 1975, let's imagine Ali gives Foreman a rematch in the States in normal conditions and George beats him. Not a preposterous alternative reality, is it? Then let's say George goes on a holy reign of terror. Ali blows a rubber match by losing a warm up to Norton in 1976 that he didn't need to take and drops out of the picture. Then Larry Holmes comes along in 78.

Now you have a decade starting with a great champion in Frazier establishing himself and winning the amazing FotC in 71. Then you have the monster destroyer of Foreman brutally establishing himself as a great, then comes the Rumble and Ali performs his miracle. Rematch with Foreman as described above. Foreman reigns for the next three years beating Lyle, Shavers, Frazier, Norton, Young (yes, Young. This George is in better shape mentally) and a few lesser challengers, as is a champion's right.

Then in 78, the three year reign is ended by a brilliant display of boxing by Larry Holmes who then goes on to rule for the first half of the next decade. All of a sudden, that is a hell of a decade and I really haven't changed all that much from what actually really happened. Okay, I've mixed up and invented outcomes but the raw material of the scenarios - the fighters - are as they were.

Besides I have a vested interest in defending the 70s. You see, if the 70s were crap, I have to look at the 90s without the rose tinted gasses of my youth. Two of the 70s champions more than held their own in my beloved 90s.