Very interesting question. The match could have been made, but I can't recall any attempts ever being made to make it happen. Terrell won the vacant WBA by outpointing Eddie Machen and defended against George Chuvalo, both of whom were outpointed by Patterson in 1964 and '65, respectively. By 1967 Terrell met Ali in the unification title bout, and Patterson was again in line for a title shot but for Ali's draft troubles. I think the bout never happened because (1) at the time it could have been made, it was a high-risk, low reward fight for both. A loss for either would be a serious setback. (2) A Terrell-Patterson fight could well have been a real stinker, and not been a money-maker. Looking back, it is a good fight to speculate over who may have won, but probably would not have been an interesting bout to watch.
The WBA stripped Ali for the Muslim connection. Ernie fought Machen for the WBA title in, what?, Feb. 65? Floyd had schooled Machen in Stockholm 7 months earlier...10-2, 9-2-1? Ali was set for the rematch with Liston at the time and both of them were set to fight the winner of Patterson-Chuvalo in Feb. 65. Terrell/Floyd just wasn't gonna happen. The sad thing is the big piece of horse-poo Octopus might have grabbed and held Patterson just enough to have copped a stupid decision (based on stupid judges). It's good they never fought, Floyd was worlds more talented.
Didn't Frazier go 15 and 12 rounds with Clay, and was stopped due to a cut eye in 14th in another bout, while Foreman got knocked down by Clay yet managed to stop Frazier twice? Didn't Norton do the same thing and went twice 12 rounds and once 15 with Clay, but didn't Foreman stop him too in the 2nd?
They both UD'd Chuvalo and Machen, so since you decided to compare how they both did against Clay and use it as an argument, I'd say it's really thin. That was my point, and I thought you would get it without me having to say it out loud. In his prime, Patterson only lost to Joey Maxim (very early in his career, and Joey was too much for him at that point), Clay, Liston twice, and Johansson. Ernie lost 7 bouts before his 30's, against weaker competition.
Early-1966 may have been the best time. Ernie by a 'close' 15-Round Decision, and both boys hit the canvas in this one. As a side note, Floyd should have by-passed Cassius Clay in November 1965, and given his back a chance to heal.
I agree with this..and although he lost a tko in his last bout, that rematch with Clay was Floyd's redemption I think.
Ernie could have got a decisiom around this time. Floyd was faster,but Terrel's reach would have been a major factor.
No, Terrell's ''Octopus style" (may) have been a factor. Floyd is HOF, Ernie could have been a survivor in any era given his God-given tools but not hall of fame. You know, I'm thinking about this fight now and here is how it may have played out circa 65-67. The staid Terrell tries to establish his jab, Floyd's moving ducking side to side avoiding some, taking some. Unless Terrell lands a Sunday right hand (granted he did have that) within the first few rounds Patterson is moving under everything and landing his shots. Does anyone think Patterson is not hurting Terrell with one-two counters and the occasional Big Left Hook? Ernie realizes he's not taking out Floyd by mid-rounds and resorts to his usual plodding style en route to what I see as a lopsided UD. I guess I'm open to other opinions...
