I tend to agree with your point if view, but if you took his name off a lot of fighters resume I think it would certainly knock them down a peg or two
If he wasn't such a nutcase outside the ring and had a little more power Camacho wouldve been scary. He was great as he was but we never saw what he could've been.
Can't forget about Dwight Muhammad Qawi. Great fighter and a HOF himself but fell short when he fought Michael Spinks and Evander Holyfield. Their wins over Qawi definitely elevated their ATG status: Spink became the best LHW and Holyfield became the best CW. Qawi also fought an old Foreman when he had his comeback. Foreman's win over Qawi helped but him back on the HW map again.
Hector could have been great, but he lacked the big fights and great great wins of a Hearns or Leonard caliber fighter. He fought 40 year old Duran and Leonard, but who cares about that. He lost to all the good fighters he fought who were good and rather easily.
Iran Barkley wasn't an ATG or even a HOF, but he still looked really good on Duran and Tonys resume and the fights are considered some of the highlights of their careers( at least to me). Carl Froch is no ATG but he's also one of if not the best win on Wards resume. I don't consider Cotto an ATG, but the wins Mayweather and Pacquiao have over him were deeply impressive and elevated both of them in my eyes. Micheal Moorer was a decent heavyweight but nothing special. The fact that Foreman beat him at 45 however was his crowning achievement to me.
Would you compare him to Bennie Brisco? He makes a good gatekeeper doesn't he? A tad better than Martin Murray. Jean Pascal is another good one a little higher up. Would you say Julian Jackson was a gatekeeper? Or William Joppy?
Good post. Although I think in part it is due to lack of legitimate fights for the top middleweights of the current era.
Very good original post. There are a number of guys that aren't HOF'ers but are definitely "King Makers" Jacobs is definitely one of em. Completely agree
Man, I dunno! Brisco had he fought today...yeah I could say he would have gotten a strap or two! Had Jacobs fought back then, where few belts exist? No, he wouldn't beat Monzon up to era of Hagler IMO. So I begrudgingly say, yeah Brisco could be on par with Jacobs. But could Jacobs get a belt back then or reduced to gatekeeper, wow, never thought to see him as such. I rate him much higher than Pascal 34-6-1 out of 14 years. I discount every NABA, NABF,NABO non of those belts count for me. Beating Diaconu & Dawson were his greatest feats occurring in a 2 year time span by 2009-2010. Dawson at the times was a major notch, but since then it seems like Dawson was exposed (not as a flawed fighter) but a totally inconsistent fighter whose best wins were over old lions still hanging on, Johnson, Tarver & Bhop. Time allows us to say Dawson wasn't much, not a gr8 win for Pascal anymore. & Defeating Browne this year has no bearings until he either continues defending AND Browne goes on to win as well. If not, no comparison. IN this instance, no Jacobs is not a gatekeeper. A legit champ. But Pascal's injuries and flawed style makes him a good win for up in comers. Julian Jackson no gatekeeper. Legit ATG Julian Jackson-His power IMO saves him back then like today- thinking Graham fight! From 1987-1992 noticed he went 15-0 (14kos) Jr. Middle, then Middle Champ, that is called a reign IMO. Losing to Gman who at the time could gain up to 15lbs...just too big for JJ. Their rematch Gman weighed as a LHW. No shame in either loss. His last few years 1994-1998, he didn't lose to guys who went on to win titles, so he went from champ to past prime. Few took him on to get to the belt. I know Martin Murray from 2 fights all else is boxrec, can't say, but prefer Jacobs. Joppy proved he could quietly hold that strap for some years, gained it back. On paper Jacobs seems closest to Joppy out of the names mentioned here. Head 2 Head I think Jacobs beats him. Comparison wise, I could say the same of Joppy. If a fighter beat him (Trinidad, Jermain Taylor, Bernard Hopkins & Lucian Bute & Shumenov, these aren't rooty-poots!! They could boast about beating him was more than beating a gatekeeper.
Cool thread but you just blew it by saying Dawson "wasn't much, not a gr8 win for Pascal anymore." He was rightfully in everyone's top 5 P4P and went on to dominate Hopkins right before Hopkins went on his legendary mid-40's run. Dawson is so underrated and that statement applies to folks who don't say things nearly that stupid about him.
Please re-read just those 4 sentences... Dawson at the times was a major notch, That meant When Pascal won he beat a potental great IMO. I was biased for him claiming he would be back and beat those young guns. but since then it seems like Dawson was exposed (not as a flawed fighter) but a totally inconsistent fighter whose best wins were over old lions still hanging on, Johnson, Tarver & Bhop.Time allows us to say Dawson wasn't much Looking at his career UP to Hopkins, he was the man. How so? Adamak. While I didn't give him slack for fighting Tarver, Johnson & Hop, I understood there were young guns undefeated trying to get that shot. Cloud a champ to Stevenson one loss. I understand those who questioned why fight Hop. He was never a PPV attraction. Good notch. P4P got acquired by beating the old guards. 2 fights x 3 old dudes= 6 times he fought those near 40 or over. Almost in succession. I also understand those who felt fighting 2 rematches instead of dispatching both old dudes raised questions. 3 years later he gets a young gun and loses. Not much of a chess match Hop II, but Hop has always leaned away from certain styles and embraced others like Pavlik then declaring he will never fight Ward. This was when he fought Chad. I took note. End result, stopped on cuts by Pascal, dumbs himself down and loses weight to look lethargic against Ward KOd' by Stevenson. Simply ,means Pascal win IMO wasn't a special feat. I wanted it to be that as a fan of Dawson, but damn sir...he kept losing. His prime was spent fighting old dudes. So to me, Pascal can't claim he beat a potential HOFer. Cause everybody started beating him. He's not going to be ever inducted. He's not going to ever be called on any list of greats. Rather he was one of those who has IMO SO much potential. But somehow had a career nowhere worthy of Mayweather's words of saying "Dawson is probably P4P best, since I retired." I concur with those words in reel-time, not historically.