Frank Tate vs Gerald McClellan

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Xplosive, Dec 17, 2008.


  1. Xplosive

    Xplosive Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,334
    9,941
    Jun 23, 2008
    Who woulda won between them?
     
  2. la-califa

    la-califa Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,292
    53
    Jun 12, 2007
    Tate could be hit, McClellan would blow him out, inside three rounds.
     
  3. GPater11093

    GPater11093 Barry Full Member

    38,034
    91
    Nov 10, 2008
    mcclellan with a fierce body attack would win in round 4
     
  4. Dave's Top Ten

    Dave's Top Ten Active Member Full Member

    1,162
    4
    Aug 10, 2007
    The Tate that fought Olajide could do it on points.
     
  5. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,495
    2,150
    Oct 22, 2006

    You be hitting the nail on the head IMO....


    Just because McClellan suffered in the sport, does not mean you should overrate him.

    McClellan had a ton of potential, but blew it in the Benn fight, big time, despite being given more than one chance previously!
     
  6. natonic

    natonic Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,581
    83
    Jul 9, 2008
    I fall on the Tate side of this one. Tate was a very good boxer and only lost to Nunn at 160. Tate's the kind of guy who could trouble McClellan (he won't come straight at him). Tate by decision.
     
  7. Sonny Carson

    Sonny Carson Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,995
    5
    Jan 7, 2007
    Tate wouldn't last with McClellan, dude was a lethal puncher. It's not overrating McClellan to say he would beat Tate. It would be overrating him to say he could beat somebody like Roy Jones or maybe Nunn but not Frank Tate, come on.