George Foreman vs Gerry Cooney

mr. magoo · Nov 21, 2007

AnthonyJ74 said:

mr. magoo said:

I actually think George Foreman improved as a fighter during the latter stages of his comeback. His fights against Shannon Briggs and Lou Savarese were good fights. I thought George beat Briggs and I thought he beat Savarese. But more importantly, George showed a lot of skill in those fights; his footwork, his jab, and his ring generalship were all very impressive. Even against Moorer, George seemed to pace himself and fight a smart fight even though he was losing. Against Holyfield, George seemed too tight and not as fluid as he did in many of his later fights.

But getting back to the Cooney fight, I just don't see that fight as being a "'big" win as far as fistic merit goes. It was a big win in the sense that it was a spectacular KO over a name opponent, but it was not a spectacular win over a good, active, and highly-ranked opponent. And the funny thing was, after George starched Gerry Cooney, many in the boxing world were acting as if George were the second coming of Joe Louis. And Adilson Rodriguez? Gimme a break! Was he still ranked after Holyfield starched him? Even if he was still rated, he was another "gimme" opponent who's list of quality opponents was rather lacking. There were other contenders around to fight, but George settled on Rodriguez for a reason.
Click to expand...

This is a reasonable post with good points. Consider however, that Cooney and Rodriguez were not bad fights as the 1990 heavyweight picture goes. The 1988 olympic prospects were still a long way from making waves, and the other top ten opponents consisted of men like Carl Williams, Renaldo Snipes, Orlin Norris, Greg Page, and Jose Ribalta. OF coruse there were better guys like Mason, Dokes, Ruddock and Witherspoon but the Rodrigeuz and Cooney fights were not bad picks in the grand scheme of things. The heavyweight picture of 1990, was not a very strong one, once you looked beneath the top 3 or 4 guys.
Click to expand...

AnthonyJ74 · Nov 21, 2007

mr. magoo said:

ChrisPontius said:

Fair enough, i only have disagreements with these few points:

I don't particularly think that Foreman built his whole resume on Cooney per say, although he was one of the bigger names in the early portion of Foreman's comeback. Also, for whatever reason Tillis was commonly listed as a signature win on a lot of men's records, prior to getting bigger opportunities. Tommy Morrison for example fought a completely shot Tillis in 1991, when he was already 24-0. This fight was marketed as being 1 of 3 big bouts on a highly promoted card involving Mercer-Damiani, Seldon-Ribalta, and Morrison-Tillis(of course). I probably still have that card on VHS tape in a box somewhere.

Fair enough, although he probably could have found a way around facing Morrison and gone after a different fish.

A fringe contender yes, but certainly not a safe opponent.

Savarese was a 6'6 prospect who was unbeaten in 36 fights. This was a risky fight for an aging ex-champion. Shultz was a slick boxer, which historically was the type of fighter who gave Foreman problems. Grimsley had no previous wins over reputable fighters, but being unbeaten in 20 fights with 18 ko's, many of which were early round knockouts, indicated that he could both win and punch. Briggs was viewed as one of the best young heavyweights around in 1997. Foreman fought him when he was dangerously close to the age of 50, and I remember thinking that George should have gotten the decision by a thin margin.

When you say "should've gotten a shot", do you mean at Foreman's belt in 1994 following the Moorer win? because if this is the case, then remember that Goerge arguably lost to shultz in his first defense, then renounced the title, for refusal to fight Axel again. The fact that he fought Schultz in his first defense after just winning the title does not imply that he ducked those other men. Rarely do cahmpions go after the very best opponents after just taking a world title in their first defense. By the way Tyson had not yet returned to the game in 1994, Lewis had just lost to McCall, Holyfield was temporarily retired from the Moorer fight, and Bowe, was meandering around fighting various people here and there.
Click to expand...

Bowe was way more deserving of a title shot than was Axel Schultz. It was shameful the way Foreman attempted to "hold on to" the heavyweight championship by fighting a guy who obtained his fraudulent ranking by way of a Bob Arum payoff to IBF president Bob Lee. George was hoping to cash in on a mega-million fight with Mike Tyson at the time, and he didn't want any capable fighter to spoil his goal. And Schultz did exactly that, he just didn't get the decision. Foreman deserved to lose that fight!
Click to expand...

mr. magoo · Nov 21, 2007

AnthonyJ74 said:

mr. magoo said:

Bowe was way more deserving of a title shot than was Axel Schultz. It was shameful the way Foreman attempted to "hold on to" the heavyweight championship by fighting a guy who obtained his fraudulent ranking by way of a Bob Arum payoff to IBF president Bob Lee. George was hoping to cash in on a mega-million fight with Mike Tyson at the time, and he didn't want any capable fighter to spoil his goal. And Schultz did exactly that, he just didn't get the decision. Foreman deserved to lose that fight!
Click to expand...

I think the notion of Foreman deserving to lose to Schultz has been addressed plenty during this thread.

I also disagree that it was shameful for Foreman to fight Shultz instead of Bowe. Foreman had just fought one of the toughest fights of his career against Michael Moorer, and took a fairly good beating before winning that fight. He fought Schultz just 5 months later. Its not uncommon for a newly crowned champion to take an easy first title defense before challenging better fighters. Holmes for example, fought Alfredo Evangelista in his first defense for Christs sake. Schultz was also no safe opponent as he was a boxer type which George always had trouble with.
Click to expand...

AnthonyJ74 · Nov 21, 2007

mr. magoo said:

AnthonyJ74 said:

I think the notion of Foreman deserving to lose to Schultz has been addressed plenty during this thread.

I also disagree that it was shameful for Foreman to fight Shultz instead of Bowe. Foreman had just fought one of the toughest fights of his career against Michael Moorer, and took a fairly good beating before winning that fight. He fought Schultz just 5 months later. Its not uncommon for a newly crowned champion to take an easy first title defense before challenging better fighters. Holmes for example, fought Alfredo Evangelista in his first defense for Christs sake. Schultz was also no safe opponent as he was a boxer type which George always had trouble with.
Click to expand...

You think Axel Schultz was worthy of a title shot? He was unranked prior to being chosen to fight Foreman. And what's with this Foreman deserved to take it easy stuff? He took it easy over the majority of his entire comeback. He lost to Tommy Morrison in June of 1993 and then was offered a championship fight against Moorer in November of 1994 on the basis of his losing effort against Morrison. He then beats Moorer and then he's entitled to fight a guy like Schultz? Come on now! And then, to leave no shadow of a doubt as to what Foreman was all about, he refuses to fight Schultz again after he was ordered to when the fight turned out to be much tougher than expected. At least Foreman could have given Schultz a rematch; the kid outfought him the first time and you think reverend Foreman would have done the classy thing in granting him a rematch!
Click to expand...

Woddy · Nov 21, 2007

AnthonyJ74 said:

mr. magoo said:

You think Axel Schultz was worthy of a title shot? He was unranked prior to being chosen to fight Foreman. And what's with this Foreman deserved to take it easy stuff? He took it easy over the majority of his entire comeback. He lost to Tommy Morrison in June of 1993 and then was offered a championship fight against Moorer in November of 1994 on the basis of his losing effort against Morrison. He then beats Moorer and then he's entitled to fight a guy like Schultz? Come on now! And then, to leave no shadow of a doubt as to what Foreman was all about, he refuses to fight Schultz again after he was ordered to when the fight turned out to be much tougher than expected. At least Foreman could have given Schultz a rematch; the kid outfought him the first time and you think reverend Foreman would have done the classy thing in granting him a rematch!
Click to expand...

I think that basically what Magoo is saying, is that Foreman was doing what most champions would do following a title win. He suffered a beating from Moorerer, then defended against a low ranked fighter. Most guys have done this. Magoo already used the example of Evangelista and Holmes. As for the rematch, Foreman knew that he was outclassed, therefore quietly gave up the belt with no excuses. Personaly, I think this was a fair move, and lets not forget that this was a guy who was what....45 years old???
Click to expand...

AnthonyJ74 · Nov 21, 2007

Woddy said:

AnthonyJ74 said:

I think that basically what Magoo is saying, is that Foreman was doing what most champions would do following a title win. He suffered a beating from Moorerer, then defended against a low ranked fighter. Most guys have done this. Magoo already used the example of Evangelista and Holmes. As for the rematch, Foreman knew that he was outclassed, therefore quietly gave up the belt with no excuses. Personaly, I think this was a fair move, and lets not forget that this was a guy who was what....45 years old???
Click to expand...

Well, boxing doesn't handicap based on age. George knew what he was getting involved with when he returned to boxing. And I agree that most fighters take fairly easy fights after winning the title, but George took it to a new level by selecting Schultz. Whether or not you want to say Bob Arum was responsible or not for selecting Schultz, George still went along with it. And it was proven that a bribe was made to get Schultz the opportunity. The whole thing smelled bad!
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

George Foreman vs Gerry Cooney

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member

Woddy Guest

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

George Foreman vs Gerry Cooney

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member

mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member

Woddy Guest

AnthonyJ74 Boxing Addict Full Member