Well, if you put McCellan in the early 1900's, he not going to box the same way as a modern boxer did. Boxing in those days put a premium on toughness, stamina, and such. The odds are McCellan would be a tad smaller as well. I do think Mclellan could have been a contender, but I can't seem him taking out Jeffreis, Johnson, or Langford. Maybe he could UD McVey. Jeanette for me is a tad over rated, but under that rule set I'd take him over McCellan. IMO, Mcclellan would have a much better chance at middle vs Ketchel or O'Brien.
60's poops on it and plenty come at least close...it was strong but not everyone fought each other like they did in the 60's...not everyone was rolling around at it the same time and many would only stay for a short amount of time before skipping off to supermiddle. Tiger, Fullmer, Carter, Archer, Griffith, Giardello, Benton, Hank, Tiger Jones, Fernandez, Downes, Pender, Papp, Giambra, Moyer, LMR, Rivero, Lausse, Torres, Armstrong, Mims, Spider Webb...chuck in an old Robinson and a young Benvenuti aswell...And Im probably missing some aswell.
maybe he was a boiled down supermiddle if he was given more time to grow. cruisers do not boil down to 160. ask adamek , or do you consider him a legit heavy ? marciano , however , was a lightheavy and so was corbett. charles was also a supermiddle , and a heavyweight walcott was indeed a small cruiser , for example , so were the heavyweight versions of moore , morrer , spinks , norris and louis.
Presuming were talking about a time machine GMAN, I assume he'd just not boil down and fight at a healthy 180-190, maybe even eat his way upto 200-210
It is hard to be sure. Fighters of that period seem to have come in somewhat lighter in longer fights than in ten rounders because of the large amount of roadwork required to get their stamina up to scratch. I could see a situation where G man might have to train down to say 170 in order to last the distance. You just don't know untill you put him through that regime.
against benn or before benn ? and cruiserweights are around 210 in the ring today and i mean the top of the division , not erdei and danny green , in the 190 era they were also around 200 , so how mcclellan a cruiserweight is beyond me. toney was 183 / 184 when he lost his 168 crown to roy and it effected him badly. so you say mcclellan could lose 20lbs+ without damaging effects ?
How do you know McClellan didnt do the same amount of roadwork that most of the era did? Plenty of fighters do very high milage today. This type of slow jogging isnt necessarily conjusive to boxing though in either era as boxing is more dynamic
In the 180s against Jackson, and thats possibly part of the reason why hes in the condition he is now, dehydrating takes fluid from around the brain giving it less cushioning
Really, this thread highlights how overrated McClellan is, rather than the constant adoration for 'Old Timers'. G-Man just wasn't that good. Fairly decent attributes, but who did he really prove his immense power against? Fighters past their best and couldn't even put away one of those fighters past his best in Benn, although Benn that night was like an animal. Still, for someone to be beating up the likes of Tommy Burns and Jack Johnson, I'd hope they could beat Benn. Personally I'd give Benn a better chance at fulfilling the OP's suggestion.
Benn was a great fighter in his very prime that night and fought a hell of a fight and said himself he was near death. That fight ruined both men, both had amazing ability, if you cant see it your blind
Benn was a MW Tyson through and through [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TVgkCN_1aE&feature=related[/ame] BTW Benn said he was hit in the head by a sledgehammer (I think it was a sledge hammer) in a street fight and he said McClellans power hurt him more than that. Benn suffered broken jaw, a shadow on the brain, damaged kidneys amongst other injuries in that fight