Pretty much. hernandez, Castillo, Corrales all considered the top guys when Floyd beat them. I think that starting with the Gatti fight is when he started to fall off a bit. He made a lot of money against Gatti and since then is only worried about chasing big paydays.
He did Pacquiao a favor by taking that fight. Let's face it, if he fought Pac and Marquez was still available then people will be all over Pac's ass for having to fight Marquez even if he beats Mayweather. By Mayweather/Marquez fighting then Pac takes the winner no one will be complaining about Pac having to fight the loser of that fight and he's free to go.
Yeah it would have been genious to come back and fight the #1 p4p fighter in the world after a two year layoff as opposed to taking a 25 million dollar tune up fight.
The poll isn't asking whether he is justified in the decision. Simply in whether he fought the best available
I was responding to the direct comment that Floyd should have fought Pac right after a layoff as opposed to Marquez.
Gotcha. In relation to this thread how much sense the decision makes is irrelevant. Simply put is the opponent that Floyd chose the best one available. The answer is a pretty clear no IMO.
what i mean is..... there mentality could have been why fight pacman now.... if they want me to fight pacman... i could get away with fighting jmm.. rake in some extra money and then fight pacman later down the line... both fights are fairly winnable - not risky - and will bring me a lot of $
this is a joke he prob. wont fight sugar shane untill shane hits 45 or starts fading,he,s been ducking cotto for 2 years
Disappointing. Such obvious, obvious bias. His resume is good, he has fought some strong comp, but OF COURSE he did not always fight the best available. Have you undergone therapy to block out the very existence of Tszyu, Mosley, Williams, Cotto and Margarito??