Has The Heavyweight Division Ever Been So Poor?

Bull****...

2005

Title Vacant

1. 1. [url]
      This content is protected
      [/url][url]
      This content is protected
      
      [*][/url][url]
      This content is protected
      [/url][url]
      This content is protected
      
      [*][/url][url]
      This content is protected
      [/url][url]
      This content is protected
      
      [*][/url][url]
      This content is protected
      [/url][url]
      This content is protected
      
      [*][/url][url]
      This content is protected
      [/url][url]
      This content is protected
      [/url]

Top 5 in Action that year:

Rahman/Barrett
Ruiz/Valuev
Toney/Ruiz
Byrd/Williamson
Brewster/Golota
Brewster/Kransniqi (actually a great fight here)

 

yea, I think the 80's were bad and parts of every decade....even the 70's despite the big 3 and a few, the rest were retreads or neverbeens. The Klitschko's collectively have cleaned out the division but the contenders were not bad,Chambers,Brock,Thompson,Ibragimov,Haye,Chagaev, would have been competitive in any era and would have beaten a lot of contenders from other era's

There seems to be a rising crop but will take a year or 2 for them to rise up

 

:good

 

1994-1995 was horrible as well.

McCall, Seldon, Moorer, and Bruno as Champions. Foreman taking the lineal claim into hiding.

The number one HW in the World, Bowe shut out of the title scene and fighting guys like Donald, Hide, Mathis Jr, and Gonzales..etc.

 

It can be a strong era, if most of the best participants are comparable in size to one another and fight regularly... So the past periods in boxing were not bad in that sense. But in a head to head sense in fantasy matchups I agree. While me like Marciano will always rate higher than either Klit on my list, I wouldn't bet on them to lose to a lot of fighters from 40+ years ago.

 

No. It's horrible and has been for a while now

As pathetic a challenger as Mormeck is, you can guarantee Wlad will still fight like a petrified deer in headlights and jab jab jab for 10 rounds

A disgraceful Champion fitting for a disgraceful era

 

I wonder what peoples opinion will be the moment Wlad gets beat?

Will they say it's better? Or will it need to be a Brit, or an American for them to say it?

Or is that it needs to get out of the white dudes hands?

 

better than that, I can't wait for the hindsite view 20 years from now when people say **** like, " the heavyweight picture of the 2030's sucks", " You just don't have ATG like the Klits anymore, and I bet even Chris Arreola would hold one of the belts if he were around today."

 

Quick top ten from the top of my head

Champ: Wlad
Vitali
Povetkin
Chambers
Adamek
Chagaev
Dmitrenko
Chisora
Arreola
Fury

I don't see what the big fuss is.

the top guys are slowly beginning to face off against each other and that's all any era can ask for.

Plus we have a great champion cleaning house.

 

It has nothing to do with support for your viewpoint, it is your need to flood the forum with the same bitchy threads.

And it has many uses..."like...I'm waiting for eternity." You can't possibly wait for eternity. Or....

Hyperbole

"1. obvious and intentional exaggeration"

ex. Will anyone outside of Germany, actually pay to watch the Klit's beat up two drastically under qualified challengers as Mormeck and Chisora?

But I'm not going to argue semantics..the point is you are being a god damn drama queen. Get the **** over it.

 

Yeah, Ron Stander, Jose Roman, Coopman, Evangelista, Dunn, Leon Spinks, Tex Cobb, Scott Frank, David Bey, Tangstad, the motley crew of drug and donut addicts of the 80's, the Mike Dokes that fought Bowe, Akinwande, Botha, Vaughan Bean... the list goes on... these would all be champs today!

 

I doubt they will do it for todays guys.

They will still be claiming Tyson would **** those guys.

Espically if the champ is a white dude.

The champ will probably be Mexican by then.

So will most everyone else. :rofl

 

In fairness you're picking the worst of the bunch from those eras and using them as a counter argument against the best of today... Sure in the 70's you had a lot of crap contenders, but you also had a much better upper tier.. In 1973 for example your top 5 heavy's were Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Norton and Quarry.... That list is comprised of 3 top 10 all time greats, plus two hall of fame contenders or so I believe.. Can we honestly make that comparison with today's current picture?