not a atg should have 5-6 losses and in all big fights.. elite fighter who is higher then should be thanks to media
Still a top 5 Mexican imo. The depth of his resume is just very hard to stand up against even if you get nippy about placing asterisks and scoring.
Good fighter but not a great fighter always had several big flaws. Cement feet and poor stamina. His power was only good wasn't great. Only aspect that he truly excelled at was slipping and countering. Guys that can box will always out box him and for my money even when he faced someone with the skill set that complimented his own he lost which was Triple G. Honestly he hasn't looked great since Bivol pasted him. Moving down to Super Middle and beating B level guys masked the fact that he's been in decline a long time. 70 pro fights will do that along with hundreds of millions sitting in the bank.
People seem to forget he himself started at light welterweight...he is essentially a blown up welterweight if we are going to describe Crawford as such; although, in reality, Crawford is a 190lb man cutting a shed load of weight...for me, that was the most 'natural' fighting weight I'd seen Crawford last night...
I think his legacy is cemented as a All Timer. What ive always said about Canelo though is theres so many fighters who are All Time Greats also, that stylistically would punch his nose in for 12 rounds and make him look very basic. Legacy: B++ Fantasy Match Ups: C+
For me, he's 0-5 or 0-4-1 against the five best opponents he's fought. 1-3-1 even with the enormous scorecard favouritism he's always had. A boxer who never legitimately beats an elite opponent in five attempts and who clearly loses on any fair scorecard in four of them isn't an elite of the sport in my mind.