I don't have a huge issue with anyone who calls Floyd Mayweather Jr. the GOAT..

He's a great fighter. He's impressive in accomplishments and ability.
But he's not at the level to be considered #1 by anyone who has any real knowledge of boxing history.
You say you "don't have a huge issue with" anyone who says he's #1, but it's almost hypothetical. No one is saying it, apart from trolls on the general forum, and people who don't know boxing history at all.

I'm actually one of the more flexible persons on this forum regarding the amount of fighters who can be put into the argument for #1. Some say there are 2, 3, 4 names only up for debate. I'd say at least 7 or 8 and maybe as many as 20, but Mayweather would not feature.
On the other hand, I'm less impressed with Mayweather than some have professed to be in the last year (inlcuding yourself).

 

I know you are knowledgeable on boxing history.

I also think that you wouldn't rate Mayweather as #1, and have not seriously considered doing so, in light of everything else you know about boxing history.

That's the point.

You're not a troll.
I think you're just using the idea (of Mayweather as #1 being acceptable) as a rhetorical-hypothetical device to get across the points you're actually making eg. "Mayweather is one of these fighters who's resume may gain more appreciation through the passage of time." etc.

 

You should have a problem with it. All those things above are well and dandy, but the fact remains he's not the GOAT, and frankly, not even top 10 GOAT.

 

:thumbsup You're a good guy Magoo

 

They are though mate, Floyd isn't nearly as big and imposing at 147 as he comparatively is at 130 much like Leonard, Hearns and Robinson aren't as big/imposing at 160 as they are at 147.

To a degree it's like matching up Floyd at 130 to Barrera at 130. Or Leonard against RJJ at 160.

In terms of size Mayweather, Duran, Whitaker, Chavez, Ross, Benny Leonard are in the same bracket and comparable H2H on a P4P basis. Armstrong being smaller than the lot.

 

Pacquiao was small like Armstrong.

 

I'm not fully sure I agree, although I do see where you're coming from.

For me Floyd was at his best as a SFW but I wouldn't say he beats MAB because he's too big there, I'd say he beats him because he's better.

Size becomes a bit arbitrary when dealing with weight classes and if someone is tall that is am asset just like someone being fast imo.

There is a point when someone wins because they're bigger rather than better like I favour Hagler over Hopkins at MW but Hopkins over Hagler at LHW.

But basically those I listed at WW I think beat Floyd because they're better than him.