If Floyd loses...

He was never amazing anyway

 

He's been the best boxer in the World for over 10 years, hard to argue he "was never that good" and not look like a complete spastic.

 

He was that good, Manny was better. It doesn't make him any less, it makes the boxer that beat him more.

 

He's the best defensive boxer of his era... that is all.

His careful matchmaking, retirements, and ducking hinders his rating.

In my eyes, Mayweather has lost to Castillo, arguably to an old DLH and a B level Maidana.

 

Def lost to castillo, and yes arguably with DLH but Maidana? No way.

 

Are you related to CJ Ross or boxing_master? :rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Arguably to Maidans. I've only seen the first fight once and I scored it for Maidana...I may have been biased in my scoring, but I know many people had it close... I'll give it a watch sometime and re-score it, I usually don't like watching Mayweather fights more than once because they are usually dull and boring.

 

ya think!!!!!!!

 

Never that good? No. Just that he's 2nd best and Pacquiao is #1.

 

because Mayweather fans aren't biased right....:deal atsch

 

that's not going to stand up.

his resume will get scrutized and all you kool aid drinkers will realize that a lot of his "greatness" is based on hype. he just sold himself well.

 

People are ridiculous.

At the very least, Mayweather and Pacquiao are two of the top fighters of this era and sure-fire HOFers. And not questionable HOFers where you go "THAT guy in in?" (McGuigan, Gatti).

A lot of the people who say Mayweather is overrated and not really that good are just weird "Pac****s" who say it to comfort themselves so they can feel better about their hero's chances on May 2nd. Same thing with "*****s" who bash Pacquiao and bring up losses 10 years ago, or the Marquez KO. Well bringing up KO6 isn't exactly gonna make a Mayweather win look better since a smaller guy, whom Mayweather already beat 12-0, did it first.

The more you bash one fighter and say he's not that great, it doesn't exactly say much for the other guy should he win.

"What's the big deal, he beat a guy that was not that great anyway'

 

The hell that got to do with you being unable to score a fight fairly?

 

Losing to Pacquiao isn't getting exposed unless he's demolished quickly or shut out. And even then, it doesn't bring into question his resume. It just means Pacquiao was/is the better fighter between the two. Why does losing to Pacquiao have to destroy his entire legacy?