If PAC's resume ends up looking like this:

7div champ...history baby...inside ATG#5, ATG#10 the least...

 

It's the truth. Past greats are held way too high on a pedestal.

 

i would say top 15....if you break down the wins, some of them are not impressive ts just the names......

like we will have to wait and see what hatton does, if hatton fights one more time and gets a quality win, then it will enhance pac's resume, if hatton decides to walk away then that win on pac's resume people will discredit it like they have done with his oscar win, and the last barrera and morales wins.......

and for the sake of argument he would beat a cotto, and floyd we will all have to wait and see what cotto and floyd do for the rest of their carears, if manny was to get a win over them......

 

and what if he only wins up to 147, will still this not convince you of his greatness?

i mean, can you imagine the guy fighting paul williams or rjj at 168?

 

hmm says... you could do for a good majority of high rank elite ATGs as well. ie. so and so fought so and so when he was old and out of his prime, or had a back injury, coming of an injury, was the smaller fighter <-- sound familiar? Anyways, not disagreeing with you, just saying that there will always be an excuse to discredit someone's merits.

Top 15 unless some governing body can at least show an updated or revised ATG list other than the crappy ESPN one. It's kinda hard to argue with the names on in the top 10... maybe you can argue the order but 11-20 starts to get shitty.

 

I would consider him great. But thats why i dont really care for rankings of ATGs.

 

You've got 15K posts but you churn out idiotic posts like this. Tell me who's that fighter in history who started at 108 and won at 160. :nono

 

eze, eze,

the guy started at 106. and you even imply that he has to win at 160 or 168 to be acknowledged by fans as greats.

i am not too sure if you are one of these fans.

i know its tough to see that resume, however assumed it is since it contains your idol's name.

its becoming apparent that floyd and floyd fans seem to have things in common.

 

He was a teenager at 106. Pac started at 106! That means nothing.


I would have Pac in my top 10-15 even higher if he did those things (not what I said).

Im just saying, people don't want to let SRR lose his title, or Henry Armstrong, etc.

I just think those standards are unreachable.

 

He was a teenager. He hadn't even full filled his frame yet. He didn't do that till he hit 126.

 

I think eze is trying to, and forgive me if I'm misreading this, claim that it would take something extremely outlandish, i.e., Pacquiao winning titles at 160 and 168, for many to displace fighters like Robinson, Langford, Greb, etc. from the absolute top of their ATG lists. If that is the case, then I agree with him; it's almost inconceivable for a contemporary fighter to build up the credentials requisite to enter that sort of rarefied air.

[Edit: I composed the above before reading eze's clarification. It seems that's exactly what he was saying.]

 

Usually I agree with your posts but this is ridiculous. Pacquiao was world champ and linear at 112. So that still means your argument about moving up to 160 (from 112) is a joke. 160-112 = 48 LBS. In weight class language that is:

FLY
SUPER FLY
BANTAM
SUPER BANTAM
FEATHER
SUPER FEATHER
LIGHT
SUPER LIGHT
WELTER
SUPER WELTER
MIDDLE

For Pacquiao to be Top 10 in your eyes, he would have to go through ELEVEN WEIGHT CLASSES??? Name one fighter who has done that, much less won SIX WORLD TITLES doing it even before reaching WELTER.

 

:good

 

Not in my eyes.