If today's HW division is so crappy, then why can't the 90s fighters win a belt?

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

This content is protected

 

:deal

 

This content is protected

[/IMG]

 

I never said anything about him being a top fighter. Read well much troll? :roll:

You asked about titles, I gave you one from your list. And you reply like a ***** who can't read.... atsch

 

This content is protected

 

couple things: liakovich and brewster weren't 90's hws and byrd was barely. Also, byrd and briggs and i think holy grabbed straps in the 2000's. Holy was 40 since 2004 so its hard to use him as a good example. Mercer too was 40 for a lot of the past decade so there's a problem. Golota shoulda held a belt, tua never held belts in any decade, and ike was in jail. Guys that were also relevant in the 90's to add depth were foreman and holmes and they were in their 50's in 2000's. Tommy morrison was aided up. tyson was only in any type of shape (mentally and lesser extent physically) for about two years around 2000-2002 and he was 40 in 2006. so in sum i don't see how the argument adds up to too much in justifying today's division. all you need to know about the hw division of the past 5 years can be attained by watching just about any title or "contender" type fight and you'll see that the majority look like mismatches or borefests or both

forgot a couple: bowe was kidnapping his family and blowing up to 350lbs during the decade, ollie mccall was over 40 and still battling crack addiction for much of the time...also maskaev held a belt in like 2006 and he was a 90's hw... rahman also held a belt around 2005 and is about to get his second title shot in the last 3 years......