Is Crawford in the same class as Mayweather, Leonard, Duran or more in the Class of Oscar, Mosley...

I'm questioning the classes you have them in because:

tier 1: Pernell, Duran, Leonard
tier 2: Tito, Oscar, Floyd
tier 3: Mosley, Forrest

Crawford is tier 3

Crawford is an excellent fighter, rightfully in the top 3 p4p currently IMO. But to mention him as potentially superior to tier 1 and 2 yet? No.

 

No

 

The Fab 4 fought much tougher competition than Mayweather did. Thus, their flaws were laid bare. If Mayweather had fought prime Mosley and DLH and guys like that you would have seen him show vulnerability in ways that much worse fighters like Corrales couldn't expose.

 

I agree

 

Maybe

But he'll never have the legacy

In 10 years time he will be forgotten

 

List is trash

 

Crawford is the truth, but he needs first rate opponents and fast because he's getting up there in age already.

If he beats Spence, Ennis, and Vegil his standing will go up a whole lot. He might take titles at 154 too.

 

ok

 

Pernell wasn’t that great at 147.

Duran had a great win, a good win, a decent win and an embarrassing loss at 147. Nothing else.

Floyd and Oscar both put in work at 147 and Tito wasn’t bad either.

The tiers make zero sense.

 

Crawford has yet to prove he's even on the level of ODLH and Mosley, let alone on the level of Floyd, SRL and Duran.

All 5 of them had accomplished MUCH more than Crawford when they were Crawford's current age (34). Crawford arguably doesn't even have a win as good as Floyd's over Corrales, and DEFINITELY not one as good as Leonard's over Hearns.

 

1. Please point to where I said Tito was bad, or that Oscar and Floyd didn't put in work.

2: Please point out where the question only referred to WW.....................go back to page one, look at the original post, this was holistically, not what they did at a single weight.

The tiers make perfect sense when you judge by their entire careers: Tier one are all considered the greatest irrespective of era, tier two are in the greatest conversation and are all considered that of their respective eras.

My position stands.

 

Pernell's resume is nowhere near as good as Mayweather's. Tito and Oscar have resumes that are worse than Mayweather's and Tito is by a lot. That is why it looks like a welterweight ranking.

 

Hard to say tbh. Ability? Maybe but resume you just cant tell as he has yet to fight a beast.

 

Not remotely.

Floyd, Leonard, and Duran are all top twenty all-time p4p.
They all have signature wins over other top twenty p4p fighters.


Bud is not top fifty and he doesn't have a signature win over a top fifty opponent.


Maybe, he COULDA been.

But he isn't.

 

Crawford isn't even top 100. He might have the weakest resume of the current top 10 P4P.