Is Floyd Mayweather overrated??

Yes somewhat ,but his status gets elevated sometimes by his popularity .

 

Floyd have proved himself from the beginning of his career to the present date. How could anyone with out being bias claim that he's overrated? All his titles were earned at the official weight, he's moved up in several weight classes and still remains undefeated. Who else have ever done that and still remains with a 0 on there record. Sure people have moved up in several weight classes, but not many if any have remain undefeated while doing so. He would be a problem to any fighter within his weight class from any era. Until proven other wise he's definitely the best of this era.

 

This content is protected

 

Of course he is. Old DLH would have defeated him had he not stopped jabbing.
Old and shot Mosley almost KO him, while Pac defeated these 2 fighters easy.

 

He's one of the best fighters I've seen.

His record, though...it just doesn't seem to match up to his potential, especially in recent years.

Judah was coming off an upset loss to Baldo, and Baldo himself isn't exactly special. I remember people finding it quite laughable at the time, and it took the shine away from the Mayweather match up. Hoya was a decent match, and one of the better names on the record, but Hoya was nowhere near his prime at the time and wasn't even training with his usual coach. He did, however, have the size advantage, and the size of the ring, the gloves, etc meant that he did have more of a chance than he normally would have done. Hatton was another solid name, but I was never impressed with his skills, and his lack of defence was particularly evident. He also wasn't at his best weight class when he fought Floyd, and some people even thought he lost to Collazo before the match occurred. Marquez is an excellent fighter, but the weight/size issue definitely hindered him a lot, which is why he changed his conditioning process afterwards. When the fight was announced, people were criticising Floyd quite heavily for picking on a smaller guy. Mosley was old, and just like Hoya, far from his prime. Ortiz...we don't even need to go there. Now Floyd is fighting Cotto, who many people regard as damaged and no longer the danger he once was. (To put this into perspective, consider that Merchant asked Floyd about fighting Cotto back in 2007.)

Now, to be fair, you can pick apart nearly any record, even really good ones. There are always things to criticise, and opponents are rarely in the best possible shape. Mayweather also deserves a lot of credit for some of his earlier fights -- he looked masterful against Corrales, and he gave Castillo an instant rematch and beat him. I do think Mayweather's record, as a whole, doesn't quite match up to his ability, though.

I hate to bring up Pac in this thread (I'm tired of the constant arguments surrounding these two guys) but when I look at his record, I find myself appreciating it a bit more -- a complete destruction of a prime (or close to prime) Barrera, a close loss and then two dominant matches against Morales, and two back and forth, tight matches against Marquez. Those three names alone are highly impressive, but then you consider that he goes on to move up in weight and take on Hatton (someone usually regarded as one of Mayweather's best wins) in Hatton's best weight class, easily crushing him, before beating up Cotto, who had only lost to Margarito and was younger and fresher than the version today.

 

You are impressed by Pacquiao needing atleast 2 gifts against Marquez, one at welterweight making Marquez move up 2 weight classes, and beating a shot weight drained Morales, then picking off a bunch of Mayweather leftovers. :roflatsch

 

Best of his generation , but this isnt a particually good era.

Yet his media work is ATG worthy.

Wouldnt be unbeaten in the 90's , 80's or 70's (cannot go further back as only discussiong boxing I have seen).

 

I wasn't referring to the third (and most recent) Marquez/Pac match. I had Marquez winning that quite clearly. I was pointing out that they had two very close fights that could have gone either way. (The draw and then the Pac win.) I don't think Morales was shot either. 'Shot' implies that you're a shadow of what you once were...the perfect example is the current Roy Jones Jr. That is 'shot'. When Morales fought Pac, he was past his prime, but far, far away from being shot...even nowadays he's still holding up and schooling supposed world class guys like Maidana. Calling the 2006 version of Morales 'shot' seems silly.

 

Yes he is. but so is pacquiao.

 

Morales was completely shot at the weight. He was massively weight drained. He lost to Zahir Raheem in the fight prior to fighting Pac at 135. Even today at a more comfortable weight do you see him beating any of the guys in top 10 thats not an unskilled brawler like Maidana?

Giving Pacquiao credit for beating a shot weight drained MOrales is laughable. Infact it shows how weak Pac is that he got schooled by Morales the first time.

 

Agreed ,Imagine if fought the likes of Pryor ,Duran or Arguello ? He wouldn’t have had the luxury of handpicking opponents ..

 

I think our disagreement arises from the fact that your definition of 'shot' seems to be very different to mine. It can certainly be argued that Morales is currently shot, but the 2006 version? I really don't see it.

 

Yeah agree. Also not having media outlets such as twitter , 30 different sports channels would mean all of his talking would be done on a fewer amount of channels to a higher quality audience who wouldnt put up with his BS unless he backed it up in the ring.

Also he would be going up against Prime King and Arum , not the old relics they are today.

His resume would be way better but the 0 would definately go.

 

Underrated if anything. Not often an era can boast an unbeatable fighter.

 

:deal This