Is Floyd Mayweather overrated??

You can't use the Pac fight to back up that assumption with Oscar because anyone coming into the ring for fight night at 160+ for the last 7 years, then boiling down to 145 at weigh in, then not allowed to gain over a couple of pounds for fight night would not be able to perform in any capacity.

If there is such a man out there, that's a BMF.

 

No no. PAC #1, Floyd #2 :deal

 

No, I don't think so. He's one of the best fighters of all time, Maybe he's slightly overrated by some(not including *****s) but he's defintely and ATG in my eyes.

 

Yes he's great but he's never fought a prime peaking fighter on the way up, in fact he's gone out of his way to dodge them all. He's under rated as a great promoter, matchmaker, business man but as a fighter he is overated. He time's his matches perfectly.

 

As I said before, I haven't even seen the fight (only a few clips) and I'm only going by what I've heard or assumed from different places. Until I actually see it (I don't have much motivation to do so, but I suppose I should for the hell of it) I won't have any decent feedback to give.

I see what you're trying to say -- it's the term that you're using (shot) that doesn't sit well with me. If you think his body couldn't handle the weight, and that he was thus no longer as efficient as he used to be, then I could definitely understand that perspective. It makes sense. I think it's pretty clear that Morales had seen better days, and I agree with people saying that he was past his prime. Being 'shot at the weight' is much more debatable.

I'm just repeating myself over and over again, though -- as I said before, I believe the disagreement between us arises due to our different definitions of 'shot'. You seem to use it more liberally, whereas I use it when I consider a fighter completely gone/finished, to the point where he no longer even resembles his old self. This is usually due to age (typically late thirties/early forties) and ring wear. The weight shouldn't make any difference.