Is George Foreman the most overrated fighter in history?

Very funny you posted this I was considering doing a thread myself after seeing another post in general. I happen to agree that Foreman gets overrated. Most overrated ever? That’s a little harsh. But if you look up and down his record it’s short on depth. An immense level of padding even some of the guys with decent records like a Tony Fungilia were coming off multiple losses when they faced big George.
I have no issue with excluding Foreman from my top 10 all time heavies. His comeback was carefully orchestrated and the climax for me was his noble performance against Holyfield. Rather than the ko of Moorer. Moorer was a temporary claimant as champion and not viewed as good as Bowe, Lewis (Tyson in jail), at the time.

 

Even many of the big names he defeated were smallish heavies that had campaigned in lighter weights before like Gregorio Peralta that gave George a great fight. Or Dwight Quawi. Or the aforementioned Michael Moorer. I find Foreman’s record very deceptive.
Norton lost to every big puncher he ever faced. And Ron Lyle was good but lost his biggest fights.
Foreman gets a ton of mileage for blowing out Frazier. And for the fairytale comeback on Michael Moorer.
If you really go on deep dive of Foreman’s record you can probably pick about 45-50 opponents on his win total that we’re journeyman, cruisers, or well past there best.

 

Well Norton was rated among top 5 best Heavyweights for a good 5 year period in 70s, in what is called the strongest Heavyweight era ever. Its not like Norton was a one tricky pony who just had a good style vs Ali, he came within a whisker of beating Larry Holmes who is considered top 5 Heavyweight of all time. So i think Norton deserves some credit for his performances Ali, Holmes, who are top 5 Heavyweights of all time. Norton also destroyed Quarry and beat Young. So Norton was actually a very capable fighter, so Foreman deserves high praise for the manner of the victory over a prime Norton.

 

Almost certainly, I believe the 70s heavyweight era to be overrated (therefore I believe the fighters in the era are too). However, it’s still either the strongest or second strongest era of the heavyweight division ever. Although that seems a little contradictory I believe both to be true.

 

What are Foreman’s 5 best wins pre retirement and post retirement comeback.

Pre: Frazier 1, Norton, Lyle, Peralta 2, Frazier 2.
Post: Moorer, Stewart, Quawi, Coetzer, Cooney ?

I’m asking because I’m unsure. Especially for the comeback.

 

He was like Mike Tyson before there was a Mike Tyson...except (as amazing as Mike indubitably was) Tyson never beat anyone the level of undefeated, under 30 Frazier or peak Norton.

Underestimating peak Ken Norton is a mistake. Maybe watch more of his fights. His journeyman ko loss was when he was green, he only got knocked out by men in the top 5-ever category of greatest heavyweight punchers.

He was a great fighter, and George knocked the living yee-haw out of him.

I also find it amusing when his win against Moorer is underestimated. All predictable excuses aside, Moorer had beaten the only man to have ever beaten Riddick Bowe in the professional ranks. At the time he won the title only Bowe and Lewis were considered his real peers, and Lewis got KTFO shortly after.

George was an old man, and it's kind of funny to hear how people play up his losing to Moorer up to the knock out. Uhhh, who won that fight again?

No offense, it just peeves me to see such criticisms. Yes, George kind of had a one off in the 90s, to some degree lucked out, and only had one really good win after (yeah I count Briggs as a win). But nobody to date has matched that accomplishment at that age. It's not like he knocked out Seldon for the title lol.

 

Great fighter but he gets slightly overrated imo. I rank him about the 10th best atg heavyweight which is nothing to be ashamed of. He was a destroyer who doesn't quite have the versatility to win in different ways like Ali or Holmes for example and I think he loses to those guys among others the majority of the time. I don't regard his comeback as highly as some do, If you disregard his age, that version was comparable to a Bonecrusher Smith level fighter.

 

Briggs stunk - check out his resume for padding and if you count that as a win do you count Schulz as a loss? Because that was an even bigger robbery.
Norton lost to the biggest punchers he ever faced, no real crime they were huge punchers but he got blown away each time. He never made it past the second round against Cooney, Shavers and Foreman.
And as for his other fights I thought Holmes beat him cleanly, I find few on here that say they felt he won, Young was 50/50 and Quarry was old. Norton is also overrated.

 

Fought alot of unranked bums. Even jimmy young knocked him down

 

Briggs wasn't much of an ATG but hey, he won the title twice so...

 

I have him #11 at HW all time, which is considerably lower than average. I do wonder if I underate him or if others conflate his profile with how good he was, as you allude to. Either way, still a damn fine HW.

 

I assume the OP meant top 5 at HW and top 50 pfp.

 

One of the hardest hitting heavies of all time. Good chin,decent jab and excellent at cutting off the ring on his opponents. Durable.

Definitely a top 10 heavy.