Is Matthew Saad Muhammad an All Time Great ?

This. Good summary.

 

Is the sky blue?

 

In another time he might be viewed differently or has he had a proper career with good consistent training etc....He was dangerous, tough and capable...but his vulnerability takes him out of the discussion. He was tough as nails and flourished in the best era of Light Heavyweights an era sandwiched between Bob Foster and Michael Spinks He was the real deal and I loved some Matt Franklin fights. His fights with Qwai showed his limitations against a clever cutey fighter with a mean streak. His status is kind of in the Pepino Cuevas mold at Welterweight category

 

I know, huh?

 

Johnson was very good but he won only four title fights in total

He lost in his first defense the first two times and had one successful defense the third time.

Admittadly the guys he lost to Matthew Saad Muhammad and Eddie Mustafa Muhammad were special.

The loss to Spinks was no shame in retrospect seeing what Spinks went on to achieve.

I think the most impressive thing about Johnson is that he regrouped after the Spinks loss when everyone thought he was done

He bided his time and because the division got weaker he remained one ot tne best in the division.

When Spinks abdicated Johnson was able to win a version of the belt.

He did this a full five years after the loss to Spinks. Very impressive.

On paper I think he falls just short but if McGuigan, Mancini and Gatti are in,

Johnson deserves to be in.

So does Michael Nunn.

There does seem to be a soft spot among Hall voters for wildly popular white fighters while some borderline black fighters who never

captured the adulation of the general sports public are forgotten.

 

It is the hall of FAME though, and Gatti and Macinin were famous fighters. Not sure about McGuigan.

 

MSM went roughly 37-12-2 in fights contested at LHW.

He started 31-3-2 (the final defeat of which was to the excellent Eddie Mustafa Muhammed when Matthew was aged 22 in only his 18th pro fight) before he lost to Qawi aged 27, where his record dropped off thereafter. At 27/28, he was still in his prime years, but his style was always likely to result in a short peak & I suspect he was passed his peak by the time of the Qawi fights & only degraded further from there.

He beat Marvin Johnson x 2, John Conteh x 2, Yaqui Lopez x 2, Marvin Camel by SD (1-1), Mate Parlov (1-0-1), Lottie Mwale, Murray Sutherland and Richie Kates. That's a fine win resume, though he lacks longevity in dominance over the division.

Between late 1977 and early 1981, MSM was a serious force at LHW.

I rank him #13 all time at LHW, based solely on fights contested within that division.

Depending on your interpretation of "ATG", that will make him either an ATG, or borderline ATG, LHW.

 

No. Exciting yes, gutsy yes, but not a "great".

 

Great post wins over Kates, Johnson, Lopez, Parlov, Conteh, are very good wins some of those wins were before he become champion aswell which adds to his legacy significantly.

The issue i have with Muhammad is that regarding the eye test he doesn't look like an ATG to me, obviously he was a very exciting fighter which adds to his immense popularity. But apart from his unreal durability which obviously was his best attribute he didn't appear to me regarding his overall skillset to have that special something if that makes sense ? basically when i watched him i saw a very brave real life rocky type boxer that would comeback from immense beatings, but i never was overly wowed by his skills or anything like that. But i guess his will and durability is an ATG trait aswell and that's something you can't teach.

But i think in regards to his resume he has to be a lower tier ATG for me for example if people consider Bob Foster an ATG then i don't see why Muhammad isn't. Muhammad has a way better resume than Foster and definitely more defining fights than him at Light Heavyweight. Even if Foster does look significantly better than Muhammad in regards to the eye test.

 

Yes, I know what you mean. MSM has more recognisable names on his win resume than Foster, but Foster utterly dominated the divison for several years and never lost at the weight. He vastly surpasses MSM in terms of dominance and longevity, as well as the eye test, as you say.

 

That’s the way I see it, I think everybody loves Saad for being a true warrior, but he just does not have the skills to be thought of as an all-time great. It’s simple as that.

 

Yeah, he could

 

He had enough power if he landed in the right place at the right time. Would I favor him ? Probably not.