I wish I lived in a world of either-or's that made argumentation so simple. "One bad/one good"... Hey, that was easy. Maybe I will adopt your rigorous regimen of thought in upcoming, illuminating threads.
I think you're right. And that's unfortunate. Perhaps this is an INTERNET phenomenon. The moment you adhere to the herd like mentality, or fear to make an astute observation that might upset the herd is the moment you're selling out to make INTERNET friends that you'll likely never have a real live conversation with.
Frazier was very consistant in fighting ranked HW's. What on earth are you talking about? In 1973 Frazier was one of the biggest names in boxing. Lyle had not yet fought a winning effort over a distance longer than ten rounds and had lost his biggest fight. Any idea that Frazier was "ducking" him is preposterous. There is absolutley NO reason for Frazier to match Lyle. None. I don't understand when you think they should have fought? Why do you say Frazier only fought Foreman because he "had to"?
Yes, Seamus has said this repeatedly and often. I've yet to see him point out an example, however. What he means, I think, is that people disagree directly with an opinion that goes against the mainstream. This is sort of like saying there is weather outside.