Mickey Walker v Gerald McClellan

Thoughts about this match-up at 160? Go ahead and vote, too.

Anyone who thinks this is a slam dunk either way isn't very knowledgable or hasn't thought about it very deeply, IMO.

 

One of my reasons for this thread is that, and hold your pearls closely, Gerald McClellan is overrated. He has a very short, very shallow resume comprised largely of knocking over a lot of tin cans, facing two elite fighters of which one was a bit past it and bit over his best weight, and another who ended his career. There isn't much more meat on the bones of his resume. Three fights at the elite level against two fighters. Seriously, Sanderline Williams might be the 3rd best guy on his resume since Mugabi was completely shot. How you can compare this favorably to Walker who had innumerable quality fighters on his resume, who proved himself over a decade and a half, over some of the best in a broad range of divisions and over almost 100 victims is beyond me. Walker more likely clowns McClellan than Gerald even comes close to hurting him.

 

Two nobodies named Dennis Milton (didn't Jackson flatten him in 1?) and Ralph Ward did just that.

 

Based on what? You don't think Walker ever faced guys who had length and height on him? The burden of proof is on McClellan and there really isn't a lot of evidence beyond the ballyhoo of the era, which has now faded and granted us objectivity. Meanwhile, Walker's career presents a depth of evidence that he can fight fancy or rough, small or big, in short order or upon deep waters... and most importantly, against high quality opponents.

 

One fighter offers an extensive resume at the peak of the sport in multiple divisions, the other offers 3 fights against quality opponents, one of which he lost.