One aspect that Floyd ruined in boxing was making "undefeated records" meaningful

*Since losing to Todorov.

 

Has nothing to do with Floyd actually, like someone else mentioned, fans are too quick to discredit someone for a loss or even a poor performance. Fans enable this behavior.

 

All I can say is since MONEY retired these fighters have had to get their act together.
All of 147 minus Bradley and Porter were waiting around for Floyd's fight pick like they were picking a new Pope.
Khan sat out for a year.
Thurman started BSing around.
Garcia was fighting fringe
Lightweights.
154 completely stalled out as if they had a chance in hell.
It was weird from 2013-2015 and even 2016 had Pacquiao doing weird ****. Now that Floyd has become an "entertainer", these guys have to fight like the last rule of Fight Club.

 

After De La Hoya, a decade of cherry picking. He did more than most, but for the prices he charged and the money he earned people expected more from him. I think they wouldn't have held his cherry picking against him if he'd only made as much as other fighters historically have, but the fact that he made 32 million dollars to fight Berto, Guerrero, Maidana, and Ortiz made a lot of people feel cheated, like he didn't earn that money. For that kind of money, most people would argue, you ought to fight the toughest competitor around. After facing De La Hoya, he never did that.

Take Holman Williams for example, a welterweight boxing contender in the forties. He fought Archie Moore, Jake LaMotta, Marcel Cerdan, Charley Burley, Cocoa Kid, Eddie Booker, and Bob Satterfield. Some of these guys he fought like five times. That level of competition is just so far above what Floyd Mayweather Jr gave us, and the reward Williams earned by it seems so paltry in comparison, it just seems unfair. It's a mockery of the meritocratic system. It was like Floyd sold everyone old used handbags at Gucci prices.

If you just compare Floyd to other people who made that kind of money, say De La Hoya, Holyfield, or Leonard, they just all gave better value for money. De La Hoya fought Chavez, Whitaker, Trinidad, Hopkins, Mosley x2, Mayweather, and Pacquiao. Leonard fought Hagler, Hearns x2, Duran x3, Benitez, Norris. Holyfield fought Tyson x2, Lewis x2, Bowe x3, Moorer, Mercer, Holmes, Foreman, Dokes, Thomas, and Qawi.

Usually, the big money goes to the most exciting fighters the Tysons, the Dempseys, the Leonards, Pacquiaos, Alis, and Holyfields. But Mayweather was boring. His fights stunk, and he made more money than all of them. It violates common sense and a lot of the rules that people tend to think regulate boxing.

 

Seems to be the consensus view - Floyd was truly great but he could have been so much greater.

But…. He's not dead , maybe he wakes up one day and says F it and goes after Crawford, Spence then Golovkin!

But we probably just get conor mcgregor or ronda rousey or if we're lucky Cherry Garcia for no. 50

 

You know, I don't think people resent Miguel Cotto for being a diva and making tons of money because he so consistently fought top guys to earn top dollar. Prime Pacquiao, Mayweather, Mosley, Martinez, prime Canelo, Margarito x2, Mayorga, Judah. When you look at that list of names, he faced better competition than Mayweather and it's no wonder that he has some losses.

Does anyone think that Mosley fought better competition than Mayweather during his career? Prime De la Hoya x2, prime Pacquiao, prime Mayweather, green Canelo, Forrest x2, Wright x2, Cotto, Margarito, Mayorga, Vargas x2.

You see all these other guys attempting more, risking more, and most people assume that if Floyd had attempted as much he would have losses, just like them, which means his perfect record is a smoke screen.

 

The sanctioning bodies with all these ridiculous titles along with protecting that 0 is dooming boxing. Gent fighters lose. Then they come back and are great again. I rather a guy fight the best and lose and keep fighting the best than build some quality wins, cherry pick, retire, return, avoid great fighters primes, retire, cherry pick, etc.


I'll take a guy with an L or 2 to great fighters if he can erase those with even greater wins.

Because Lennox got KO'd, he's no longer great? Krusher lost a highly debatable decision, no longer feared? Pac's early and late L's diminish his incredible climb in weight? Tyson's infamous night in Tokyo. Duran. Hagler. Ali.

We can all point to moments in great fighters careers when they just don't have it, but they are still great.

 

Fighters wanting to stay undefeated is nothing new. Mayweather was able to capitalize from his undefeated status better than anyone prior to him. An undefeated record does have a positive effect on a fighters career, this cannot be argued. The fact that FM was so popular and made so much money created a paradigm for future fighters to follow. One reason why fighters are doing this is because of the fans being so contradictory, they want fighters to step up and if the fighter loses, he is labeled a hype job or a bum. Knowing this, a smart fighter will bide his time a wait for a big money payday to cash out. Can anyone really blame him? The other reason a fighter is allowed to do this is due to the fragmentation of the sport. Too many belts give too many fighters a place to hide and hold belts hostage. The best do not need to fight the best to call themselves a champ. As difficult as it is to get a belt, it's extremely easy compared to the good old days. What FM did would never be repeated if there was 1 belt and 1 champ per division. Multi-champ divisions are the reason for fighters avoiding each other , not Mayweather.

 

That's another good point.