While everyone is waiting in anticipation to see who pacquiao will fight next and how he will look after 3 terrible performances in a row. One potential fight being offered is a second match with cotto now everyone seems to be against this due in part to pacquiao beating up and stopping cotto in the first bout. Recently it hit me how can the same people who are against this fight use match-ups such as barrea 2 and moralas 3 as big legacy defining victories when they ended up being beaten down in similar fashion. I understand moralas 2 on the strength that Manny lost the first fight but barerra got destroyed in brutal fashion yet all you here is praise that he was able to win rematches vs opponents that he had already thoroughly outclassed. Now this isn't a thread to bash Manny I simply was wondering what do people find so different about theses situations that one is looked at in another light than the other.
