Terence Crawford vs Pernell Whitaker

I think it's similar level

 

Hagler didn't have Crawfords footwork or timing
There's nothing in the ring Crawford can't do that Whitaker can

The only thing Crawford would be lacking is possibly cutting off the ring which I doubt Whitaker was exceptional at

Crawford is just a way more versatile fighter than Whitaker. Particularly offensively as a combination puncher and finisher

Even if you think Whitaker was a better fighter than Crawford there's no way he's more versatile

 

This is a solid joke

 

Complete revisionist history

 

You are not as high on Crawford as I am

You picked Ennis to beat him (which is ok)

Life goes on

 

Very weird logic but ok

 

I remember seeing you say Ennis beats both Crawford and Spence but maybe it was someone else

 

Spence wasn't 100 but Spence was still world class and a beat down like that from Crawford can't be overlooked

Sometimes I wish Crawford wouldn't have beaten Spence so badly and won more competitively so he'd get more credit but in boxing sometimes the better you do the less credit you get