Many people discredit/question Floyd’s stats/accomplishments. Yes, there’s always going to be casual/biased fans etc. Yes, it IS the reality. I’m English. I think that Terence has great skills, and I enjoy watching him fight. But he absolutely has a weak resume, and especially when you’re trying to rank him with the greats of the past. He has never beaten a prime ATG fighter. He does not have a stacked resume. Any knowledgeable fan knows this. Again, that isn’t his fault at all. And although I’ve never met him or know him personally, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that based upon all of the interviews etc that I’ve seen with him, that he’d love to have fought guys like Floyd, Manny and Oscar etc. I truly believe that. And I believe he legitimately wants to fight Canelo to test himself to the limit and to leave behind a legacy in the sport. I think he’s the real deal. I think that he’s very ambitious. But at the moment, he doesn’t have a great resume. That is the reality of the situation.
Yes, the history is deep, and most of the people in the discussion never seen any of the greats fight live before the 70s, so all they are doing is google searching and picking out names that other people said were great without having an accurate breakdown of how "weak" or "strong" the opponents on the previous fighters' resumes are. They are simply leaning on the fact that others promote these guys as great. In 30 years, Crawford's name is going to be in that deep history and his accomplishments are going to be beside that name. I highly doubt anyone is going to be arguing the strength of Horn, or injury of Brook, or will power of Porter, etc..... They are going to see ACCOMPLISHMENTS. And Crawford has those in abundance. When we talk about how great Joe Louis is, no one breaks down how good his opponents are. And since you go with your one example......what exactly has Mike done that suggest Crawford hasn't done anything to unseat someone like Mike.......(this is not me disagreeing or agreeing, just wanting to know you vantage point)...... Obviously Mike Tyson was a force......but if we are going to talk about accomplishments......Mike only fought in one division so he isn't a multi-division champ......He became undisputed in the 80s but his accomplishments from then on were more controversial. Arguably the most talented opponents on his resume he LOST to.... He also lost to an individual he has 10 to 1 odds against in Buster Douglas....... But you are suggest that Crawford who at the very least not only beat everyone he was suppose to, but dominated them, while winning titles in 3 different divisions, has no chance at unseating Mike Tyson.......lol..... Sounds like you are simply, going off of a name. Who are the elites that Mike Tyson has a W over?
A win over Canelo at SMW would be absolutely huge. But a top 10 P4P slot would have to based on a H2H basis. Ray Leonard doesn’t make many top 10 lists. Neither does Floyd. I think he’d need even more than a win over Canelo and those other guys in order to get there.
They're both guys who beat up on severely diminished or disadvantaged people. Look how ancient Liston was, everybody knew. Then there were the little guys moving up like Moore and Patterson. They look skilled, sort of, but that's about it. It's all kind of an illusion to me. Crawford's the same. Not impressive. It reminds me a lot of Pacquiao, whose best win might be Barrera who had a metal plate in his head and was tiny.
I must've hurt your feelings by pointing out your ignorance. I didn't really expect much to come from you in response. Having a boxing discussion and your response is "take a chill pill"......did I use too many words?....lol. Next time I'll try to add pictures so you are comfortable and don't feel threatened.....lol
He beat a 126 lb guy and Spence...thats it. Cant blame him though, all those years wasted being kept in the dark by Uncle Bob
Imagine typing essays on a forum because ppl dont worship the same fighters as you. You expect us to believe he's as good as sugar ray leonard with the opposition he's faced? If you're this upset now I hate to see how you handle disagreements in real life. At the end of day, Crawford still needs to do more for any of us to rank him as an ATG. Spence was drained and inactive but due to styles crawford would always win. However, a shawn porter who trained seriously and wasnt a part time commentator could have beaten him.
How do you know that those people are googling those old fighters? There’s some very knowledgeable people on this forum, and on this particular thread. Yes, people are going to see accomplishments. However, the relevant CONTEXT needs to be applied. Any genuine knowledgeable fan will always focus more upon who a guy beat, and at what point, more than an official title. And especially in an era with 4 belts and 17 weight classes. Are you telling me that Terence rates higher than every fighter in and around his weight classes, throughout the sport’s history, who haven’t achieved those official titles? Those stats/titles seem very impressive, until you see who he’s beaten to achieve them. Regarding Mike McCallum, Terence wasn’t on another level in terms of ability, and he has nowhere near the resume or group of wins that Mike had. Regarding Mike Tyson, I never mentioned him. Personally, I’d rank him as a top 20 HW of all time, but he’d be nowhere near any top P4P list. He’d only be ranked highly specifically focusing on just a HW list.
Longevity is a great thing and I think that definitely should be a factor, but it's not like Crawford hasn't been around for a while. I agree, I hate that the moment one of these new fighters connect to social media, they chant how great they are and people crown them as "the face..." or "the future...." or simply just "great" without them accomplishing anything. For example....the "new age 4 kings"......Haney, Garcia, Teofimo, & Tank......These guys all sat in a division together for years and never attempt to compete against each other, until Tank and Ryan recently but with weight clauses and such. These new fighters rather promote themselves as being "avoided" thus they are great rather than getting in the ring and showcasing why they should be considered great. Everyone wants top dollar, which there's nothing wrong with that as I'll never tell a fighter who's putting their life on the line that he wants too much money for the risk. But damn.... To answer your scenario......I think Crawford beats Hearns, Duran, & Benitez....but am up in the air about Hagler. I think Crawford vs Sugar would be intriguing given the style. As far as fighters today.... I feel Tim Tszyu gives Crawford the closest to one of those match ups....I would have said Charlo, but we see his heart is far from elite and if that's the case, Crawford would break him down early.
Terrence has undoubted skills, and he passes the eye test. Yes, he could have beaten those guys. But some more reality for you: He has simply never fought guys of that calibre before.
What ATG has Mike Tyson fought and beat...... What ATG has Andre Ward fought and beat...... What ATG has GGG fought and beat........ ATG is, again, of the opinions of the individual......I could easily say my favorite fighter in history beat a stacked deck without breaking down his opposition but do it for another fighter...... We saw Spence fans do this with Crawford fans for 5 years. It was both entertaining and ignorant at the same time even after the bout. Fact is, Crawford is cut from the same cloth of those greats we mention in history of willing to face opposition to get the respect he deserves. We seen his chants to his former promoter and we saw him leave when they couldn't deliver. We also see him still looking to go after the individuals that some considered to big and/or strong for him. It's exactly what we would have saw with guys like Marvelous Marvin Hagler or Tommy Hearns or Pernell Whitaker, etc..... As you pointed out, it's not Crawford's fault.........I'll like to highlight......it's not his fault that others don't carry the same mentality that he does. That was difference with Hearns existing along side Duran, Ray, Marv...... They had the same drive........Crawford came to the welterweight division and immediately said he wanted all the champions......yet, each pointed him in another direction on their way to not facing him at all or being forced to face him because there was no where else to go......And when he got his hands on them.....he dropped them......... That's why he deserves to be in the ATG discussion. When it comes to controlling the controllables..... Crawford has it handled.
I got to start getting ready for the Super Bowl party but I'm definitely going to come back to this discussion. I appreciate the exchange.
You know who else passed the eye test......Errol Spence Jr.... all the way up til July 29, 2023. Shawn Porter had passed the eye test as well. When I would say he lost to his best opposition, the response was always...."he comes to fight"...... all these guys passing the eye test......until Crawford dominates them in front of those same eyes. Who are we to say he's never face someone as good as Duran or Hearns etc.....those guys lost to individuals who are not ATGs as well during their careers. But again, Crawford is the only one that is judged based on the fact that he isn't fighting Floyd, then Sweet P, then Duran, then Hearns, then Oscar, then Manny, Cotto, then.......... Crawford can't win with some people........(ironically, that's the only time he's losing.....lol)
But I’m not advocating the inclusion of Ward and Tyson to be ranked as high in history as what you want Crawford to be ranked. Yes, it’s actually quite rare for a guy to beat a prime ATG. But when you’re talking about a high all time, P4P ranking, you’ve got to have either a few of them, or a very deep resume of very credible fighters who were very good-great, and at their best. Yes, again, I believe that Terence is legit. I believe that if Terence could choose his next 3 opponents and he had access to a time machine, that he’d pick guys like Floyd, Manny and Oscar etc. I believe that. However, you have to accept that he doesn’t have a great resume. And I’m sorry, but I don’t even see that as being merely my opinion. He just doesn’t have a great resume. He hasn’t beaten any great fighters. A guy like Leonard fought Benitez, Duran x 3, Hearns x 2 and Marvin after a 3 lay off. Whereas Terence has beaten Spence, Gamboa, Brook, Khan and Porter etc. And Spence, Brook and Khan were all past their best. So they’re just miles a part. You’re trying to rank Terence high on his official accolades, without focusing on who he beat to gain those accolades. The official stats will say: He’s been the undisputed champion in different weights. However, the fact is: Again, he’s achieved those accolades from beating the guys who I’ve just mentioned. Today’s era is weak compared to some previous eras. In today’s era, Adrian Broner can claim to be a multi divisional champion. A few questions which can’t ever be answered, but are fun to ponder: 1. Would Terence have the same accolades had he have fought in a stronger era? 2. For example, could he gone undefeated had he have fought Oscar’s opponents, or had he been in Oscar’s era?
