The distorted legacy of Manny Pacquiao

oh wow the WBC still has Floyd as Emetrius champion?

 

Ok, name some possible belt holders at heavyweight you would favor thomas hearns over that he could of fought.

 

:rofl I didn't see that till you pointed it out.

 

I know *******s see every criticism as hate but this does seem pretty balanced. Manny has clearly gone after the easiest way to win a belt on multiple occassions as he moved up in weight. Cherry-picking and catch-weights have been a bit of a theme but he's still a great fighter. His overall record is great and he's got ATG offensive skills. Regardless of his recent wins I think he still deserves to be in the conversation with the best of the best.

 

Sadly though, with top fighters refusing to face one another, this is as good as it'll get and Pacquiao's list of wins against credible opponents is still an impressive feat. I would not rank him above Armstrong nor do I care for the "eighth" world title label but not every good (or even great fighter) could replicate.

Marquez, Hatton, Cotto, and Clottey had been ranked top 5. And he dominated the rest like no other top fighter could, and in Marquez's cased hurt him like he hadn't been hurt before.

De La Hoya and D Diaz were top 10, and again Pacquiao beat both of them in a way they had never been beaten before.

And coming up Margarito is not ranked but was still a top 5 ranked fighter after the Mosley loss (and I suspect he is still top 10 worthy today).

I'm not going to tear down Pacquiao, Top Rank, Roach and co for how they've marketed his legacy. This a problem that stems alot deeper than Pacquiao's eighth title and really is just the tip of the iceberg with the problems with boxing.

And no fighter is bigger than the sport, so it would be unfair on me to expect Pacquiao to save boxing, when he is ultimately expendable and if he didn't play by the "rules" he would ultimately be chewed and spat out, replaced with somebody who will be more accomadating (Hey Hopkins did refer to promoters and boxers as pimps and ho's)

I think you assume us boxing fans can't see through the smoke and mirrors and make an intelligent assessment.

And who cares if casual boxing fans or Pac nuthuggers think he is the greatest. Thats passion. It stirs interest. And anyways, for alot of people Tyson only had a big punch and all Ali had was speed, so who cares if aren't that educated on the fighter. At least they know his name.

If you don't like the way Pacquiao's legacy is being marketed then all I can say is "don't hate the player, hate the game..."

 

e

Disregard the 7 weight division and just consider the fact that Pac is the only 4-division lineal champion (flyweight, featherweight, junior lightweight, and junior welterweight). IMO, this is way more impressive given the proliferation of ABC titles in modern boxing. There is no manipulation of the system here, my friend.

 

exactly but of course its already seeded into the OP's mind that Pac is the WORST offender of them all

 

Still the best legacy of the last 30 years

 

I never understood all the emphasis on World Title Belts and Unification bouts. I just look at who they fought, and Manny Pacquiao has beaten the who's who of the last 10 years. Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Manuel Marquez, Erik Morales, Miguel Cotto, Ricky Hatton, and Oscar De La Hoya all fell victim to the Filipino. I don't hold the Oscar fight in that high regard considering Oscar's condition, but the rest of the wins are impressive. I think Manny stands alone.

 

Then WHY WON'T HE GET INTO THE RING WITH FLOYD WITH OSDT YOU STUPID *******?!!! FLOYD is the who's who of boxing for the past fifteen years! :deal That's why he dominated JMM-Who Pac only beat on paper! GTFO Manny's dick!

 

:deal Exactly.

 

:rofl You do ***** better than *****'s.

 

All these charges of cherry-picking have come after the fact. But the truth is, in most of Pac's impressive wins post-135 lbs, he has been the underdog. One only need to read the pre-fight threads here at ESB before his bouts with DLH, Hatton and Cotto to appreciate just how few people gave him a decent chance of winning, much less dominating, these opponents.

And just to correct the widely held misconception, he has had only one catchweight fight wherein he gained a supposed advantage - against Cotto. In this catchweight fight against Margarito, it is Margarito who stands to gain the advantage being the naturally bigger man.

 

Actually I reckon Hearns could have made a serious crack for a Heavyweight belt, however it would have to be for a vacant one at the moment (as I do not see him beating Klitchsko bros or Haye) or we look at past champs. In terms of weight he won a bogus belt at cruiserweight late in his career, so i reckon he could could have beaten Ruiz back when he had a belt (ala Roy Jones Jr), or currently Holyfield for his ABU (???) belt and possbily Sam Peter's belt when he was WBC champ. I think a late 90s Hearns could beat current Toney for his IBA belt...