No fighters are immune to criticism nowadays, athletes as a whole are more nitpicked on the internet. Here's what people in the past would've likely said about pre-internet era fighters. Larry Holmes: unify damn it! Give a guy a rematch after he gives you a tough fight! Salvador Sanchez: stop ducking Eusebio Pedroza! Eusebio Pedroza: an uppercut to the testicles is not a scoring punch! Sugar Ray Robinson: quit asking for too much money, and pulling out of all these fights at the last minute! Aaron Pryor: you should've taken the $500,000 offer from Ray Leonard. Sugar Ray Leonard: you should've offered more than $500,000 to Pryor. You low-balled him. Marvin Hagler: stop ignoring the public challenges of the light-heavyweights and fight one of them. Jack Johnson: (besides the racist comments). Fight a black contender! Wilfred Benitez: train! Evander Holyfield got quite a bit a criticism in the boxing press during his first reign, when he fought Foreman, Cooper (although it was Tyson who pulled out of the fight), and then Holmes. He would've been crucified on the message boards. Roberto Duran would've gotten flack for not rematching Ken Buchanan. I'm sure there would've been more publicity about proposed Duran fights that Carlos Eleta turned down, and the criticism would go to both Eleta and Duran.
Imagine the Dempsey wars? A popular, white champion ducking his two most persistent challangers, the really dangerous one black? ****ing place would melt.
That's a pretty good reason to ***** about a fighter Except for the fact that the champ not defending against the best was almost expected back then - EVERY other heavyweight champ unashamedly did the same. So I'm not sure, if the internet was around back then, we'd have people bitching about it.
It's pretty sad how many terrific fighters in the old days never got title shots. That's one thing that I actually do like about numerous titles out there. Since there's more titles to choose from, the more avoided fighters have a much better chance at winning a world title. And having a title can help their marketability to some extent. Guys like Wills, Godfrey, Langford, Burley, Booker, etc...most or all of them would probably be world title-holders today. They've got 4 to choose from and work their way to the #1 spot.
JCC Jr. - you are slow and will always have a hard time with slick black fighters. you are overrated Whitaker - you are boring as ****, not a big draw Duran - you are a quitter
Sugar Ray Leonard would've gotten destroyed. -Lost to a lightweight, offered a bunch of money to him for a rematch after he saw him get really fat and out of shape, then refused to give him a rubbermatch for years -Publically stated that he wouldn't fight Hearns until Hearns was on the level of someone like Roberto Duran. Hearns was seemingly a bit weight drained when Leonard finally did fight him. Leonard refused a rematch until Hearns was past it, and got a gift draw. -Ignored public demand for a fight with Hagler. Invited Hagler to an event so that he could make a big announcement. Played the **** out of Hagler and the fans by announcing his retirement instead announcing his intention to fight Hagler -Admitted to only wanting to fight Hagler after he felt he was past it. Refused to give Hagler a rematch after getting a controversial decision in a fight where he ran the whole time and tried to steal rounds by flurrying with 10 seconds remaining in each round. -Low balled Pryor -Defended his title against numerous bums so that he could steal some HBO money -Fraudulant claim as a 5 division champ considering he fought a handpicked LHW at 168 lbs. for the newly created WBC SMW and the WBC LHW title at the same time(a blatant violation of the rules). -Retired 5 times, including multiple retirements by the age of 32.
Hearns would have ended up on some genius' list of "glass jawed jokes". Baer would be hammered for his work ethic (reasonable) and Carnera for building himself on soft touches and rumored fixes.