Wills, Langford and Jeannette could have been Dempsey's Walcott, Charles and Moore

Possibly..

He in order for it to be comparable Jeanette McVea and Langford would have had to be rated either number 1 in the world or be heavyweight champion.

Was that the case with those 3 in 1919?

We're Jeannette Langford McVea still mopping the floor with the best young heavyweights in the world in 1919 the way Louis Walcott Moore and Charles were?


If the answer is Yes then the comparison is valid

 

Yep. And why not fight Sam Langford in 1916? Why turn him down?

And why turn down Harry wills the number 1 contender For 6 years

 

Dempsey is frustrating I watch him and he looks great to me. The talent is there and his style is so fan friendly but historically, because of the times he ended out missing on some opponents he really should of fought.

 

The difference is Marciano didn't draw the color line. Dempsey lived in an era in which the color line was virtually assured.

 

Basically sums it up.

 

Langford was 33 in 1916, that year he beat among others:
McVey x2
Wills by ko
Clark x2 by ko
Jeannette by ko
Battling Jim Johnson by ko.

Dempsey was 21 years old and fought a
large part of that year as a light heavy.
His manager at that time was John" The Barber" Reisler. Who tried to over match Dempsey on several occasions. eg Dempsey spent the night before the John Lester Johnson fight sleeping on a park bench,that's how caring his manager was.

If you see no reason why Dempsey should have fought Langford in1916 then I think it is lucky for today's boxers that you went into the Police Department,rather than boxing management.

Wills was not the number one contender for 6 years.

 

Good objective post ^

Dempsey should of fought Wills and Greb. Anyone else is reaching a bit to truly discredit the man.
The fact that a shot Dempsey floored the iron willed, prime Tunney and clawed back into the Sharkey fight with a rough and prime gob is proof enough for me that Dempsey was a bad man.
You can knock him for his failures as a dutiful champion that avoided his top two challengers but to claim the man could not fight would border on holding a bias against him for one reason or another.

 

Langford got beaten badly by Fred Fulton in 1917 if I remember rightly, and dropped a 4-round decision to Fulton at end of 1918. He lost a 4-round decision to Willie Meehan in 1919, something Dempsey often gets ridiculed for doing the previous year, although of course Dempsey had destroyed Fulton.
Langford had probably slipped a bit in the ratings, beneath where Charles or Moore would be rated in Marciano's reign.

I'd rate Jeannette below Langford in 1919. And he went nowhere after that.

Harry Wills is comparable to Charles or Moore, or combination of both. Rated #1, with longevity too.

Jersey Joe Walcott was a 38-year-old world champion when Marciano faced him, so the obvious comparison on Dempsey's resume is Jess Willard.

 

I reject any comparison between the top fighters that Marciano fought, and the versions of Langford McVea and Jeanette, that would have been available to Dempsey.

The former group legiimately occupied positions at the top of the division, while the latter did not.

 

I think they would have had a lot more in common with the Holmes, Foreman and Tyson that Holyfield fought.

 

I would agree.