H.O.F. Criteria

I was reading an article on whether or not Stevie Collins should be in the hall. At first I thought, yeah of coure, but then I started thinking about it and if they let him in why shouldnt they let all World Champions in the hall. I was thinking it would make sence to come up with some actual guidelines to figure out who belongs in the Hall. But how do you measure boxing greatness. There are many B-level warriors that have done more for the sport than say a Champion like Lennox Lewis (no disrespect to Lewis as he definately belongs in the Hall). How do you make the HOF better or is there nothing wrong with their decisions now?

I don't know the criteria, but I think it should be a fighter who had a significant presence in the elites. That doesn't necessarily mean a champion but maybe a guy who had several great fights who was at least 50/50 with people in the top ten.

And just because a guy won a belt doesn't mean he should be in. Like Jose Antonio Rivera. A decent fighter but he was completely out of his depth in his first defense of the WBA title.

The hall of fame should be for fighters who will be remembered by following generations, whether they are in HOF or not.

It should not be a vehicle for trying to ensure average 'champions' are remembered.