Why are people now quite negative towards Cotto???

[ono]

Yeah obviously i meant Bika and Mafredo....


Lacy, Kessler and yes 'old man' Hopkins.

Say what you like bout Hopkins but there was still plenty of people on here backing Bernard.

Anyway don't want this thread to turn into a Calzaghe/Cotto slanging contest because i'm no big fan of either. My point is TysonBruno seemed a little bit confused as to why people were being negative towards the #2 147lber in the world who lost a 50/50 fight, yet he bashes (practically on a daily basis) the #1 168/175lber who has had 3 50/50 (or there abouts) fights in the last 2 and half years.

Well here's the deal Miguel Cotto is 27 and he isn't playing it safe with his career this fight with Margarito COULD end his career as we know of it (I doubt it will because he's a good boxer and has good power and heart). Joe Calzaghe took a risk fighting Chris Eubank (at least his fans say it was a risk) when Joe had 22 pro fights under his belt and the next big risk he took was 9 years later.

Miguel Cotto fought a host of unbeaten fighters which people were pretty high on: Mausa, Pinto, Torres, and Quintana. Quintana for his first fight at 147 was a HUGE risk as Joel Julio got beat by him a fighter people may have compared to Cotto. Then for Cotto to fight Mosley, Judah, and Margarito too all before he's really reached his best....that's impressive.

In this day and age it would be EASY for Cotto to be like Floyd Mayweather Jr. and fought guys he knows he can beat but Miguel is better than that he wants to be challenged and he wants to fight big fights and he's done that time after time.

Joe Calzaghe was just stubborn and it was stupid on his part because he could have fought Hopkins and Roy Jones earlier if he came to America as those guys were the top draws but noooooo he wanted to stay at 168. If you want to compare Lacy and Kessler to prime RJJ and Hopkins then fine but I will have to disagree with you.

I wasn't getting at Cotto's record. Never mind...point missed.