With Both Now "Retired," Who Had The Better Legacy, Oscar or Floyd

[BoomBoom]

I know Floyd was a smaller man than Oscar throughout most of his career but I think your missing my point. He obviously wouldnt have fought Tito in 1999 or whenever Oscar fought him at Welter, but since most people agree that Floyd wasnt past his prime when he did fight at Welter, match them prime for prime. Or a prime Floyd at 135 against the guys Oscar fought at lightweight. Its all hypothetical, but any way you look at it Floyd would not be undefeated imo. If Oscar fought Floyds competition, in form, hypothetically, I wouldnt be surprised if he was undefeated either.

[BoomBoom]

And if Oscar had dropped a decision to Sturm or Quartey, it wouldnt be a bad loss given that Sturm was a undefeated and talented middleweight, and Quartey was an undefeated prime fighter. And I believe that Quartey at that time was a phenomenal fighter. Had Oscar beat Floyd, I would give him the benefit of the doubt in saying that Oscar was probably too big for him and not held that loss against him either.

[JazMerkin]

I know Floyd was a smaller man than Oscar throughout most of his career but I think your missing my point. He obviously wouldnt have fought Tito in 1999 or whenever Oscar fought him at Welter, but since most people agree that Floyd wasnt past his prime when he did fight at Welter, match them prime for prime. Or a prime Floyd at 135 against the guys Oscar fought at lightweight. Its all hypothetical, but any way you look at it Floyd would not be undefeated imo. If Oscar fought Floyds competition, in form, hypothetically, I wouldnt be surprised if he was undefeated either.

I think it's a bit much to say 'any way you look at it Floyd would not be undefeated'. I personally think Floyd could have outpointed Trinidad, by outboxing him similar to Hopkins did. Am I convinced that if Oscar faced the same height & reach disadvantages that Floyd did against Corrales, that he would have beaten him, no I'm not. But, its all hypothetical. If someone feels that Oscar has the better legacy fair enough, but when you start doing hypothetical fights it becomes hard to compare.

Also tbh, I think if you only look at fights below 147, apart from JCC who was old, I think Floyd has a significantly better legacy. Most of the great names on Oscar's resume come at 147 & above. Don't get me wrong, Oscar has a great legacy & he gets a really hard time from posters on here, but the fact is you can't pick and choose what to take into account in one form and not in the other (ie the Castillo/Quartey decisions).

[BoomBoom]

I agree with that, Its really impossible to say how either guy would have faired against someone they never fought conclusively. I just dont see more than a few great wins on Floyd resume. I dont rate Castillo or Corrales that high even thogh I liked them as fighters and were among my favorites. Though Coralles was an undefeated powerhouse at the time so that wa definately was a very good win. Id say Hatton and Oscar are probably his biggest wins. I have no problem that you think Floyd has a better legacy, thats your opinion and others feel the same way. Im just curious what your reasoning is. He is a multi division champion and he did beat every man in front of him, thats in the books. But did he fight the best in those divisions? I will say this, he was one of the greatest Super Featherweights ive ever seen, one of the best. A very good lightweight, a good light welterweight, and a good welterweight.

[JazMerkin]

I agree with that, Its really impossible to say how either guy would have faired against someone they never fought conclusively. I just dont see more than a few great wins on Floyd resume. I dont rate Castillo or Corrales that high even thogh I liked them as fighters and were among my favorites. Though Coralles was an undefeated powerhouse at the time so that wa definately was a very good win. Id say Hatton and Oscar are probably his biggest wins. I have no problem that you think Floyd has a better legacy, thats your opinion and others feel the same way. Im just curious what your reasoning is. He is a multi division champion and he did beat every man in front of him, thats in the books. But did he fight the best in those divisions? I will say this, he was one of the greatest Super Featherweights ive ever seen, one of the best. A very good lightweight, a good light welterweight, and a good welterweight.

I agree, for me his the best Super Feather there has been, but I can fully understand why people criticize him at higher weights, although to be honest, I think at lightweight and light-welter he can't be blamed for that. At lightweight he chased Mosley who wanted $10m, and the other guys who were at the top in the division, Castillo & Corrales he had already beaten, whilst at light-welter a fight was being set between him and Tszyu, only for Hatton to upset all that. I think at welter he fought all the guys who were at the top when he first got there, but then retired too quickly for some. Personally I would never criticize any fighter retiring, it's their prerogative. I think that he is only one fight away from having one of the greatest legacies, and whether that name is Marquez, Mosley or Cotto it doesn't matter to me.

With Oscar, the problem for me is he that before he got to welterweight, most of the guys he was fighting were blown up from lower weights, Ruelas excepted. Once he got to 147, I've got no criticisms, and he was possibly a great 140lber, but to me he couldn't physically stick around at the weights to prove it. His welterweight opposition and above is great though. I would have trouble pinpointing him as a legend at one particular weight though.

[richard (mossley)]

It has to be oscar, for christs sake, he beat Forbes. We never saw PBF do that.