Just another way of looking at it.

[KananKrus]

Just helping out here... LOL!

What is the point?

The point is.... miron lang is providing proof that the assumptions that Pacquiao is cherry picking opponents by "established" Pac haters like Miles and company, here at Saddo, is not accurate, or yet, completely false.

The proof presented is that of a list widely accepted that reflects the high rankings of Pac's last few opponents at a weight within the same grouping to that of Pacquiao.

Add to that the timeline of 2008... then bingo! Without BIAS in one's system, independently, one can conclude or at least the fact will be acceptable, that the string of Pacquiao's opponents since 2008, considering availability and or physical probability, are not only worthy, but topnotch!

[erics44]

Just helping out here... LOL!

What is the point?

The point is.... miron lang is providing proof that the assumptions that Pacquiao is cherry picking opponents by "established" Pac haters like Miles and company, here at Saddo, is not accurate, or yet, completely false.

The proof presented is that of a list widely accepted that reflects the high rankings of Pac's last few opponents at a weight within the same grouping to that of Pacquiao.

Add to that the timeline of 2008... then bingo! Without BIAS in one's system, independently, one can conclude or at least the fact will be acceptable, that the string of Pacquiao's opponents since 2008, considering availability and or physical probability, are not only worthy, but topnotch!

does everyone still love pacman then?

[Rantcatrat]

Miron is making a decent point that was also brought about on FNF this past week by Joe Tessitore. Teddy Atlas was critiquing Pacquiao's opponents, but when Joe Tessitore asked Teddy Atlas who Pacquiao had ducked or who he should have been fighting and wasn't, Teddy didn't have an answer, and admitted that the Pacquiao's perceived lack of great competition wasn't Pacquiao's fault.

[marbleheadmaui]

Very nice post.

The one thing the folks who hammer Manny never answer very well is "Well who should he have fought?"

[Boxer4life]

TO be honest, that just remains to be seen, if anyone of the guys pacqiou has fought can comeback and do something great, then yes it adds to his credibility, but to allthose who don't understand, our friend here is saying that the guys packman beat aren't necessarily washed up

[marbleheadmaui]

TO be honest, that just remains to be seen, if anyone of the guys pacqiou has fought can comeback and do something great, then yes it adds to his credibility, but to allthose who don't understand, our friend here is saying that the guys packman beat aren't necessarily washed up

This post identifies perfectly why it really is impossible to form an accurate picture of a fighter's career until not only he has retired, but the men he fought have also retired.

I mean who'd have thought the Jones win over BHOP would be so critical to his resume when it happened in 1993 (?) ? Who knew BHOP would go on to be BHOP? Same with Sanchez's win over Azumah. That win has grown dramatically in importance. Lennox over Vitali looks like another doesn't it?

It works the other way too. At the time Floyd's win over Chico looked huge. Now? Not so much. Chico turned out to be a good fighter, not a great one.

[Boxer4life]

TO be honest, that just remains to be seen, if anyone of the guys pacqiou has fought can comeback and do something great, then yes it adds to his credibility, but to allthose who don't understand, our friend here is saying that the guys packman beat aren't necessarily washed up

This post identifies perfectly why it really is impossible to form an accurate picture of a fighter's career until not only he has retired, but the men he fought have also retired.

I mean who'd have thought the Jones win over BHOP would be so critical to his resume when it happened in 1993 (?) ? Who knew BHOP would go on to be BHOP? Same with Sanchez's win over Azumah. That win has grown dramatically in importance. Lennox over Vitali looks like another doesn't it?

It works the other way too. At the time Floyd's win over Chico looked huge. Now? Not so much. Chico turned out to be a good fighter, not a great one.

Good point with b hop, and i agree on chico, but i still think floyds wins over him and castillo carry some weight because he did fight them when they were a bug deal, unfortunately they failed to deliver after that fights, like most guys floyd fights

[mafiajoey]

TO be honest, that just remains to be seen, if anyone of the guys pacqiou has fought can comeback and do something great, then yes it adds to his credibility, but to allthose who don't understand, our friend here is saying that the guys packman beat aren't necessarily washed up

This post identifies perfectly why it really is impossible to form an accurate picture of a fighter's career until not only he has retired, but the men he fought have also retired.

I mean who'd have thought the Jones win over BHOP would be so critical to his resume when it happened in 1993 (?) ? Who knew BHOP would go on to be BHOP? Same with Sanchez's win over Azumah. That win has grown dramatically in importance. Lennox over Vitali looks like another doesn't it?

It works the other way too. At the time Floyd's win over Chico looked huge. Now? Not so much. Chico turned out to be a good fighter, not a great one.

Roy didn't hand B-Hop a life altering beat down my friend.



And in 29 days you have 618 or so posts. I'm curious....that's over 21 posts each day. For 29 days in a row. Are you part owner of this site? Or maybe you don't work? Or you are one of those trick Pac accounts to build more Pac lovers on the forum. But you disguise i with other general boxing posts....hmm....you've seem to be quite the Pac lover as of late. Seemed neautral in the beginning.

[Pavlik]

TO be honest, that just remains to be seen, if anyone of the guys pacqiou has fought can comeback and do something great, then yes it adds to his credibility, but to allthose who don't understand, our friend here is saying that the guys packman beat aren't necessarily washed up

Bro:

Miguel Cotto right now:
Boxing Ratings | RingTV

Boxing Ratings | RingTV

Heck Even a shot Erik Morales:
Boxing Ratings | RingTV

if my memory serves me right Barrera and Larios after getting beat by PAC still won a major title.

[Pavlik]

Miron is making a decent point that was also brought about on FNF this past week by Joe Tessitore. Teddy Atlas was critiquing Pacquiao's opponents, but when Joe Tessitore asked Teddy Atlas who Pacquiao had ducked or who he should have been fighting and wasn't, Teddy didn't have an answer, and admitted that the Pacquiao's perceived lack of great competition wasn't Pacquiao's fault.

Yup I saw that too at FNF, and presented Bradley as the best choice. Fighting Bradley would be the less risk fight because he is not that big of a man to begin with and does not carry a big punch or a great defense. If PAC does fight him in the future and probably stop him I still believe Atlas would still have something bad to say about Manny, maybe something about the steroid issue. Can't please them all.

[Rantcatrat]

Miron is making a decent point that was also brought about on FNF this past week by Joe Tessitore. Teddy Atlas was critiquing Pacquiao's opponents, but when Joe Tessitore asked Teddy Atlas who Pacquiao had ducked or who he should have been fighting and wasn't, Teddy didn't have an answer, and admitted that the Pacquiao's perceived lack of great competition wasn't Pacquiao's fault.

Yup I saw that too at FNF, and presented Bradley as the best choice. Fighting Bradley would be the less risk fight because he is not that big of a man to begin with and does not carry a big punch or a great defense. If PAC does fight him in the future and probably stop him I still believe Atlas would still have something bad to say about Manny, maybe something about the steroid issue. Can't please them all.

I disagree. I believe Bradley is the best choice for Manny right now, barring maybe JMM. Unlike JMM, Bradley is proven at 140 and 147. In addition, you can be sure Bradley will go out on his shield. Bradley is also the top dog at 140. JMM isn't even the top dog at 135. JMM also isn't proven above 135 and the fact that he chooses to fight Diaz at 135 rather than step up and fight someone ranked at 140 makes me wonder whether JMM himself even believes he can be effective above 135, and maybe, like Mosley, he is taking the Pacquiao fight because he wants the cash, not because he can win.

[Pavlik]

Miron is making a decent point that was also brought about on FNF this past week by Joe Tessitore. Teddy Atlas was critiquing Pacquiao's opponents, but when Joe Tessitore asked Teddy Atlas who Pacquiao had ducked or who he should have been fighting and wasn't, Teddy didn't have an answer, and admitted that the Pacquiao's perceived lack of great competition wasn't Pacquiao's fault.

Yup I saw that too at FNF, and presented Bradley as the best choice. Fighting Bradley would be the less risk fight because he is not that big of a man to begin with and does not carry a big punch or a great defense. If PAC does fight him in the future and probably stop him I still believe Atlas would still have something bad to say about Manny, maybe something about the steroid issue. Can't please them all.

I disagree. I believe Bradley is the best choice for Manny right now, barring maybe JMM. Unlike JMM, Bradley is proven at 140 and 147. In addition, you can be sure Bradley will go out on his shield. Bradley is also the top dog at 140. JMM isn't even the top dog at 135. JMM also isn't proven above 135 and the fact that he chooses to fight Diaz at 135 rather than step up and fight someone ranked at 140 makes me wonder whether JMM himself even believes he can be effective above 135, and maybe, like Mosley, he is taking the Pacquiao fight because he wants the cash, not because he can win.

im not degrading bradley in any way but to say he is better than Cotto

[marbleheadmaui]

Miron is making a decent point that was also brought about on FNF this past week by Joe Tessitore. Teddy Atlas was critiquing Pacquiao's opponents, but when Joe Tessitore asked Teddy Atlas who Pacquiao had ducked or who he should have been fighting and wasn't, Teddy didn't have an answer, and admitted that the Pacquiao's perceived lack of great competition wasn't Pacquiao's fault.

Yup I saw that too at FNF, and presented Bradley as the best choice. Fighting Bradley would be the less risk fight because he is not that big of a man to begin with and does not carry a big punch or a great defense. If PAC does fight him in the future and probably stop him I still believe Atlas would still have something bad to say about Manny, maybe something about the steroid issue. Can't please them all.

I disagree. I believe Bradley is the best choice for Manny right now, barring maybe JMM. Unlike JMM, Bradley is proven at 140 and 147. In addition, you can be sure Bradley will go out on his shield. Bradley is also the top dog at 140. JMM isn't even the top dog at 135. JMM also isn't proven above 135 and the fact that he chooses to fight Diaz at 135 rather than step up and fight someone ranked at 140 makes me wonder whether JMM himself even believes he can be effective above 135, and maybe, like Mosley, he is taking the Pacquiao fight because he wants the cash, not because he can win.

While I really disagree Bradley is in any way "proven" at 147, I guess he's a legit choice among a series of pretty lousy options for Manny at this point.

Manny's best legacy option is to find a way to get to 135 and fight JMM there. Seems unlikely. Next I guess would be a suicide mission to fight Sergio Martinez and separate himself, if he were to win, from every other man who ever fought. Lineal at 112, 126, 130, 140 and 160? Crazy. Third choice I guess Bradley at 140, then Bradley at 147.

How about Kermit Cintron?

[captainanddew]

Cintron makes sense. Why? Cintron says he can make 147 if the money is right (which it undoubtedly would be). If not, just make it . a 150 pound catchweight. More importantly, Cintron is promoted by Top Rank!! The Bobfather would get to keep it in house.

Dropping to 140 makes sense. Pac is weighing less in the ring than alot of the guys who make 140. Take on Bradley and anyone else there willing to fight him.

[Gandalf]

The opponents Pac fought have all been very good in their time, but by fighting them when he did, he invited himself in for criticism. I actually agree with Teddy Atlas. There is a complete lack of young, hungry undefeated fighters on Pac's resume. Even at the lower weights, you have wins over the likes of Barrera and Morales who had been in plenty of wars themselves. Those are still Pacs most important wins IMO.

People might scoff at the suggestion of Bradley, but it is point well made that unlike Marquez who is unproven beyond 135, Bradley is the top dog at 140, is undefeated and will come to outhustle Manny. It would be nice to see someone with output, desire and some handspeed of his own to see Manny have to deal with.

I maintain that Manny is smoke and mirrors. Why not rematch Marquez earlier at 135? Because they knew he was too dangerous and went looking for lumbering come forward types. It's only 3 years later that the fight is made and Marquez is fighting 10 pounds north of any weight he has looked good at. If Manny blows him out, then whoopy doo. More smoke and mirrors. Then what? A rematch with Cotto who has been lumbering about pretending he is a 154 pounder? Or will it be Berto.