Holy christ, I know that's what you said, I echoed that several times. I don't care if you didn't MEAN to compare the sports themselves, you said if boxings HOF was LIKE MLBs(unless Im wrong

). I know you meant by the criteria they look for, but my point was, that there are other things to look for in boxing, intangibles that you don't find in other sports, and since the sports are different, you have to think there can be different areas which the HOF should look at. Written achievements and statistics should weigh alot more heavily in sports like baseball, where there is no physical contact and the game is all about numbers. Boxing isn't like that, people can be remembered for great fights and great performances, win or lose and regardless of their ability. I wasn't exactly sure if you acknowledged that or not, so you did clear up that bit for me. I took a stance against your opinion because I simply don't agree.. Your basically saying that you know the boxing HOF weighs in a fighters great performances, heart, warrior spirit, popularity, impact on the sport, but you just don't think they should and instead should go by simply the p4p best fighters on each era. I think theres more to it then that. Guess thats all there is to it. Have a CC, didn't have a personal problem with your opinion at all, I just don't agree with it.
Bookmarks