King Geedorah wrote:Actually, the boxing world wanted Floyd vs pretty much anyone and everyone in 2007, including Paul Williams, due to his win over Margo, whom everyone, including Cotto and Floyd, was 'ducking', and Paul's freakish size at the weight. Though if you applied your logic then what the boxing world really wanted, and should have got, was Cotto versus Williams, instead of Cotto versus Shane. Cotto-Williams would have sorted out a lot of 147lb issues but never took place. Cotto-Floyd was not at the forefront of everyone's minds and claiming that Floyd retired and deprived us of the fight is not true. It was a non-starter.
Floyd had intimated retirement prior to the fight with Oscar, he took on Hatton, then the linear 140lb champ, and then belatedly 'retired', probably to rest his hands up for further fights.
Floyd ducking Cotto, nah, Cotto should have fought Williams and should have taken on Margo sooner, opting instead for a fight with Zab, mentally deficient and without a win in three, and some fairly middling fights until the Shane one, by which point Floyd was locked into the Hatton fight and had one foot in his vacation. Subsequent fights have exposed the idea that Cotto could have somehow pushed or beaten Floyd.
Before you ask, Hatton deserved the shot at Floyd more than Cotto did, he defeated a reigning linear champion at 140lb, though it has become unfashionable to mention this, and Cotto, for all his decent wins, has never risen above the rank of title-holder. Floyd actually beat the man who beat the man down at 147lb, a feat that has consistently eluded Miguel, who beat the man, Zab, after he'd lost to the new man, Baldomir and then Floyd. Cotto is decent to watch but on a different planet to Mayweather when it comes down to it.
See all those 'shoulds', that is boxing, that is.
As for everyone in boxing, I'm 'in' boxing as I'm a fan -- I actually wanted Mayweather-Forrest back in 2007/08.
Dearie me, I can't decide whether you're devil's advocating just to be argumentative or whether you genuinely believe that Mayweather's beyond reproach.
There's simply no denying that the Cotto bout was the natural fight to be made post Hatton, try reading some articles from around that time if your memory doesn't serve, the net's littered with them. It's the fight the fans wanted to see and in turn it's the fight HBO were pushing for, it's no coincedence that Merchant grilled Floyd about a bout with Cotto after the Hatton fight. Cotto's matchmaking was a direct push towards that superfight, that's quite clear. Everyone wanted it, except Floyd. The excuse that Mayweather retired in order to rest his hands is complete bollocks as he was gunning and willing for a rematch with De La Hoya at the time, which fell through.
Now in regard to your points, talk about double standards, you're willing to praise Mayweather for the win over Judah yet rate Cotto's win over the same man as a much lesser feat for the reason he was 'mentally deficient and without a win in three'? You're being economic with the truth there as the first loss was inflicted prior to his bout with Mayweather, a result of Judah taking Baldomir lightly, the second was against Mayweather himself and the third was the result of Zab tearing his opponent up so badly in a single round that the fight was called and a ruled a NC due to a cut. Essentially meaning Cotto's win came directly after Mayweather's. Are you implying that Mayweather left Judah mentally deficient? If not, then surely Judah was mentally deficient prior to his bout with Mayweather.
If you want to play that game, you could just as easily say De La Hoya was 1-3 in his last 4 prior to the Mayweather bout given that Sturm was jobbed out of a clear win. You could also say Hatton had looked god awful in all but 1 of his 4 bouts preceding the Mayweather bout, his worst showing being his sole fight at 147 prior to Mayweather. Personally, I don't agree with either sentiment, what's good for the goose is good for the gander though.
I actually didn't knock Hatton as a choice of opponent for Mayweather, so why would I ask whether he deserved it or not, more to the point why would I ask you?
Your view that Cotto should've fought Williams 'by my logic' is again, misleading. I've never held any unrealistic expectations for Mayweather to enter into high risk/low reward fights. The two bouts central to everything I've posted in this thread, Cotto and subsequently Pacquiao both represent high risk/
high reward propositions.
Mayweather had already stated that Williams was too big, a fighter I've made no mention of as I'm not so vehemently biased that I'd expect Mayweather to enter into fights that represent an unreasonable risk for little reward. The same goes for Cotto. It's no coincedence he fought Judah and Mosley, fights made intentionally to align him with Mayweather. At the time the bout was being lobbied for Mayweather and Cotto represented 2 of HBO's 3 brightest stars, DLH being the third.
As to whether 'Cotto could have somehow pushed or beaten Floyd', I'd edge Floyd, but that doesn't change the fact that he would've represented a greater challenge than both De La Hoya and Hatton, not to mention a comparable payday. He'd have certainly gotten more respect from the boxing community for a win over Cotto than he did in beating DLH and Hatton. As for subsequent bouts exposing Cotto's shortcomings, it's easy to say that in light of the fact that the fight which saw Cotto's decline, came against a man exposed in his next fight as a cheat who loaded his gloves.
