What on earth does this mean?Naandrew wrote:I don't mind this as Khan hasn't fought for nearly a year.
However what will really annoy me is Khan winning and calling out Floyd again. Beating Collazo IMO does not make him a worthy opponent for Floyd.
Had he fought and beat Devon in December than he would have earned a fight with Floyd as he would have picked up a World Title at 147.
Still I quite fancy a Collazo KO as Khan will overlook him all he will talk about is Floyd Floyd Floyd in the build up. He was like this before Peterson and even though some thought he won that fight i thought it was his worst performance for a while.
Since when was Floyd elevated to the status where potential fighters have to prove themselves? The idea that only those who are most worthy and have defeated allcomers are entitled to share a ring with him is largely nonsense.
Marcos Maidana, who has lost to Khan and Alexander, lucked out by showing up Broner for the overrated turd he is, and of course Floyd jumped at the chance of that fight - it's an easy win and Maidana won't make too high a purse demand.
Robert Guerrero "earned" his shot with one worthwhile win at Welterweight, against a fairly limited Andre Berto. The remainder of his best wins were at a stone or more lighter.
It's a similar story with Victor Ortiz.
Floyd selects his opponents based on the best risk/reward ratio (and he's earned the right to do so), but to suggest that his opponents are lined up using some meritocratic basis is a fairy tale.