Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post Reply
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by APerno »

Image
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by Kalan »

NOPE!!! ... Floyd is retired... You can't come up with a better bonanza than his 48th opponent and his 50th opponent. He'd be nuts to fight someone good.

Triple-G was logical 2 and 3 years ago, when GGG made the offer to go to 154 to fight Mayweather... and Kell Brook and Keith Thurman were trying their ass off to get Mayweather or Pacquiao to fight...and Floyd was cherry-picking as usual...guys like Andre Berto and Marcos Maidana.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by Kalan »

golden oldie wrote:At the end of the day Mayweather will only ever be a 5' 8" average sized Welterweight who might come in at 155 max to be able to operate at his optimum potential. At fight time Golovkin is a far bigger man than that who hits a lot harder than anyone Mayweather has faced. It is a crass call by people desperate to see the guy lose to demand a fight between the pair of them.
Who's desperate to see anybody lose??? Floyd fought brilliantly at 154 versus De La Hoya, Cotto, and Canelo who were all far bigger than him... Since Floyd held a World Title at 154, and was a 3 X World Champion at 154, and GGG NEVER fought at 154, and nobody knew whether 3G could weigh-in on weight and still be strong -- Floyd seemingly had every advantage. They would have been fighting for HIS World Title. It was a ton of money. Floyd didn't want to risk it -- or risk Keith Thurman -- or risk Kell Brook.. No knowledgeable fan was too excited about Floyd's fights with Berto and McGregor.

Coming down in weight is EXTREMELY TOUGH!!!! Ask Roy Jones.. Emile Griffith.. Ray Leonard.. Oscar De La Hoya.. Chris Byrd.. Donnie LaLonde... Chad Dawson etcetera... They were ALL World Champions at HIGHER weights before coming DOWN in weight in quest of another title -- and getting TRASHED!!!

How many World Champions at Higher weights came DOWN in weight 1 division and actually succeeded at picking up their desired World Title??? You'll find that there's MANY MORE who FAILED at that plan than succeeded.. They all believe they're going to be bigger and stronger than their opponent. Screw that! They're in for a rude awakening.. Their strength peels off with the weight and they're a sorry sight after 8 or 9 rounds -- struggling like crazy.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by APerno »

golden oldie wrote:At the end of the day Mayweather will only ever be a 5' 8" average sized Welterweight who might come in at 155 max to be able to operate at his optimum potential. At fight time Golovkin is a far bigger man than that who hits a lot harder than anyone Mayweather has faced. It is a crass call by people desperate to see the guy lose to demand a fight between the pair of them.
I was/am calling for a fight between them not because I believe Mayweather will lose. I think Mayweather is that good, that he can beat a good bigger man; I also think GGG is that good that he can offset Mayweather's boxing skills. In short I think it is a very competitive fight. As I said in my separate post, I think it would have been a must fight back in 1947 and the audience would have understood all the circumstances relative to the fight. (Ok, maybe I am just being nostalgic with that last part.) e.g. Armstrong should have fought SRR back in '43 even though is was unlikely for him to win, but fans like us understand the dynamics surrounding that fight, and despite the likely outcome I'll bet Homicide Hank wanted that fight badly; why doesn't Mayweather? (Right I keep forgetting it's not 1943; the money has changed everything, but I think it would be an ATG fight; no blow-out, no way. I think the fight is a pick-um.)
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by Kalan »

Just because you came in under 160 doesn't mean you didn't struggle to make weight... It's really hard to make the weight to the last ounce... Thomas Hearns weighed in at 145 for his 147-pound fight with Ray Leonard... Hearns looked the thinnest and skinniest of his life -- and he looked weight drained.

Sure enough -- as the fight worn on Hearns was rapidly running out of gas -- until he had nothing left and Leonard walked straight through him.
BitPlayer
Welterweight
Posts: 3527
Joined: 29 Feb 2016, 05:14

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by BitPlayer »

No, a 40 year old retired welterweight Vs a middleweight is crazy.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by Kalan »

Not that it's crazy... It won't happen because Floyd is too smart to let it happen... He slipped past Keith and Kell -- GGG sure as Hell isn't getting a look.
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46556
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Isn't Money v. GGG the next logical fight? (Wouldn't it be nice to be 1947 again?)

Post by gilgamesh »

It's definitely not the next logical fight.
Post Reply