BoxRec

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

LOL, I'm hardly emotional on this topic. Gerry had heart, I don't doubt that he could get up before going down again. Even if it wasn't one-punch, Oliver is flat out a better all around fighter. He's certainly inconsistent enough that Gerry could outpoint him if he was going through the motions. I've just tired of reading how underrated Gerry's skills are over the years.

Stylistically, a guy that Cooney won't be able to hurt is hardly good for him.

Young was finished at that point. He was out of shape and never had another big win in his career. He wasn't completely shot like Norton & Lyle, but his days as a contender were done.

Fair enough. But McCall really wasn't that good. He did well against CERTAIN types of fighters, and maybe once or twice in his career got lucky against an elite guy when complacence set in the other corner. He lost to plenty of lesser fighters than Cooney even while at his best, and his punching power while solid was hardly elite. I suppose it could have gone either way.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

LOL, I'm hardly emotional on this topic. Gerry had heart, I don't doubt that he could get up before going down again. Even if it wasn't one-punch, Oliver is flat out a better all around fighter. He's certainly inconsistent enough that Gerry could outpoint him if he was going through the motions. I've just tired of reading how underrated Gerry's skills are over the years.

Stylistically, a guy that Cooney won't be able to hurt is hardly good for him.

Young was finished at that point. He was out of shape and never had another big win in his career. He wasn't completely shot like Norton & Lyle, but his days as a contender were done.

Fair enough. But McCall really wasn't that good. He did well against CERTAIN types of fighters, and maybe once or twice in his career got lucky against an elite guy when complacence set in the other corner. He lost to plenty of lesser fighters than Cooney even while at his best, and his punching power while solid was hardly elite. I suppose it could have gone either way.

I never said he was that good. We're not talking about him fighting Joe Louis here. Getting "lucky" against an elite guy > than never coming close to beating one. As for elite punching power, that's not necessary against a chin and defense like that of Cooney's.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:
Fair enough. But McCall really wasn't that good. He did well against CERTAIN types of fighters, and maybe once or twice in his career got lucky against an elite guy when complacence set in the other corner. He lost to plenty of lesser fighters than Cooney even while at his best, and his punching power while solid was hardly elite. I suppose it could have gone either way.

I never said he was that good. We're not talking about him fighting Joe Louis here. Getting "lucky" against an elite guy > than never coming close to beating one. As for elite punching power, that's not necessary against a chin and defense like that of Cooney's.

As I also mentioned, McCall lost to worse fighters than Cooney, yet the same thing never happened in reverse. You've made some good points, and I agree that it would be a fight that could go either way. But hopefully if this match went down we'd see Gerry Cooney the CONTENDER who fought from 1980-1982 and not the semi-retired husband who in 1987 was answering the door in his bathroom to accept a pay check just for making an appearance. Sadly, I think most people judge him for his losses to Foreman and Spinks rather than for his better days.

"SaadOffTheDeck"

If they are both at their best, I can't see it going either way.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

"SaadOffTheDeck"

If they are both at their best, I can't see it going either way.

And you're entitled to your opinion. I think that if its scheduled for 10 rounds, Cooney at least has a "chance" of pounding out a decision, given that he went 13 rounds with a peak Holmes and won probably 5 of them. I don't see McCall as being that skilled or that devastating. But stopping Cooney before the bell sounds for the 10th, is not out of the question either.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

"SaadOffTheDeck"

If they are both at their best, I can't see it going either way.

And you're entitled to your opinion. I think that if its scheduled for 10 rounds, Cooney at least has a "chance" of pounding out a decision, given that he went 13 rounds with a peak Holmes and won probably 5 of them. I don't see McCall as being that skilled or that devastating. But stopping Cooney before the bell sounds for the 10th, is not out of the question either.

I certainly didn't see Cooney win 5 rounds against Holmes. More like 2.

drunkenpiper36 wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

drunkenpiper36 wrote:
And you're entitled to your opinion. I think that if its scheduled for 10 rounds, Cooney at least has a "chance" of pounding out a decision, given that he went 13 rounds with a peak Holmes and won probably 5 of them. I don't see McCall as being that skilled or that devastating. But stopping Cooney before the bell sounds for the 10th, is not out of the question either.

I certainly didn't see Cooney win 5 rounds against Holmes. More like 2.

Whatever floats yer boat man.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Whatever floats yer boat man.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost just about every round. I don't think calling him decent is an exaggeration. Average guy with a lot of size and solid power.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:His punching power was certainly above average, definitely not elite. Holmes was in his prime, Spinks and Foreman clearly were not. He's a guy that would lose to most any top Heavyweight you can think of and beat the lesser guys or aging contenders. He wasn't a bum, but he certainly wouldn't be a top 100 Heavyweight to me. To quote Larry Holmes, Gerry was no Tommy Morrison.