A case against Shane Mosley being a Hall of Fame Boxer

Impressive Wins:
Oscar De La Hoya 1
Antonio Margarito
Luis Collazo

Unimpressive Wins:
Fernando Vargas 1 (cut stopped a close fight)
Fernando Vargas 2 (weight drained, shot Vargas)
Ricardo Mayorga (fight would have been scored a draw if Mayorga won final round)

Controversial Matches:
Oscar De La Hoya 2 (most had Oscar winning... and Shane was on PED's).

Losses:
Vernon Forrest (twice)
Winky Wright (twice)
Miguel Cotto
Floyd Mayweather Jr. (got destroyed)
Manny Pacquiao (didn't even show up to fight)
Sergio Mora (I'm putting this in the losses, because a draw vs Mora is a loss to me)

This is not a hall of fame resume to me. Thoughts?

i used to think that he was but now im more leaning towards that he isnt especially with the whole PED thing. what made him such a big name was at lightweight in which he destroyed everybody he fought there but he didnt really fight anybody that great.

Yeah, broken down like that, no it's not a HOF worthy resume. And as Power said, with the whole PED bullshit

You can even make the case of putting Margarito's win in the controversial slot. Margarito's head was not in that fight at all.

You can rip any fight's resume apart like that though.

For me, he does't have enough "Ws" over top opponents

Its hard to argue that he is huh?

You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

flapanther2001 wrote:You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

But really he never fought anyone of note at 135. The best guy might have been Jesse James Leija.

Soonermark890 wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

But really he never fought anyone of note at 135. The best guy might have been Jesse James Leija.

He beat the guys that were there. You can't beat somebody that ain't there.

flapanther2001 wrote:You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

Teddy atlas would also say he would of lost to Collazo if Luis doesn't break his hand in the 2nd round!

Shane at lightweight was a thing of beauty. Forget 3-4 punch combinations. 6-8 punches were often seen.

flapanther2001 wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

But really he never fought anyone of note at 135. The best guy might have been Jesse James Leija.

He beat the guys that were there. You can't beat somebody that ain't there.

But that doesnt make him a HOF guy automatically. When he stepped up to that elite level he lost more times than he won was the point the OP was making and it really is a good argument.

that was my point is that shane got his name because of what he did at lightweight. that alone didnt put him in the HOF so his career after lightweight was the determining factor and i dont think that he passed. did shane only use PEDs in the second fight vs de la hoya or both?

shane from what i understand used peds for both oscar fights..now if guys on here want to accuse margo was a cheat for all his fights then shane deserves the same treatment...will shane make the hall..yes todays voters will put him in..is shane a first ballot lock.boxing folks said that too many times...in reality and in my mind is shane a hofamer.fuck no.a great fighter.sorry no again.a very very good one yes.what he did at lightweight was against who.what type of talent..since oscar what its been 9 years and hes like i think 11-6-1.or so.thats in nine years...not one impressive win.if you want to call margo a come foward slow wide open easy to hit win as impressive go ahead..ill call it expected which i thought he would win...
look im personaly sick of hearing him being called a all time great.hes not..not even close.ill agree with powerpuncher on this..id vote no every time for him.pac yes.floyd hopkins yes.jones sure.and a few others.
yes there are guys in the hall that clearly were not even good fighters which shane is.i wish hall voters stop justifying well if this guys in then why not put this guy in.keep deluting the hall is what there doing.

shaun ill agree also.

Shane's a lock!!!

Soonermark890 wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:You didn't mention his career at lightweight at all. During his reign he was unbeatable at 135 before he moved up, and when he did, he beat ODLH in only his 3rd fight at 147. Where'd you learn to break down a career, the Teddy Atlas school of prejudice?

But really he never fought anyone of note at 135. The best guy might have been Jesse James Leija.

wtf?? hell no john john molina even though john was at the end of his career but even in his prime shane would have been too strong.
shane also beat wilfredo rivera at welter who was no slouch just ask fernando vargas and pernell whittakker.

if anybody thinks that what shane did at lightweight is good enough to be inducted into the HOF then you should probably be on that panel because its like dmar said, they induct way too many undeserved fighters. shane had an impressive run at lightweight but that was the extent of his career. after that he was a good fighter, even a top 10 p4p but that doesnt make you a HOF fighter. when i think of a HOF fighter i am thinking of a truly elite fighter and shane for me is just a step below that. plus, if shane did use PEDs in the first oscar fight then his whole career changed because of that event. if he wouldnt have beaten oscar then his welterweight career would have been garbage.

Is Oscar HOF?

i think that oscar is HOF more based on being a cash cow rather than his fights in general although he did beat some great fighters and had some close fights with others. but even on resume alone, oscar deserves a spot over shane easily.

powerpuncher wrote:i think that oscar is HOF more based on being a cash cow rather than his fights in general although he did beat some great fighters and had some close fights with others. but even on resume alone, oscar deserves a spot over shane easily.

...i agree.oscar did revitalize boxing a bit shane did not.plus your other resons are good.oscar is more deserving then shane.oscars resume exceeds shanes also.

powerpuncher wrote:if anybody thinks that what shane did at lightweight is good enough to be inducted into the HOF then you should probably be on that panel because its like dmar said, they induct way too many undeserved fighters. shane had an impressive run at lightweight but that was the extent of his career. after that he was a good fighter, even a top 10 p4p but that doesnt make you a HOF fighter. when i think of a HOF fighter i am thinking of a truly elite fighter and shane for me is just a step below that. plus, if shane did use PEDs in the first oscar fight then his whole career changed because of that event. if he wouldnt have beaten oscar then his welterweight career would have been garbage.

I agree. I go back and forth on whether or not even Mayweather belongs in the HOF. And yeah, I know he's a guranteed lock for the HOF.

Floyd no doubt is an elite fighter, but there's a big part of me that feels he should not be rewarded with being inducted into HOF, and be in there with greats that made the sport better. To me, Mayweather has done nothing to make boxing better. If anything, he's made the sport he respresents look worse.

He represents everything I hate about certain modern day fighters.

The Collazo win wasn't that impressive, Luis was giving Shane a good fight before he injured himself.

It's not a strong record but you just know Shane's going to get in, he's too big of a name to be excluded. And before Shane moved up to Welterweight he did have a solid Lightweight career.

He shouldn't get it just bc of PED crap

GrantZilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:if anybody thinks that what shane did at lightweight is good enough to be inducted into the HOF then you should probably be on that panel because its like dmar said, they induct way too many undeserved fighters. shane had an impressive run at lightweight but that was the extent of his career. after that he was a good fighter, even a top 10 p4p but that doesnt make you a HOF fighter. when i think of a HOF fighter i am thinking of a truly elite fighter and shane for me is just a step below that. plus, if shane did use PEDs in the first oscar fight then his whole career changed because of that event. if he wouldnt have beaten oscar then his welterweight career would have been garbage.

I agree. I go back and forth on whether or not even Mayweather belongs in the HOF. And yeah, I know he's a guranteed lock for the HOF.

Floyd no doubt is an elite fighter, but there's a big part of me that feels he should not be rewarded with being inducted into HOF, and be in there with greats that made the sport better. To me, Mayweather has done nothing to make boxing better. If anything, he's made the sport he respresents look worse.

He represents everything I hate about certain modern day fighters.

mayweather's retirement could have helped him a ton if he would have taken the pac fight but because he didnt, it has hurt him. earlier in his career floyd wasnt like he is now but he started to be picky and and only caring about money.