Of our current fighters who is HOF worthy?

We were discussing this in another post I just figured its a great topic.

Here is my list
Manny Pac
Floyd
JMM
Eric Morales
MAB
Both Klits
Calderon
Mosley

I know I am missing some but I am going off the top of my head. Who else?

Sooner, I think you have a good list based on the mediocre standards the HOF requires. However, I think with Marble, we can create our own hall which destroys the logic of the present HOF. The article Marble wrote yesterday pertaining to fighters who have no interest in fighting the best in their division, should have an effect on who gets in the HOF. If the Saints refused to show up for the Superbowl, or Drew Breeze found a niche in his contract that allowed him to skip the game, I'm sure both parties would be disqualified from the NFL HOF. Floyd Mayweather has clearly stated that fast money is more important to him than legacy, and he's getting paid a fortune for taking fights with little or no risk. If there was a "Mafia Hall Of Fame", I believe the honor among thieves would disqualify a hitman who only killed when he felt like it. Believe me, the mob would take that HOF VERY seriously. If we award fighters who avoid other fighters entry into the hall, we're agreeing with what they do. Simple as that. The NFL standards are so high, Lynn Swann had hell getting in. Let's take a long, hard look at Marble's last article and see who belongs. Not saying his article was "The Holy Grail." Only that those factors mentioned are imperative in deciding who qualifies for our hall. No doubt, he would put those fighters he mentioned as duckers in the HOF. I myself would not and I'm ready to present a sensible and detailed argument as to why. Also, being the best in a given era should NOT qualify anyone for anything. What is that era and what competition is available in comparison to other eras? Being lucky enough to enter any division at it's weakest point and dominate should not qualify someone for legendary status. All these controversial but (I believe) true factors, should not be ignored in the event we form our own hall of fame.

Frank you just gave me an idea for a sticky. The Ninja's Place Hall of Fame. We can all vote in a regular thread and then add the names to the original post in the sticky. What do you think? I think it might be fun.

We would need Dmar and Marbles help to do that.

All of your list are first ballot locks.

sooner good topic and frank great post and i agree with all you said for dam sure.to me winning 4 or 5 belts today is truly meaningless.today indeed has fighters worthy of the hall via talent perhaps and not performance against a elite level time and time again..it would be nice to have both...your list is a good one..lets call it serious canidates for hall consideration for most of them..who else today should be considered hall worthy contenders..hollifield jones jr bo hop and james toney for example are ones deserving AT least consideration..who would i vote for and who like frank do i have serious reservations about per franks great post and who would i rule out and why..this is not to say all that you mentioned will not make the hall cause they will.thats not the topic..its our own individulal standards we are talking about..i agree plenty with franks post..1.manny pac yes..wins over great fighters like jmm morales mab plus beating good fighters like cotto clottey and fighting at a respectable level in different divisio0ns even if it was one fight..calderon..yes.good little dominate fighter.hollifield yes.talent wise floyd jones jr and bo hop have what it takes of course..all i consider great..i have strong reservations..bo-hop realy his middle defenses against poor to mediocre competion..LH legit champ yes..against tarver..woopie..jones jr..see bo hop..forget the phoney belts.talent wise fantastric..a pick and choze type of fighter..floyd..see bo hop and jones jr..ducked more top fighters then he fought...JMM morales and barrera..yes id vote for them..warriors who challenge themselves is a big plus for me even if they lose..thats a lesson floyd has not learned..mosley..nope sorry..a good fighter yes.talent yes..a top 100 all time top 200 or 300 nope..ive seen to many welters milldles lightweights with as much talent that are not in ..boardereline at best maybe and thats a stretch...the 2 K brothers .nope..the younger one koed 3 times in his prime against mediocre fighters..it could be 4 times real soon..see franks post there..the older brother.i have a issue with a fighter quiti9ng while way ahead and when he quite he complained in his corner that his hand hurt..noo mention of the sholder at all..noo marcel cerdan here plus theres many things he has not come close to mastering..toney..yes .he did challenge himself even though he got sloppy fat..great talent that steped up to the plate several times..again ALL will make it on your list .some do not deserve it..you have to earn it in the ring and not for just 1 or 2 fights.

soonermark890 wrote:

Frank you just gave me an idea for a sticky. The Ninja's Place Hall of Fame. We can all vote in a regular thread and then add the names to the original post in the sticky. What do you think? I think it might be fun.

I'm with you 100 percent. I just think we need to be honest and take some chances. It would be cool if we could somehow come to an agreement as to what the qualifications are.

Guys who I think will, regardless of whether I think they should

Manny, Floyd, Ukranian brothers, Marquez brothers, Iron Boy, BHOP, Morales, MAB, Wonjonkam, Izzy.

Mosely's drug use will hurt him is my guess.

One guide for considering things. The Hall has already begun to water down a little and that is averaging 20 fighters per decade of the sports existence. So one way to limit dilution would be to say we can't have more than 20 fighters who spent a big part of their career in 2000-2010 in the Hall. Now frankly I think that is being VERY generous, too generous given the overall quality of the decade, but that's just my view.

So let's go through the retired locks as well and THEN see how many names we have.

Jones, Toney, BHOP, Oscar, Evander, Kostya, Calzaghe, Darius M (hey if Roy's a lock).

But the list is already too long. What about a guys who are in the process? Say Adamek and whomever comes out of the 168 tourney and Sergio Martinez and Paul Williams and Berto and Bradley etc?

This gets VERY slippery VERY quickly.

Those are good points, Marble. What I was saying was that we could form our own standards as to who gets in for this site. Roy may be a lock for the HOF, but not necessarily on our site.

Now here's my list of active guys who I think should be in.

Morales, MAB, Raffy Marquez, BHOP, Manny and Floyd. That's it.

And by the way, can we PLEASE get McGuigan, Terry Norris, Kenny Norton, Brian Mitchell, Edwin Rosario and Lloyd Marshall out of there? Fine fighters each and every one. But not immortals.

4445Frank wrote:

Those are good points, Marble. What I was saying was that we could form our own standards as to who gets in for this site. Roy may be a lock for the HOF, but not necessarily on our site.

I like it it. We could form an "IMMORTALS" wing. The threshold could be as follows. If the candidate can seriously be debated? He's not going in

The first step is developing criteria. I'd start with these bare minimums. These wouldn't gurantee inclusion, but if you didn't have these you have zero chance.

1. MUST have been THE MAN in at least one division. Exceptions for race and family issues.
2. MUST have at least a dozen wins (negotiable) over ranked fighters.
3. MUST have been "fully tested." That means the guy cannot have say 3+ guys he should have fought and didn't. The three is negotiable.
4. MUST have winning record against championship quality competition.

Marble, due to your last post, I've erased my present post to agree with you. Those are great standards and we can make a good list if we follow them.

frank i dont think its possible for us to come up with a set standard..i think you i and marble think for sure along similar lines for sure..some of the others may feel so n so belongs dispite lets say falling short of our standards or the 3 of us line of thinking anyway..each posters has there own standards or ideas..some feel the K brothers are all time greats i think diffent.as marble and i have pointed out as well as frank the hall has fighters that doo not belong..noo way..but some voters use that as a critera.the real voters i mean ..gee if nortons in or bradcock howe can we turn down the K brothers..if mcguiggan and norris are in how can we leave out camacho then..if bill mazeroskis in baseball hof how can we eliminate so n so..get the point..i listed who id vote for who i would not and whos questionable by my standards which may be high but thats what the hall should be..very high not mediocre or several like ingo bradock marbles list and a few others should be out..
if all posters voted im sure the enti9re list of fighters mentioned would make the hall if it was up to this board..
great topic sooner but to get a standard should be easy maybe but where is that bar set at..if roy jones jr is considered a lock ditto the K brothers etc etc then the bar is set at a mid level of mediocrity..sorry thats how i feel.

[quote="4445Frank"]

marbleheadmaui wrote:

Now here's my list of active guys who I Due to your last post, I've erased my present post to agree with you. Those are great standards and we can make a good list if we follow them.

I read your post before you deleted it. Maybe we should add a "warrior ethic" criteria as well. Would that help?

ill like the immortals thing..you can be a hall member but not an immortal..that makes sence.

[quote="marbleheadmaui"]

4445Frank wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

Now here's my list of active guys who I Due to your last post, I've erased my present post to agree with you. Those are great standards and we can make a good list if we follow them.

I read your post before you deleted it. Maybe we should add a "warrior ethic" criteria as well. Would that help?

LOL: Please forget you ever read the post. That was before I read the standards you required. Dmar thinks that we may have trouble getting the whole board to agree on universal standards. I agree with dmar, but I say let's take a crack at it anyway.

dmar5143 wrote:

frank i dont think its possible for us to come up with a set standard..i think you i and marble think for sure along similar lines for sure..some of the others may feel so n so belongs dispite lets say falling short of our standards or the 3 of us line of thinking anyway..each posters has there own standards or ideas..some feel the K brothers are all time greats i think diffent.as marble and i have pointed out as well as frank the hall has fighters that doo not belong..noo way..but some voters use that as a critera.the real voters i mean ..gee if nortons in or bradcock howe can we turn down the K brothers..if mcguiggan and norris are in how can we leave out camacho then..if bill mazeroskis in baseball hof how can we eliminate so n so..get the point..i listed who id vote for who i would not and whos questionable by my standards which may be high but thats what the hall should be..very high not mediocre or several like ingo bradock marbles list and a few others should be out..
if all posters voted im sure the enti9re list of fighters mentioned would make the hall if it was up to this board..
great topic sooner but to get a standard should be easy maybe but where is that bar set at..if roy jones jr is considered a lock ditto the K brothers etc etc then the bar is set at a mid level of mediocrity..sorry thats how i feel.

I hear ya. The problem with my criteria is it STILL isn't restrictive enough. Not close. Jim Braddock? Aye yi, yi. Laszlo Papp is another. Not his fualt, but he just didn't do enough as a pro.

The other way I've thought about the HOF is Kostya Tzsyu as my guy at the margin. Spent his whole career fighting world class guys. The man for a four years. Fought everyone there was to fight. Should he be in? Tough call in my mind. But if you weren't as accomplished as Kostya? You shouldn't even get a hearing. Now why did I pick him? No idea.

Guys, I have to go for a minute but I think this is really exciting. If we give our HOF another name and put out the "Standards" for all to read, I don't think we should run into much trouble. I'll try and return as fast as I can. Thanks Soonermark, Dmar and Marble for getting this started.

lets do an immortal thing then..marbles critera plus a warrior thing is a basic foundation.lets say a fighter in our eyes meets all thoses things he still may not be an immortal just a real legit hofamer..hollifield comes to mind..soo do we do immortals from day one..vote yes or no and give reasons why at a list of ten at a time..noo poll.thoses that post will vote at that time..the immortal idea is a excellent one to think about.

by day one i mean from sullivan on up..we may have a complete list of 50-60 fighters perhaps or less.

this may take a few weeks or so as one of our great topics but the end result is something this board can be proud off..

dmar5143 wrote:

this may take a few weeks or so as one of our great topics but the end result is something this board can be proud off..

I agree with everything you guys wrote. If you guys come up with some more criteria please let me know I will add it. I put Marbles 4 up on a sticky. I will change it to whatever you guys want. I agree we should be strict in this list.

dmar5143 wrote:

lets do an immortal thing then..marbles critera plus a warrior thing is a basic foundation.lets say a fighter in our eyes meets all thoses things he still may not be an immortal just a real legit hofamer..hollifield comes to mind..soo do we do immortals from day one..vote yes or no and give reasons why at a list of ten at a time..noo poll.thoses that post will vote at that time..the immortal idea is a excellent one to think about.

I say we create polls on guys we are unsure about. It will be fun. You can vote and debate. If the guy does not get a certain percentage of the board to say yes we will not add him. What should the percentage be?

soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:

lets do an immortal thing then..marbles critera plus a warrior thing is a basic foundation.lets say a fighter in our eyes meets all thoses things he still may not be an immortal just a real legit hofamer..hollifield comes to mind..soo do we do immortals from day one..vote yes or no and give reasons why at a list of ten at a time..noo poll.thoses that post will vote at that time..the immortal idea is a excellent one to think about.

I say we create polls on guys we are unsure about. It will be fun. You can vote and debate. If the guy does not get a certain percentage of the board to say yes we will not add him. What should the percentage be?

I think there's two questions. How restricitve are we trying to be? Immortals (top 50 of all-time?) or merely HOF.

I think 2/3 or 3/4 ought to be necessary for inclusion.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:

lets do an immortal thing then..marbles critera plus a warrior thing is a basic foundation.lets say a fighter in our eyes meets all thoses things he still may not be an immortal just a real legit hofamer..hollifield comes to mind..soo do we do immortals from day one..vote yes or no and give reasons why at a list of ten at a time..noo poll.thoses that post will vote at that time..the immortal idea is a excellent one to think about.

I say we create polls on guys we are unsure about. It will be fun. You can vote and debate. If the guy does not get a certain percentage of the board to say yes we will not add him. What should the percentage be?

I think there's two questions. How restricitve are we trying to be? Immortals (top 50 of all-time?) or merely HOF.

I think 2/3 or 3/4 ought to be necessary for inclusion.

You are more generous than I am. I was going to say 90%. I say the Immortals is what we make it. I say it doesnt have to be a top 50 list. How do you guys want to organize it? Just an ongowing list of fighters or list it by Decades in boxing? Or if we really decide to be very serious about it we can list them like this.

Rocky Marciano (1947-1955)- then a short bio on him and his accomplishments. I think you should do the writing of these to be honest I can but you are a much better writer than I.