Kyrone Davis Gives His Two Cents: Why a Crawford vs Canelo Bout is a “Herculean Task”

Boxing aficionado Kyrone Davis provides a deep dive into why Terence Crawford would face an uphill battle against Canelo Alvarez, explaining the specifics that would make this fantasy fight a “tall task.”

Setting the Stage: What’s At Stake

Before we dig into Davis’ analysis, let’s just take a moment to acknowledge the gravity of this hypothetical matchup. The idea of Terence Crawford going glove-to-glove with Canelo Alvarez has fans buzzing like a hive of bees around a soda can. It’s a tantalizing scenario that would undoubtedly sell out any arena and have Pay-Per-View numbers shooting through the roof. But here’s the thing: it’s not just about ticket sales and bragging rights; it’s about legacy. Both fighters have something to prove, albeit for very different reasons.

Kyrone Davis: The Voice of Reason

It’s not often you hear someone rain on this parade of hypotheticals, but Kyrone Davis does exactly that.

It would be a tall task for Terence Crawford to defeat Canelo Alvarez.

Let’s Talk Size: When Bulk Meets Skill

Davis circles back to the size difference, and folks, this is a key point. Canelo is big, and he’s fought bigger men and crushed them. From Gennady Golovkin to Sergey Kovalev, Alvarez has more than proved his mettle. Meanwhile, Crawford would be looking to pull off a “Roy Jones Jr.,” jumping from 147 lbs to 168 lbs. The physical toll of such a drastic change cannot be understated.

What Mayweather Did Right

We’ve all seen the videos and the debates. Mayweather was able to handle Canelo through a masterclass in defensive boxing. But Davis brings us back to reality. Mayweather’s boxing IQ is off the charts, and let’s be real, not everyone can pull off a Mayweather. Since that loss, Canelo has evolved, adding more finesse to his brutish force. He’s not the same fighter Mayweather beat, which adds layers of complexity for any strategy Crawford might employ.

Skills Pay the Bills, But Will They Be Enough?

Terence “Bud” Crawford isn’t just another boxer; the guy is a wizard in the ring. He’s got hands as quick as a mongoose and the kind of tactical mind that would make Sun Tzu proud. Crawford’s adaptive style has allowed him to dominate multiple weight classes, but the move to 168 would be uncharted territory. Davis acknowledges Crawford’s skill but remains skeptical.

You’ve got to be able to look the punch all the way in.

The Betting Lines & Public Sentiment

So, you’re sitting there, mouse hovering over the ‘Place Bet’ button, and you’re torn. Davis himself stated that oddsmakers would favor Canelo, and that’s no surprise. Canelo has been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Crawford might be hunting for a payday, but this is a fight where the stakes transcend money.

Davis’ Final Take: Skill vs Size and Power

While the pundits and the Twitter warriors can debate till they’re blue in the face, Davis’ analysis brings a sobering dose of reality. A matchup between Crawford and Canelo isn’t just a question of skill vs. skill, it’s about overcoming overwhelming physical and experiential disadvantages.

Canelo walking around at 190, 180-something, going against a guy who needs to move up to 168, would make it a difficult fight.

In the theater of the mind, anything is possible. In the ring? That’s a different story altogether. A “tall task” doesn’t even begin to describe what Crawford would be up against. As the saying goes, you can’t measure the size of the fight in the dog, but when the other dog is Canelo Alvarez, you better believe you’re in for a war. And if Davis’ words carry any weight, it’s a war that could end in defeat for Crawford, despite his unparalleled skill and heart.

Davis might be a voice in the wilderness here, but it’s a voice worth listening to. This hypothetical battle may never happen, but if it does, remember you heard it here first: Crawford taking on Canelo would be nothing short of a Herculean task. And while Greek myths make for great stories, this is one tale that could have a far less poetic ending.