Errol Spence Jr. vs. Terence Crawford debate: The biggest questions about the biggest fight of the year

It’s actually going to happen. Errol Spence Jr. and Terence Crawford will fight Saturday for the undisputed welterweight title — and potentially be named best pound-for-pound fighter in the world.

There’s so much surrounding the fight and the implications of what could — or could not — happen in the ring. There are questions about Hall of Fame legacies, Spence’s size compared to Crawford’s and the age-old question of why this fight took so long to make.

Mike Coppinger and Ben Baby debate those topics and more.

Baby: As much as the promotion for the fight indicates that both men are in their prime, that might be stretching it a little bit. Crawford turns 36 this year, has been a professional since 2008 and won his first legitimate belt in 2014 when he beat Ricky Burns for the WBO lightweight title. Spence is 33 and has been a welterweight champion since 2017.

Not only that, but the fight has been discussed at length for the past five years. That has led to the consternation among boxing fans that it’s taken so long for this fight to occur. In a conference call on July 12, Spence noted that it essentially would have been a black mark on each of their careers had they never faced each other.

It’s good it’s finally happening. But one could make the argument this should have happened a couple of years earlier.

Coppinger: This fight — to borrow a phrase from Bob Arum — was “marinated” to perfection. Both Spence and Crawford have never been more popular; will enter the ring with their undefeated records intact and reside inside ESPN’s top-5 pound-for-pound rankings.