BJ Is a freak and he's a rare exception. A prime BJ would be competitive even In the modern era, possibly even be a champion.
He's also not a middleweight.
I don't think that fighters of old aren't solid fighters, just that MMA is a young sport and the game has evolved quite rapidly over the years and continues to do so.
Anyways, It seems like you're dodging the actual points being made and speaking In circles.
What points am I dodging? That because Romero looks impressive in the current division, it means that it is a better top 5 than before? Or that Whittaker and Gastelum would be champs at ww too?
I really don't see you making any points at all, except what Rogan and Dana said. Just rants and posting 3 posts at the same time over and over. I am the only one making arguments here, and posting examples of why I believe mw is weaker at the moment.
Seems like you are hung up on the current top guys being the greatest ever, because you like a few of them, and can not look at it objectively. I like Whittaker, Jacare, Luke, Bisping much more than I ever liked Anderson or Vitor or Hendo or Okami or Franklin, but I still don't give them skills they don't have, and neither should you. Think for yourself - Rogan is not objective in anythng he says, you know. He is paid by the UFC.
The top 5 in every division are great fighters and tough fights for anyone, but at the moment mw is weaker than in many years. That is also why the wws move up to challenge, and even have great success. It would not have happened in 2006-2009 when Anderson was at his best. Bisping KOing Anderson during these years is also unrealistic.
Sure, BJ was a special fighter, and would probably be champ today, but so was Anderson, Franklin, Hendo, Vitor. I really don't see the top 5 guys in any division at the moment beating them in their prime.