Five years ago, and until recently, Mayweather was too afraid Pacquiao would be the one capable of destroying his undefeated career long streak.

As De La Hoya said: "Mayweather will not fight, because he thinks that if he leaves the sport undefeated [he will be considered the best ever], but he won't be because people will respect you more when you face the toughest, the strongest, the most dangerous", something we all know Mayweather didn't do.

He added: "It doesn't matter who, all of the biggest names lost- Sugar Ray Robinson, [Muhammad] Ali, Pacquiao. What matters is the legacy we're leaving behind."

He's kind of right but it's not really Mayweather's fault.  Most people measure the greatest fighters by who they've beaten.  Unfortunately, this era of boxing isn't producing many stars, which makes it next to impossible to rank Mayweather accurately.  The list of Hall of Fame guys that Sugar Ray Robinson or Muhammad Ali beat (and lost to) is impressive.  Where does that leave Mayweather, though?  De La Hoya, Hatton, Pacquiao?  That's really not all that impressive in any kind of historical context.  Mosley earned his match but we all know he was on the downside of his career (after having ducked Mayweather previously when Floyd was the one looking to make a name for himself).  Of the guys he did not fight, which he supposedly ducked, are any of them significant?  Casamayor, Margarito, Williams?  Not even.

So, yeah, he probably won't be considered a "Top Ten Greatest Ever" fighter by most people but there really wasn't a lot he could have done about it.

The funny thing here, though, is that De La Hoya just completely dissed himself.

Dissed himself? How do you interpret it this way?

What do you mean?  Mayweather didn't face "the toughest, the strongest, the most dangerous," right?  But he did face De La Hoya, which means that De La Hoya must not qualify, right?