Roach: "We Don't Need To Fight Cotto For No Title"

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by san rafael, Jul 31, 2009.


  1. FinalBELL

    FinalBELL Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,582
    0
    Aug 4, 2009
    Roach: "We dont need to fight Cotto for no title, we would rather weight drain him to a raisin."
     
  2. Bazooka

    Bazooka Pimp C Wants 2 Be Me Full Member

    44,390
    5
    Oct 23, 2005
    You know I hate to say it but Mayweather comming in heavy was ****ed up, I mean it was wrong you agree to a weight you honor that...

    However on the flip side, **** that if these small mother ****ers want to come up and challenge for world titles and fight for big money, then allow them to, but do not attempt to make it un safe and healthy for the fighter that is naturally the bigger man....

    if you dont have the sack to fight a welter weight at what ever weight he decides to come in at then dont come up and **** with the big boys....
     
  3. FinalBELL

    FinalBELL Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,582
    0
    Aug 4, 2009
    Agreed! And originally the weight Pac camp was asking for was 143.
     
  4. Bazooka

    Bazooka Pimp C Wants 2 Be Me Full Member

    44,390
    5
    Oct 23, 2005
    I know its ****ing sad, I mean why didnt Roach and Manny just offer to pay Cotto to take a dive for them? may as well have......
     
  5. Auracle21

    Auracle21 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,998
    5
    Jan 13, 2008
    cause they were going the mayweather route of trying to win against the big names
     
  6. Bazooka

    Bazooka Pimp C Wants 2 Be Me Full Member

    44,390
    5
    Oct 23, 2005

    As much as I cant stand Floyd, he never asked any fighter bigger than him to come down in weight looking for an advantage....

    Floyd comming in high against Marquez, I dont think it was for an advantage, I really think that after that lay off and father time has opend the doors to him being in his 30s now I think he had a hard time just to get under the limit.....
     
  7. Kid Cuba

    Kid Cuba Boxing Junkie banned

    7,712
    0
    Feb 16, 2009
    Is it true that this fight is also for that new WBC Diamond Belt?
     
  8. jrhjoker

    jrhjoker Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,298
    0
    Aug 24, 2009
    YA but that belt DONT MEAN SHIIIIIIIIT.:D
     
  9. jrhjoker

    jrhjoker Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,298
    0
    Aug 24, 2009
    YOU GOT THAT RIGHT:good
     
  10. 555east

    555east Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,948
    0
    Oct 24, 2007
    Did the whole Diamond Belt thing get officially passed?

    any way I agree on the Mayweather point as he probably gets a fair amount of criticism for fighting not the best opposition available

    but he's never gone up in weight and used a catchweight vs an opponent

    **if roles were reversed and Floyd was in Pac's place moving up to fight vs Cotto at a catchweight the board would go ape s*it on Floyd being a coward etc
     
  11. 555east

    555east Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,948
    0
    Oct 24, 2007
    I realise it's a dead issue and the fight will be at 145

    however coming from Camp Pacquiao I don't understand Freddie Roach's willingness to continuously be on the record and make public statements on the weight

    besides what he's said on fighting Mosley at 142, the initial Cotto weight was rumored to be 143, which Roach comment he wanted "as low as possible"

    why is the trainer of the Pound for Pound #1 fighter making himself and his fighter come across as weak?
     
  12. bachatu

    bachatu Pro Full Member

    4,779
    8
    Feb 25, 2006
    If Roach wants Manny to get a welterweight belt, than the fight should fall within the regular welterweight weight limits; yes, I know, 145lbs falls within the welterweight limit, however, in order for team Roach /Pacquiao to agree to the fight, they wanted Cotto to weigh below 147lbs. It was one of the stipulations listed in the contract.
     
  13. Kid Cuba

    Kid Cuba Boxing Junkie banned

    7,712
    0
    Feb 16, 2009
    Yeah, they passed it back in September.