Did roach just admit he cherry picks opponents for pac?

Exactly. That story encounter happened around the time of hatton fight.

If shane will come today, now that Pac has defeated Cotto in that manner. Roach of 2010 "might" say.

"Hey Shane, there's no doubt in my mind that Pac will whoop you".

Not that Roach will say that, but i'm just saying that what people say in 2009 and they say in 2010 is different with the way how a fighter could improve every fight.

 

Rooney,

I think you need a serious reality check. You're actually trying to label a guy who has fought De La Hoya, Hatton, Cotto, Marquez, Barrera and Morales a "cherry picker".

That is feeble.

 

Where did Roach said that?

I just read the whole article. I can't see the one i just quoted. I don't think Roach said that.First, you're putting words in Pacquiao's mouth, then you're now putting words in Roach's mouth.

Because to me what roach said in 2009 (when manny is still untested to carry speed/power in ww) to shane is: You're too good a fighter for the amount of money we'll earn

How low can you go? You're digging your credibility in ESB a very deep grave.

I suggest you stop this habit.

 

I've heard Roach say in a video interview he told Shane they'd fight him at 42 or 43 and Shane said he couldn't make it and then he said he could, so...

And there have been many interviews where he said they'd like to fight him. Weight is the issue. They don't wanna fight him at 47

 

Why make a new thread for this?

 

Just a quick excerpt from the article........



There is the issue of time running out on Pacquiao's boxing career. He will run for Congress in the Philippines in mid-May. Roach has said he doesn't think Pacquiao can be a marquee boxer and a politician at the same time. Asked about that Monday, Pacquiao says, "Why not?"

There is the issue of how much these next fights could mess things up. Were Clottey to win, might not Pacquiao see that as a perfect time to retreat to politics full time? Were Mosley to win, might that not do the same thing?

"Shane came to the gym twice to ask me to let him fight Manny," Roach says. "I told him no both times, and both times for the same two reasons: First, there isn't enough money there, and second, you're too good a fighter."

There is the issue of Pacquiao's current lawsuit against the Mayweathers for defamation. Pacquiao's attorney, Daniel Petrocelli, says that the case is in federal court in Nevada, is moving at full speed and can be in trial by year's end.

But the real issue remains lost money for the boxers and lost opportunity for the sport. For now, Pacquiao-Mayweather has gone away, but probably not forever.



I don't know when it was said, but he said it according to the author.

 

Here's a bit of a news for you.

Right after the DLH fight, Roach said that would be Pacquiao's last fight at 147 and he would not let pacquioa near any of the welterweights

When asked about any chances of pacquiao fighting margarito or Cotto, roach said "we're brave but we ain't stupid" and Pac went to fight hatton at 140 were he weighed in at 138 lbs.

 

Mayweather isn't a former Flyweight.

Are you seriously suggesting that fighting Marquez at 147 proves that Mayweather isn't a cherry picker?

 

mayweather is bigger than both hatton and marquez and he fought them at weight classes where they are obviously uncomfortable with. DLH was a good fight were everyone expected a P4P showcase from mayweather against an aging DLH, but he fought like a fruit instead.

whereas pac fought marquez where he was severely weight drained, he fought hatton at hatton's best weight and he moved up two weight divisions for DLH where he showcased P4P skills against an aging opponent

 

It's another great honor for Pac (along with the BWAA decade's best and Ring Magazine's decade's best) when the same people that laughed a year ago at the thought of Mosley and Pac in the same ring are now calling Pac a cherrypicker for avoiding Mosley.

This is old news. Roach has always said that Mosley was too big, too fast, and too strong for Pac. That was then. Roach has stated a few weeks ago that if Mayweather fight never gets made that Shane would be a good fight for Manny.

 

We both can't see a line or sentence in the article that goes something like: "I wouldn't want my fighter to fight Shane if he beat Mayweather". To me Roach didn't answer the actual question, his answer is irrelevant and all over the place, where he even recalled his encounter with Mosley around the Hatton fight.