Freddie Roach is an idiot, period

[Tiozzo]

The difference is my man is that Floyd post fight always give credit and bigs up his opponent.

Roach post fight is still ****ting on the fighters Pac beat.

in fact, they do the same thing

that's why when they realize they have been too vocals about the opponent, then they try to give credit where they didn't to make the win look good

Gatti prior to fighting Floyd : a punching bag, a paper champion, no head-movement, I will punish him and walk through him, he won't go passed 6.

Post-fight : he is a great fighter, it was funny when Merchant recalled to Floyd what he said about Arturo, Floyd would say ''no no no he's a great fighter''

All that Floyd said before the fight was true in the end

[johncods]

I'll tell what the difference is : Floyd is a fighter, Roach is only a trainer. Roach has no business playing mind games, all he says, he truly believes.

And how do you know this sir? may I ask?

[Tiozzo]

TS look at yourslef...

no you should look at yourself

you're a huge Pacman fan obviously, so you will defend his trainer without thinking

[Tiozzo]

And how do you know this sir? may I ask?

because it's always accurate (almost)
Roach gives away his own analyse of the opponent
he has experience, he breaks down fighters well

[Tiozzo]

when you get your own boxing gym and start training world champions then maybe I might consider that what you said might be right.

ok you're a ****ing idiot, you don't have to run around shouting it, we know

do you need to have won a ****ing belt to discuss about boxing champions ??? No, so **** off

[Ya Boy NeXt]

I don't think Roach is an idiot, definitely not, the guy's got a very smart boxing mind and he's someone you would want in your corner/in the gym preparing for a fight.

That being said, it doesn't bode well for him when he does say things about opponents that discredits them after Pacquiao beats them. It really only gives fuel to those who think the same things and want to use it as a reason why Pacquiao's so successful moving up in weight. There's truth and validity in what Roach says, though about Oscar, Hatton, Cotto, Clottey, etc.

If Pacquiao were to beat Floyd, however,there's no excuse to be made as to why. He'd be the first and in my mind there's no possible explanation to discredit Floyd if Pac-Man were to beat him. No weight draining, no past his prime, no "his legs were gone", etc.

[johncods]

because it's always accurate (almost)
Roach gives away his own analyse of the opponent
he has experience, he breaks down fighters well

Whatt?? And floyd's isn't accurate??? And when Roach made the pick of Pac koing hatton before round 3 he actually said it was to get them riled up mainly Floyd Sr. guess what it worked LOL

[Tiozzo]

Whatt?? And floyd's isn't accurate??? And when Roach made the pick of Pac koing hatton before round 3 he actually said it was to get them riled up mainly Floyd Sr. guess what it worked LOL

where did I write what Floyd says prior to a fight isn't accurate ???????
I have said Roach and Floyd do the same damn thing, they are too vocals about the opponents chances and how they rate as fighters, so when they beat them as they said they would, they try to make it look better, try to make the WIN look more impressive when they have actually given away the real worth of the win prior to the fight

Floyd : Gatti is a paper champion, so if Floyd beats Gatti, what does that make him ??? a paper champion of course, because Gatti wasn't the lineal champion at 140

Roach : Oscar can't pull the trigger
Pacman beats him : oh you don't want to say Manny won because he had a good night, you have to say Oscar had a bad night

[American Dream]

Mayweather said that Mosley is old and Everybody beat his ass.

Floyd never said that..he said people will say that once he beats him...

lol, always a "difference".

Anyway, only biased bitches try to point **** like this out. obviously doesn't matter to objective pundits seeing Pac won FOTD.

so basically you have nothing logical to counter my response with..
Pac STANS..always name calling & bringing up FOTD award
come back when you actually counter what I say..
that Roach picks these opponents based off what he says about them...
until then keep deep bobbing!

[Tiozzo]

I don't think Roach is an idiot, definitely not, the guy's got a very smart boxing mind and he's someone you would want in your corner/in the gym preparing for a fight.

That being said, it doesn't bode well for him when he does say things about opponents that discredits them after Pacquiao beats them. It really only gives fuel to those who think the same things and want to use it as a reason why Pacquiao's so successful moving up in weight. There's truth and validity in what Roach says, though about Oscar, Hatton, Cotto, Clottey, etc.

If Pacquiao were to beat Floyd, however,there's no excuse to be made as to why. He'd be the first and in my mind there's no possible explanation to discredit Floyd if Pac-Man were to beat him. No weight draining, no past his prime, no "his legs were gone", etc.

thanks for using your brain unlike some other people

as for Floyd, I don't agree : Roach is already undermining a potential Pacquiao win over him, because he's being too vocal about what he sees in Floyd : no power at 147, not great at 147, drawed with Oscar, has lost his legs as you could see against Mosley, has been hurt by Mosley so Pacquiao will ko him if he hurts him

BUT AFTER PACMAN WINS (IF HE DOES), he will be having regrets for breaking down Floyd so well publicly, because people will say Floyd was not the same as he used to be, so Roach will have been the first one to take away luster from the win over Floyd, but he will get pissed when people quote him.....