it was called cherry picking because the only reason GSP moved up to 185 was bisping stumbling his way into a championship. had rockhold still been champ, you think georges would've come back to challenge him? he immediately dropped the belt when it was clear he'd have to face whittaker or romero.
neither of those two men had any business fighting for the middleweight title. bisping won it off of rockhold and instead of defending against whittaker, romero, jacare, or even mousasi - these were literally the guys in line for the belt - he did it against a barely ranked henderson. fine, bisping has been around for a long time, he deserves one match against an aging opponent. but after that, he's fighting one of the killers in his division, right? wrong. he takes on a retired welterweight, and actually goes on record saying that there's so many high level challengers in his division, he's not fighting any of them and they should all deal with it. it was absurd.
i think the issue here is that people view the above criticism as invalid, because both GSP and bisping had strong careers. they did, but that doesn't exempt them from judgement. as far as i'm concerned, GSP is the most accomplished fighter in the sport, and one of its best athletes. bisping is an absolute overachiever and an entertaining fighter with a ridiculous resume. but as soon as bisping got hold of the belt, he avoided the top contenders like the plague, and GSP waltzed his way right into an undeserved title shot he never would've taken if anyone else held that belt.