What does that even mean? No one needs to connect Roger to anything. He is a swordsman; it's something anyone with two working eyes should be able to see for themselves. People just denied it with their life until now just because they can't accept the notion of a swordsman being as strong as Roger.
It's not that I don't understand what you're saying. I am talking about how close your theories are to the canon material. There is a limit to how much we "assume" even for a hypothesis. You can't really create a bunch of what-if scenarios completely disregarding what we've been told so far in the series and then use it as an argument to support another argument. That's illogical on many levels.
It's not illogical when the author starts to make the reader question how much they know about Shanks.
I'll be honest, I NEVER supported antagonist theories until post TS. When Luffy claimed he wanted to fight Shanks ("as long as he isn't first"), I found it a bit odd. Before this, I always felt he was Luffys mentor. That he simply wanted tk meet him and return the hat when he was a grest priate. Then Rayleigh stepped in and had that role, which I also found interesting. Then Luffy said this, implying a more violent encounter.
It really started to get weird during the 900s, because now Shanks is even getting oddly excited to meet Luffy (like in fight mode, refer to my avatar), then "coincidentally" goes to meet the Gorosei after this, the same men who order genocides at the whim of their hidden leader.
Then you also have the fact that Oden didn't write 2 things in his journal. 1 bring about Laugh Tale, the other being about Shanks and Roger's dialogue after Laugh Tale. Then you have Who's Who and and fact that Shanks stole Luffys fruit from the WG...but then he also talks to the WG? So then the question becomes, what did he even say to them?
Lets not forget Oda's constant teasing the last 2 years about his mysteriousness and him "making his move". Now film Red is even hinting at some weird shit with that last trailer.
Realize that everything I'm saying is simply skepticism implied by the author, not including weird shit like his bounty or his title (hes not called "captain" for example). Not even remotely tied to additional theories like with what im talking about with Mihawk or anything else.
This doesn't come from nowhere though. There is a reason more and more people keep "meming" about "snitch" Shanks lately, joke or not
