Uncle Gil Has Been Spiking His Ensure

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
I think he's Phil Loadholt. 

this is exactly who i think of when I see him play, except Phil was more motivated to try and hustle IMO,  maybe a poor mans mount mckinnie ... great college resume,  but since he was never challenged his entire life he never really learned to find that extra gear to really take his game to the next level.

[Guest]

@"Geoff Nichols" said:
I could actually see it. I have him graded as a better prospect than Conklin was in 2016 and he went #8 overall to Tennessee. Leading up to that draft nobody really agreed with me that he would go any higher than #15 and there he went. Team needs might have McGlinchey drop out of the top 10 but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he were gone by 15. 

This aged well. 

[Guest]

@pumpf said:
I dunno... I can see it.  It's the kind of position that teams will over-draft (take higher than their talent deserves).
Then again, I've had a few concussions... so maybe Gil and I are on the same brain-wave...

Told 'ya... 

[Guest]

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:
I could actually see it. I have him graded as a better prospect than Conklin was in 2016 and he went #8 overall to Tennessee. Leading up to that draft nobody really agreed with me that he would go any higher than #15 and there he went. Team needs might have McGlinchey drop out of the top 10 but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he were gone by 15. 

This aged well. 

As did my McGlinchey defense.  I also called like 3 picks right in a row in the draft thread. Gunning for your job Guru!

[Guest]

I'm confused. Because you correctly predicted MM would go high, then your evaluation of this player is, um, correct?

[Guest]

My evaluation of Tackle thirsty teams was correct, Maroon. Still think he's a great RT but a reach at LT.  Didn't you opine that he'd slide out of the first?

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
I'm confused. Because you correctly predicted MM would go high, then your evaluation of this player is, um, correct?

No this isn't about the evaluation. The point is that the OT's were going to come off the board early and this is now two out of three years its happened. Just a realization of common day draft trends that people continually are not catching on to. 

[Guest]

@FSUVike said:
My evaluation of Tackle thirsty teams was correct, Maroon. Still think he's a great RT but a reach at LT.  Didn't you opine that he'd slide out of the first?

No, that he SHOULD not would. I said he was a 25 to 40 type player and I stand by that. I could be wrong, but I think he's a 10 year pro at RT who never makes a pro bowl. That's who I think he is. He's Tim Irwin.

I know what I think, but I don't often try to predict what the NFL thinks. Like I've said before, that's like trying to predict 32 dimensions of stupid. :-)

[Guest]

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@MaroonBells said:
I'm confused. Because you correctly predicted MM would go high, then your evaluation of this player is, um, correct?

No this isn't about the evaluation. The point is that the OT's were going to come off the board early and this is now two out of three years its happened. Just a realization of common day draft trends that people continually are not catching on to. 

Then clearly we're talking about two different things.