Jump to content

Hank Chinaski

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3549
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

6809 Surly 1%

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. He also may be a rapist.
  2. Oh, it could be done.
  3. You think this is a joke but @Wulaw Horn is about to answer earnestly.
  4. Holy shit. QE and Blue in R2 seems crazy. I’d be surprised if Sorrell doesn't go well before R6.
  5. Haha this always cracks me up. “There are only [<32] true first-round quality picks this year…” It is said every year. If the number is always less than 32, and there are always 32 picks in the first round, then their definition of “first round-quality pick” is flatly wrong. I understand what they’re trying to say, I just wish they’d say it better.
  6. Most have him rated as the #1 WR in the class and think he’s a potential pro-bowler at either spot. Seems like most are settling in on him being primarily a WR and getting some DB play, but I guess it depends on which team gets him.
  7. I’m not convicting him, but yeah, teams may not think he’s worth the hassle (in part because he just didn’t do much for half the season). But it’s the nfl, he’ll probably be selected.
  8. You sure about that?
  9. The mid-30s tiny 2B isn’t good in LF? Stunning. The rookie 3B who’s played all of about 10 games above A+ ball and is the starting RF is struggling? Shocking. Its almost as if the outfield wasn’t properly addressed in the offseason.
  10. Wait, our MO is to try to be better than them? That’s “cancerous?” Ok. Of course, the one key factor that they’ll never be able to acknowledge amid all the whining about big bad malignant Texas is - Schloss preferred Texas. Buzz apparently preferred Maryland. Most people prefer elsewhere to A&M if all things are equal.
  11. It took Texas years to recover from the damage Steve Patterson did in a short amount of time. Trev/A&M may be on that same trajectory. its funny how they act like the “embarrassment” hasn’t already happened.
  12. Be that as it may, the clear logical inconsistency remains - why are we only scrutinizing the fastest guy’s time? Is there some reason to believe that Golden was the only guy to train for the 40 when everyone is incentivized to do so? All because his time didn’t match our expectation? You can see how this very quickly devolves into confirmation bias, which calls into question why we even bother to time these guys in the 40 or collect any objective data on them at all.
  13. Agreed. Listening to these guys talk about how he was their 7th or 8th best WR in this class was bizarre. It felt like they thought Golden had become overrated because of the 4.29, so they went way too far out of their way to make the point that they don’t think he “plays that fast” that they’ve now underrated him.
×
×
  • Create New...