I saw these in a comment on TsT and thought they'd be enjoyed over here. I guess the old guy forgot what he said about Bridgewater.
These tweets by Gil Brandt are facepalm worthy
- Thread starter ChrisW
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
I saw these in a comment on TsT and thought they'd be enjoyed over here. I guess the old guy forgot what he said about Bridgewater.
I'm surprised, at his age, that he knows how to use twitter. But yea, the double standards are humorous.
My favorite thing to post on Rams talk when Old Larry would say anything. I don't miss that place at all.
Gil is borderline senile at this point. Every time I hear him on Sirius, he is confused. Time to hang it up.
One guy you were expecting to run a 4.6 runs a 4.50, that's a good time for him. Another guy you were expecting to run a 4.3 runs a 4.50, you're disappointed.
It's the same concept, not really a double standard.
It's the same concept, not really a double standard.
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
No, it is a double standard. Nobody projected Bridgewater or Manzeils hand size. Your comparison is awful.
He said he "expected" as did others that Bridgewaters hand would be bigger, semantics? expected and projected mean about the same to me.
I know Gil is getting old but he's forgotten more than any of us know and still knows more.
Of course they did. Scouts guess, assume, and estimate pretty much every measurable there is to know about a prospect. My comparison is relevant.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #12
They don't really estimate hand size. They have a general size they'd like to see...and if one is fine why is the other a problem?
At least with small hands it'll make your old boy look bigger when having a tug!
He said "smaller than I thought, many thought". Which means yes, he and his colleagues did actually estimate hand size. Just like they estimate prospects' 40 times. Why is a 4.50 fine for Mike Evans, but disappointing for Sammy Watkins?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #15
It's a double standard on hand size. Two players of the same position being graded on hand sizes which are the same. One is bad one is good. That's a double standard.
Comparing that to the 40 time is reaching at best.
BIG reason i left RRF. Thanks to CGI Ram i have found a better home.
He didn't say it was a "problem" as much as he intimated a plus that wasn't there was a surprise and THAT Bridgewater compensated possibly by wearing gloves.
Kinda like a $500 dollar room vs. a $100 dollar room you expect one bathroom with one but not the other,maybe not a great example but who anywhere tauted Garrapolo for the first overall pick? MANY DID and some still do taut Teddy, Bridgewater is expected to go beyond the "threshold" or be considered a "threshold" talent which I'd pretty well call Garrapolo. I have strong doubts anyone drafted below G will start and flourish whereas a few above him should.
Yeah, I don't even know the guy but I'd like to punch that old fart in the dick.
He never said that one hand size was bad and the other was good. Just that one was smaller than expected and the other was bigger than expected.
And you still haven't been able to explain why the 40 time comparison isn't relevant. That's because it is.