2 UGA 247 writers (and Steve Wiltfong) CB Nico to UM

Submitted by Bambi on

Coming off his official to UGA. Looks promising.

Edit: National writer Steve Wiltfong just did as well. His quote:

"Just did but wanted to ask a Michigan source first. The Intel definitely points to Ann Arbor."

taut

January 29th, 2017 at 10:30 PM ^

Been a heck of a roller coaster ride but if GA-based folks call it for M after the GA official, I have to consider that a very good sign.

MichiganStan

January 29th, 2017 at 10:43 PM ^

Rusty Mansell and Kipp Adams seem to Crystal Ball together. Those are the two guys who just did it. They did the same thing with Aubrey Solomon Crystal balling him to Michigan at the same time. They must have the same sources

I read on a Georgia Board that Rusty Mansell heard Aubrey Solomon has Michigan in first, alabama a close second, and georgia third

If Rusty is right on both of these then that'd be CRAZY

 

theSAABlife

January 29th, 2017 at 10:53 PM ^

Looks like about a half an hour after the two UGA guys, adds to the good vibes!! Can UM take NIco and Oliver Martin along with Solomon, Gay, and possibly Iffy?

The Fan in Fargo

January 30th, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^

Which who really cares because there are already four solid linebackers in the class right? If I took my nephews to a game and they asked who he was, I'd have to tell them that guy is Gay. Just would'nt work out good. They would laugh and then all of the Michigan fans sitting around would get upset and it's just better this way.

GoBlue2323

January 29th, 2017 at 11:06 PM ^

I always trust Wiltfong and wanna get excited but I wont till signing day. Wednesday is years away in recruiting time. Huge tho thought we were completely out of it.

MichiganStan

January 29th, 2017 at 11:19 PM ^

6 count em SIX! Crystal balls over to UM for Nico today! Gaitman, Ellis, Vtech guy, Adams, Mansell, and wiltfrong

Things are lookin good. If these balls are wrong Ill never trust the balls again!

Heptarch

January 30th, 2017 at 9:28 AM ^

That's because he based his predictions on polls.  Normally that's an accurate predictor.  This time it wasn't.

I'll leave my beliefs about why that was the case unspoken, out of respect for the "no politics" rule.

ST3

January 30th, 2017 at 10:04 AM ^

Do you know how probability works? Nate gave Hillary ~ a 67% chance of winning. That means 1 out of every 3 times she loses. Roll a 6 sided die. If you get a 1 or 2 you are stuck with Trump. It's the NYT and other groups who had it 95-99% for Hillary that were waaaaaay off, and even then, they didn't say 100%.

I just finished reading Nate's book, the Signal and the Noise. I highly recommend it, and not just because he is a fellow ELHS grad. He takes a very measured, data-driven approach to his analysis. He is certainly not an ideologue.