On the live board, bust risk sits at 11% and the realistic range is No. 1 to No. 27.
Trevor Goosby wins with length and violence in his hands, a blend that lets him anchor against power and still toss rushers off their spot once he's latched on. The model has him third overall, well clear of a No. 9 consensus, and both sides agree on the same conclusion: this is a blue-chip tackle after just one year starting at Texas.
Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take
Model and consensus see the same player here. No reason to second-guess this rank.
Draftanomics ranks Trevor Goosby at #3 overall — a blue chip grade. The model's case leans on broad top-100 board coverage and scout consensus. Bust risk projects at 11%, below the position median — the model has a tight grade. Public consensus has him #9; Draftanomics's board is 6 spots higher.
Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 1, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.
The written report — drafted from the fact sheet, every number traceable, honest about what we can't see yet
Which signals drove the grade up or down — in plain English
The analyst room, accuracy-weighted, plus where Draftanomics disagrees with it
Measurables, traits, and college play quality
Bust probability, injury history, character flags, pre-mortem
How well this prospect fits each of the 32 team schemes
Probability he's still on the board at each of your picks
Historical players this prospect resembles
Clips, scout notes, voice memos, written reports
Read the two ends and skim the middle: the model has a real track record telling stars and busts apart, but “solid starter vs. rotation guy” is close to a coin flip from public data — that's why those two bars are grayed. For his odds of outright busting, the Bust-risk panel next door is the number to trust.
The bracketed ranges show how far each number could reasonably move — they come from how 23–57 similar players in past drafts actually turned out.
19 public boards track this prospect. Per-board breakdown loads with the live board.
Highlight reels indexed from YouTube. Loads only when you press play.
Working in his favor: how many boards rank him top-100, scout consensus, and his charted gap run block grade. Nothing in the profile pulled the grade down.
The grade is the 0-to-1 score the board sorts by — it only means something next to the rest of this class, which is why the rank above it is the number to quote.
Outcome shares from the 4-tier model. The Bust share here is a different model than the headline bust probability — for bust risk, use that number.
Everything that could go wrong with Trevor Goosby, gathered in one place — the most serious flags listed first.
Named, concrete signals — every flag cites numbers, comp players, or schedule context.
Roster-based need returns once the 2026 season is played — grading this year’s teams on last year’s depth chart would be guessing. What’s knowable now: the teams holding picks around No. 3, and which of them already spent premium capital at Offensive line in the 2026 draft.
Gold means no recent premium investment at Offensive line — the cleaner fit on paper. Grey means they already spent one.