I think by Nate he refered to Nate Marquardt. Sherbros love to talk about "mental issues" when they can't tell about technical issues.
Marquardt's footwork was very poor, he was prone to get outpointed in the feet, by Saffiedinne or by Okami, or by Misaki or Kampman among others when Marquardt didnt find his KO shot or couldnt take the fight to the ground. He was a very good KO artist, but a limited striker from the outside
Oh duh doi, I just woke up. I need coffee.
Granted one of the first things that comes to mind is the Woodley fight, he really went rose to the occasion there (where Diaz can't ever truly break into the title picture)
He also look awesome against Gouveia from the outside that Tekken-esque combo still really is memorable today.
As a whole though, Marquardt kinda had Forrest Griffin Syndrome , decent to solid at most things but wasn't amazing at any one thing.
Another thing to factor in was he was pretty deep in his career by the time he even went to the UFC.
I mean what year was he Champ in Pancrase? 2000 or something.
I do remember Genki beat him early.
But then we went on a bit of a streak til Ricardo Almeida I think (another example of facing someone with a singular strength that was a bit lopsided against Marquardts.
Then on the winning end, I think marquardts win over Maia tells the opposite story.
It was the furthest thing from a lucky shot.
But yeah, I'd give Marquardt around 7s across the board.
Strickland is a more high and low mix.
I mean his cardio is definitely a 10.
Strickland also has the right mindset to improve drastically (I mean what fighters go train with the person that just KOed them brutally)
Strickland isn't a case of a fighter where he loses and all confidence is gone and they fall off the edge of the cliff.
Enough of my rambling.
All in all, I say we just need to see Maybe two more fights to get a true read on where he's going with this.
I mean he beat the guy almost no one else I the division could beat, while doing it where the champ was at his most cpmfortable.
