I think most trolls start out the same way. They take a simple contrarian viewpoint that is objectively arguable, but in an effort to bolster their credibility they push the argument to outrageous extremes and provide a bloated “resume” of sorts to make them sound more qualified in their position. So “the voice is the big thing for broadcasters” turns into “I have connections at HNIC” and “I know most major broadcasters in the US and am privy to their inside reputation rankings, so I have professional backing for my unassailable point of view”
In the same vein, “20 years in virology lab” and “worked in New York on COVID in secret” are self-aggrandizing claims meant to portray a sense of intelligence and authority. Failing that, he falls back on “I don’t just know a guy, I know THE guy” so his Harris injury update is painted as direct insider knowledge cuz he lives next to the guy, don’t you know. None of the claims are directly irrefutable, but taken all together it strains reasonableness, and that is where a simple cross exam of the claims shows the cracks (20 players came to my house to party without masks despite the CFL team COVID mandates, I worked in New York for 4 months at the height of the pandemic that closed our border with the US, I have free streaming because I can hack into the live feeds of the major US networks). The cross-exam can be kind of fun if you have the time and patience for it, and don’t get side-tracked by them waving something shiny at you to distract.
Was the same with the “Mike Kelly training camp insider” who went from seeing good players, to “I know what make a good player because of my long time coaching knowledge, let me dazzle you with terminology”.