RichUT

Deb’s apparently got one that was 147 proof but the bottle count was super low. They also made a 6 year single barrel pick at the same time, and they put that on sale today. I assume they aren’t even putting the 147 up for sale. I know one of the guys on the tasting committee and he said it wasn’t great. He greatly preferred the 6 year, which I picked up this afternoon and am sipping on now. It’s really damn good. I know people are curious about the high proof stuff, but I think there is a law of diminishing returns with that. To each their own and everything, but that’s not something I’m interested in chasing.

What the fuck is going on in here right now?

Keep me honest, but the timeline I recall is that news broke about Chang leaving on the 16th and Drew Hughes was made official on the 17th. So we're up in arms about the role being "vacant" for 24 hours? As I see it, Sark acted quickly to keep the staff functional and made a critical hire in Hughes, who will head up this aspect of the staff. There have already been plenty of reports of Hughes following and reaching out to recruits, so I am sitting here with the belief that we are no worse off than we were before. If there is evidence to the contrary I would be happy to consider that. For all we know, Chang was given the chance to stick around as part of the expansion of the support staff and he didn't like the idea of working under Hughes. That's a very real possibility, as I can't imagine he loved the optics of taking a step backwards. The specific point that I took issue with is that we should have already expanded the size of the support staff in parallel with filling out the on-field coaching staff. Criticism to that effect feels mis-placed to me, as I believe the basic premise of just keeping the old support staff and adding everyone else on as incremental is ill conceived. It's not as simple of a process to overhaul an organization as people are suggesting.

He’s retiring.

Maybe because he interviewed them and they were not on the same page philosophically? Maybe because he already has other people in mind that he can now focus on hiring because his coaching staff was a bigger priority? Jesus fucking Christ. This isn’t hard shit to figure out. Let the dude do his damn job.

https://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2021/1/25/22212820/official-chelsea-sack-frank-lampard I suppose this was always an inevitability, but I still hate to see it. Farewell, Lamps.

Had a sample of Uncle Nearest once. It was whatever version is considered the better one. It was fine enough at first, but finished with a heavy mineral/vitamin note that left me wanting to drink almost anything to get rid of that taste. No chance in hell I’m drinking that shit again.

If it's not that, then what is it? I don't know the particulars in intimate detail, but I think it has to do with justifying what we want to pay a coach relative to the broader market of people employed with the same title. It's stupid, but I could see where a state run institution could come under fire for paying a LB coach $1MM/year when the industry average is $350k. That sort of delta might be deemed unnecessarily excessive, hence the addition of titles to justify the higher pay.

If you consider a few hundred thousand more dollars per year in compensation substance, then yes.

I don’t know who the fuck this Zenitz shitbird is, but that was some world class trolling on his part. I begrudgingly tip my hat to that cock sucker.

So is your hypothesis that Sark was very thorough, thoughtful, and intentional with his staff hires for every other coaching position, but mailed it in on this one hire? Like he got to the WR spot and said to himself “Man, this coach hiring stuff is hard work. Maybe I’ll take a breather and just keep this guy that’s already in place to lighten the load on the ole Sarkster.” I just want to make sure I’m following your logic here.

Jesus Christ that was awful. Who is that guy and do people actually watch that shit? The guy was literally driving around while recording that drivel. He hadn’t even come close to getting to the point by the 90 second mark. Just terrible.

Why do we think they have any insight as to his effectiveness as a coach/teacher? I include myself when I say that message board posters usually don’t know shit about that, as they lack visibility to the input processes and only see the outputs. I’m not saying that he is or isn’t a good teacher of the game. I am just challenging the idea that any of those idiots would know either way. I think it’s more likely that he’s an underwhelming recruiter and they are transferring his failures there to his acumen as a coach.

We kinda suck.

Already covered very well in this thread. For example:

Maybe Gerry was performing a social experiment to demonstrate what confirmation bias looks like in action.

The generally accepted belief is that we only get Tosh if he’s a play calling DC. That’s been covered several times in this thread, albeit fewer times than folks have shared either their fajitas recipe or their favorite ice cream.

And that thread is great if all you care about is confirmed hires. Some of us like to follow the speculative part of the process, which is not captured there. BTW, all the shit posters know that there are entire fucking forums for the kind of inane and banal bullshit that you fucks insist on dragging into this topic, right?

I care, because wading through 5 pages of shit posting to find the 1 or 2 legitimate updates fucking sucks. It’s not like there aren’t plenty of other options on this site for that kind of discourse either.

I wish I understood why some people get up in arms about ice. I also wish I understood why some people put ice in whiskey in general.

This reeks of Urban or bust energy. I think Sark wanted Boom, thought he would get Boom, but didn’t get Boom. He’s now scrambling to vet the other options, and he hasn’t found the right fit yet. That’s my read on what’s happening, FWIW. And I’m painfully aware that it’s not worth a got damned thing. I just think people need to quit living in fantasy land when it comes to Muschamp.

Woooooow. Sad sad effort.

Sheesh. Some terrible individual efforts there. Should have put this away by now.

This is really bad football on our part. Everything is two touch or more at the moment. Very little flow or creativity. Depressing to watch.

I get it, up to a certain point. I assume they were trying to find a way to stand out on shelves that have become increasingly competitive. I don't love the bottle, but the SiB Rye I have is absolutely delicious, so I'm not about to deny myself that experience because I don't care for their marketing. For comparison's sake, I would rate it above the Willet 4 year and probably above the EHT Straight Rye as well. I thought the BiB Bourbon was meh, so I'm hoping that the SiB Bourbon has something in common the SiB Rye. Of the 4 bottles pictured above, I'm only keeping one. A few buddies wanted to check out their stuff so I had my friend send down extras for them.