Jump to content

RichUT

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    1335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RichUT

  1. I don’t know anything about the batches between 2-12 personally. I bought the very first batch and struggled to finish it. I wrote it off based on that and then started hearing how much better it had gotten online. I can’t imagine trading or selling 6 or 7 would be hard with all the BT hysteria out there. They go for $150+ on Unicorn Auctions no matter the batch number.
  2. Batch 14: https://www.breakingbourbon.com/review/stagg-jr-bourbon-batch-14
  3. The only one(s) to avoid are the very early ones that you’re not going to find anyway. 12-15 are all highly regarded. 12 and 15 are standouts. I’ve had 13, which is also very good. Batch numbers are not on the bottle. You have to go by the proof to know what batch it is.
  4. Yes. TBH, you should go for Stagg Jr regardless. Blanton’s can’t hold a candle to it, unless we’re talking about SFTB.
  5. I have 15 and it’s incredible. Should be a buy on site if any of you guys are lucky enough to come across one.
  6. Yes.
  7. I picked up the OF SiB barrel strength pick from the Shaker yesterday. Going to share it with a local group that I am part of. I agree that reviews of those have been all over the map. We’ll see if we got a good one or not in a couple of weeks.
  8. Anything over 130.
  9. 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.
  10. What the fuck is going on in here right now?
  11. 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.
  12. He’s retiring.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. If you consider a few hundred thousand more dollars per year in compensation substance, then yes.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. We kinda suck.
  23. Already covered very well in this thread. For example:
  24. Maybe Gerry was performing a social experiment to demonstrate what confirmation bias looks like in action.
×
×
  • Create New...