That Aud Smell

Ideally, Jack would have a running count of how many times he's missed from a low-percentage spot on the ice before taking another shot from that spot.

This was my initial response. Preach. I made a funny sound trying to suppress a laugh at this one. Some of this was from me, earlier today. I'm not telling you how to feel. I'm telling you my view of the world: That last night's win means less to me than a win where the team had the better of play. Please, it's: Your an idiot. Take off. This is a curious confluence of debate. That goal was, to borrow a term, RIDICULOUS. Filthy. Somewhat insane. In part was it also lucky?** Sure. But that's sport. ** Skinner scored one the other night - against the Devils? - that was similarly crazy. He shot that thing through a keyhole (h/t to Bucky Gleason for providing me with that phrase when he was talking about Paddy Kane). That's not just meaninglessly lucky. That was also amazing.

I don't think that's a fair reading of my rejoinder. And I meant it sincerely. Let's consider the situation as it may reasonably be understood (inferentially): Gibby is a 50-something mid-career executive who wasn't abusing his privilege or his power. He's just a galoot who's recently divorced (that is a total guess on my part, btw (but a reasoned one)), he was feeling frisky, he's decades separated from the dating scene, and he came on too strong with a foxy young lady after he'd had a lot to drink. Ignorant behaviour, that's all. But what precisely was he ignorant of? Current social mores? Sure, maybe. But might he also have been operating in ignorance of how his position and status (which, I submit, bestow on him certain privileges and power) inevitably made his encounter with that young woman inappropriate and upsetting? I think maybe so.

I'm genuinely uncertain as to what your point is. Sure as shinola it does. I say that as someone who firmly believes that it starts with me. #CuetheMichaelJacksonSong More seriously, I think about this spoken-word song a lot. The whole yarn is terrific. The relevant part of the homily starts at around 3:50. The struggle is real. Ignorance of one's privilege and/or power, maybe.

Yes, let's get middle-aged white dudes to act better as a cohort without addressing how they deal with positions of privilege and power. Yes, let's.

Best I could do for a faux amazement, no s**t, Sherlock sort of reaction. (Btw: In your scenario, the offender lacks power over the person being harassed.)

It strikes me as utterly non-controversial to say that there's a fairly pervasive and persistent problem in the country with white male executives harassing female colleagues and subordinates. A tale as old as time, maybe. But Time's Up, motherpluckers.

I'm talking about the news report, which had a fair amount of detail regarding Gilbert's conduct. Is it? I'm asking. If someone says: I'll talk to you about this matter off the record because I don't want to suffer any personal consequences -- does that make the source's content off-limits for a reporter?

To some.

It's a new ad that has a very strong, overt #MeToo theme. Riffing off "the best a man can get", I guess -- telling men "look, we all need to be better." And, from what I can tell, there are a lotta dudes losing their ever-flipping minds over it. In this thread, I was mostly busting chops when I alluded to the ad.

I became disillusioned with Kim Pegula over a lot of the creative output from PSE. I still think that what she finds interesting or compelling is stuff that I largely find uninteresting or tired. OTOH, her apparent influence in creating a proper workplace environment is impressive. Full marks, there. I swear. That Gillette ad has white dudes all in a tither. Sure we do. His boorish and creepy behaviour was described in some detail in the report.

GIlbert knew precisely why he was going to Brick Bar. He had a room booked back at the Marriott, after all. Not for nothing: The original report from TBN had a statement from the one (716) server who said something about how she didn't want to say anything to management because she was concerned it would be ignored like it usually is (or as usually is the case -- something like that). It was a fairly vague quote or attribution. It wasn't clear whether she was just saying, "in general," she didn't think she'd be taken seriously (given how the world works, etc.), or whether there were issues with PSE specifically. In any case, that quote or statement from her is no longer in the article. Unchecked, unexamined privilege is a problem.

I'm talking about the fact that 2 SOG in the 3rd is generally a sign of a team that is not getting the better of play at the game's end. I'm talking about the fact that going 3 for 3 in the team's final 3 SOG is not a formula for long-term success. I'm talking about a desire to see the team's overall underlying metrics move in a positive direction (they've been fairly stuck in or around the same mediocre spot for months now). I'm talking about how a team that has those kind of positive metrics is getting the better of play and will tend to win more games than they lose (unless they're Carolina, I guess). But I think you knew all of that, more or less, and feigned ignorance of what I was talking about as a means of being dismissive of the point I was making. If I'm watching or attending a game, none of these kinds of issues affect my ability to enjoy the game in the moment. Like, if the Sabres pull off a relatively improbable win because the goalie stands on his head and the team gets a few bounces, I'm no less happy with the result. I didn't get to watch much of last night's game. So where, as here, I'm considering the game more from a numbers standpoint, certain issues and considerations come to mind. Why are you discussing facts? A win is a win.

Not all wins are equal though. (Yeah, yeah. “2 points.”)

I prefer wins that are reliably predictive of future wins, not a function of PDO.

Yeesh. Happy to learn of a win, but ... that’s not good.

What an idiot. Dude fritters away a stable gig with the local pro sports conglomerate for some Brick Bar lechery. Props to the male co-worker for sure. Way to be an ally.

This is a fair counterpoint -- that being in the AFC East has artificially inflated the Patriots' win totals. I don't doubt for a second that every NFL franchise pushes the envelope, as best they can, in terms of getting "competitive intelligence" on their opponents. My sense is that, as with all other facets of preparation, Belichick & Co. just do it ... better (and more) than everyone else.

Hmm. Eric Mangini was on the same podcast talking about how, among the remaining playoff teams, the thing about NE's defense (that can make it so difficult to deal with that at this time of year) is that the coaching staff is so intense and sophisticated that they can basically install a whole new defense from week to week -- not merely tweak what they've been doing.

That franchise's run of excellence is, I think, the most impressive and mind-boggling thing to have happened in modern American sports. I am sure there's an element of this that has to do with identifying good personnel. But I think this is more a function of (1) having a QB who has done and seen it all, processes on an extremely high level, and can therefore check to the right play, and get the ball out in a timely manner ... ... and (2) the coaching staff in NE works harder and better than any coaching staff in the league in terms of getting players taught and prepared. The Pardon My Take podcast had a NE alum on within the past year. I can't recall who. Someone who has been in many NFL locker rooms, buildings, etc. And he was unequivocal: A big part of NE's excellence is that they just work harder than other teams. And that extends to every part of the season and off-season. It's like a dirty, poorly kept secret that no one likes to talk about.

Must? Win? Let's go, Buffalo.

I don't disagree with the substance of these takes on Snoop. Nor do I have a problem with him, in the least. He's become a sanitized caricature of a persona he developed and perfected in the 90s. And it apparently pays to do it. More power to him. Btw, the Hollywood Squares thing is spot on. Snoop would be perfect there.

Hiring people that you know, people you have worked with before is SOP throughout the NFL. The trick is making wise choices regarding people with whom you've previously worked.