Did you read the review?

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Her editor shouldn’t have let that piece run, regardless of how the restaurateur behaved. If she wanted to write about the ban and previous review and how their readers wouldn’t get an official review due to the immaturity of the owner, sure. She shouldn’t have officially reviewed food…

Of course not. Food that is smuggled out shouldn’t be used as a basis for a review of the restaurant in the first place. It’s wildly unprofessional and inaccurate. The fact that she wrote glowingly about cold, napkin food calls into question her palate; her choice to publish the review calls into question her ethics…

This here is the essence of what’s wrong with jobs where tips are practically the whole wage. If you go get your car fixed and the shop screws something up, you don’t get to dock the wages of the service technician whose fault it was. You lodge a complaint with the manager of the shop and he deals with you. If this…

The publication could have had someone else eat at and review the restaurant if it wanted to properly review it. Or, she could have put on a disguise and sneaked in. Eating morsels of food smuggled out in napkins is incredibly unprofessional. How could I trust her opinions (admittedly, mostly good about the food) when…

Fair enough, and I’ll concede the point before we devolve into pedantry. I’ll say though, that I’ve never had brown butter fried croutons until I started cooking professionally and it’s really incomparable to the typical baked variety. Give ‘em a try when you have 30 minutes to spare some day.

Those croutons are amateur hour. The best method is the one Drew described - cube stale bread, combine oil and butter in your pan until it starts foaming, then add bread + seasonings and continuously stir until golden brown. Drain the croutons, check for final seasoning, add grated parm if desired. Frying the bread…

Are you being intentionally obtuse? Everyone arguing that this sucked isn’t saying the rules were applied incorrectly. We’re saying the rules governing instant replay review suck as written.

Because the intent of the play from Virginia’s POV was to poke the ball away, stop the fast break and allow their defense to get set. They were 100% okay with the ball going out on them. The call was just, even if it was technically wrong. The overturn was technically right, though it didn’t really feel particularly…

Replays in football are worded such that they should only be overturned if it was obvious mistake and I’m not sure if this rule exists in the NCAA but it should. If the ball bounced off his calf and the ref somehow initially missed it and ruled it for Texas Tech, then it would be a good play to overturn because of it…

The game is played and experienced in real time, and in real time, this call is off the defender 100% of the time. It’s not like the ball bounced off the offensive player’s calf on its way out or he reached out in a desperate attempt to save it and smacked it. It was a bang-bang play where the defender poked it out of…

Took me two reads. I initially read it in Trump’s voice, then I noticed the grammar issues before I realized the joke. Bravo!

This article is more of a critique of main stream sports media than it is of Kraft. Of course an old, Trump-supporting billionaire who owns an NFL franchise will issue that limp dick non-apology apology. And he would be shocked and appalled if you didn’t believe his good word!

It’s possible (likely, imo) that initially, Davis and Rich Paul spoke with Demps privately to request a trade. If you think about it, it does them no good to go public without trying to find a compromise first because spitefulness is a lose-lose situation, which is what happened in reality.

Did this guy emulate McVay’s hair and beard style after he was hired or was he hired because he had McVay’s preferred look?

Is this worse than Irsay’s DUI with prescription pills? I say no. Irsay was suspended six games and fined $500K and I bet Kraft will get something similar.

Why is Davis letting the Pelicans know his intention of not re-signing bad for the Pelicans? If anything, this was a benefit because they could at least get SOME value for him before his contract ran out and he left for free. Obviously the best case scenario for the Pels is that he stays, but since that is definitely…

The problem with that line is his value declines by the day. What was 1.5 years of Davis is now merely one year. And he has neatly boxed in the Pelicans by publicly naming the teams with which he’d be willing to sign a new contract. He even used his father to badmouth the Celtics in a very obvious ploy.

Agree with most of your points, but I think AD wanted to get to his new situation ASAP, rather than play out another year for a team he knows he doesn’t want to re-sign with. Also, there’d be the inevitable drama of him not signing a supermax extension, will he or won’t he opt out of his player option, blah blah blah.

There’s no such thing as “full market value” on a player with one year remaining on his contract. He will be 27 years old when his contract runs out; most teams can absolutely wait it out and hope to lure him in free agency. The only teams who desperately want him now are teams with an aging super star and teams that…