BarleyNY

It's what I have too. I've been very happy with it. I would go with a whole unit system next time largely for convenience and because I already have the Anova for vessel flexibility. If prices were vastly different I'd just get another Anova. I don't have a good recommendation as I hate mine. I owned it prior to the Anova and didn't know what I needed. I'd Recommend getting one with a wet/liquids setting so it doesn't mash your more delicate foods. Mine just has one mode and it crushes delicate food so I have to use ziplocks for that stuff.

Great read. Thanks for linking it. It does seem as though Rex and Whaley are relying on a much more old school approach overall. I see a lot of HCs and GMs going with what they know and are comfortable with - especially where high draft picks and high priced free agents are concerned. That's where their focus is. In those cases the analytics guys and scouts often get more say in lower round picks and lower tier FAs. I saw that repeatedly with the Browns, until this offseason.

Good on you, eball. Enjoy! And don't hesitate to ask questions in either a thread or PM.

The climate and existing kicker are fair distinctions between Buffalo and TB. But Barth only got a one year, vet minimum deal from NO. If that's the going rate for good kickers I'd argue that a first or second round draft pick plus a kicker about equivalent to Barth far outweighs the value of a kicker like Aguayo - even in a cold, windy city like Buffalo. Throwing out names of 1st round busts is irrelevant as there are plenty of 1st round game changers as well. The Bills could use an upgrade at K, but there's a lot of inexpensive opportunity to do that. Using a high draft pick for a marginal to negligible upgrade over that just doesn't make sense to me. Funny thing about 1st round pick Sebastian Janikowski. He's 22nd on the list.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2016/the-2nd-round-is-no-place-for-a-kicker This specifically addresses the impact of selecting Aguayo vs. sticking with Barth. For those who don't care to wade through it, the gist is that taking Aguayo in the second round was an awful use of the draft picks used to acquire him and that the difference between the performance of Barth and Aguayo is likely to be negligible.

I totally agree. I can't tell you how often I've been sitting around, having a few pre dinner drinks with friends and realize I forgot to do something. The sous vide takes the biggest issue of potentially screwing up the entree off the table. And it's hands off for the vast majority of time so I can do other stuff until I'm ready to sear and serve.

Yeah, the Bills have done what they needed to do to have room for a Gilmore extension now and TT next offseason. I won't start to worry about Gilmore's deal getting done until training camp starts. The Bills still have a lot of future cap space tied up in existing players. A Gilmore extension would move them into the top position in the league for future cap commitments. That means a lot of stability in the coming years as the current group of core players is going to stay largely intact. That's great from a growth and stability standpoint. It will, however, limit flexibility since cap dollars won't be available to do much in free agency. There's also some inherient risk in guaranteeing such a high percentage of many of the big contracts through front loading and guaranteed dollars. Those players have to stay relatively healthy and perform well because they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The coming off-seasons will likely look a lot like this one, especially if Taylor is deemed worthy of a big contract in 2017. If not, they can use those dollars for a FA QB for the long or short term. They've also got all of their day 1 and 2 draft picks available if they want to make a move for one in the 2017 draft. The roster has been built, with the possible exception of the hedge at QB. Now it's up to the coaches to get the players over the top.

( It translates to "under vacuum". It's a method of cooking where the food is sealed in bags with no air and cooked in a water bath. The equipment is very precise - to a 1/10th of a degree - and once up to temp the variation is only a small fraction of a degree if you use a lid. Mine doesn't vary by more than 1/10th of a degree. Precision is one advantage of sous vide cooking, but the biggest is that the target you're hitting moves very slowly. It's tough to mess up. You have to "sear in the rear" with sous vide though. You'll lose the crust if you sear first. It's funny. I was in a similar spot as you. I started smoking meats and charcoal grilling and found that I was using slow cook methods that are designed to emulate sous vide cooking. Amazingribs.com has a lot of good info for techniques and recipes for grilling and smoking. They actually refer to one method as "redneck sous vide". After doing that a few times I finally decided to just get a real one, which is way easier. Some of the cookers are full units with a bin built in and some are immersion types that you can put in a variety of vessels. I have an immersion. If I ever get a second one it'll be a complete unit. The complete unit is nice for general use, but if you are limited by the bin size. For the immersion I found that a pot isn't great because lid coverage is important. Plus I want to see what's happening inside. I almost always use a cambro with a lid I notched. If I had to do a huge batch of something I'd probably sacrifice a big styrofoam or igloo beer cooler (I've seen several people say they've done this and it's worked well). The most I packed into my cambro was about 7 pounds of burgers. Space was more the issue than the machine. It did fine. Water circulation was good although I did have to use a rib rack to keep them separated. I've had no issue with a half dozen good sized steaks and it could easily handle twice that for a dinner party. I like the cambro because I can store the Anova, torch and my notes in it. It travels easily that way. Here's a link that I learned a lot from (and plagiarized a bit to answer the steak doneness question). Great site in general too: http://www.seriouseats.com/2015/06/food-lab-complete-guide-to-sous-vide-steak.html

When a steak cooks several things can happen. The muscle fibrils tighten up which expels liquid. Fat and other connective tissue can also break down. At rare there is no chance for any fat rendering and the muscle is nearly raw. The muscle fibrils haven't had a chance to tighten up and have almost all of their liquid. The result is that they'll give the steak a slippery, wet, chewy texture. If it's a fatty cut there'll also be a waxy texture. Tenderloin is really the only cut that can handle rare. At medium rare the steak will still be red, but there will be some tightening of the muscle fibrils and expulsion of some liquid. That allows the fibrils to be easily cut when bitten rather than slip and slosh past each other like with a rare steak. That result is a very tender texture. Pretty much any steak can turns out well cooked medium rare. Tougher, fattier steaks like hangar or skirt do well up to medium. The color goes to rosy pink, the fibrils tighten further and there is more liquid lost, but the fatty marbling breaks down more. That adds richness, flavor and liquid to the meat. At medium well pretty much any steak takes on a grainy or cottony texture. Some of the fattiest cuts can fair decently, but most will be pretty dried out and tough. At well done the steak is pretty much leather. Personally I can't eat a rare steak. The texture makes me retch. Due to the inconsistency in cooking at most places I would order medium for fear of an undercooked medium rare piece of meat. The best steakhouses are reliable, but I wasn't eating many meals at places like that. Now, medium rare is the only way I eat a steak - mostly at home. If I eat out and don't trust the place to nail the steak I'll get something else. Higher temps do have their place though. I cook my steaks at 130, but brisket is another story. I always smoke it for 2 hours first. I've done the point at 176 for 24-36 hours before searing. The result was some great pulled brisket tacos. Still very moist and not overcooked at all. I've done flats for 48 hours at 130 and 140. The 130 was pinkish red and cut with a butter knife. The 140 was very light pink/brownish and cut with the side of the fork. I actually liked that one better as it was incredibly tender. Thanks. We've been talking about getting a 1/4 or splitting a 1/2 with friends. I've been researching farms that do that.

Dude, go buy yourself a sous vide cooker. You'll be shocked at how great a cook you can be. Once you dial in what you like it's almost totally idiot proof. My wife was way skeptical, but she's totally hooked now. My Anova retails for $199, but goes on sale regularly. Use a cambro, pot or igloo cooler for a cooking vessel and a charcoal grill or CI pan for searing and you're off and running. Oh, and you'll need some freezer ziplocks or a vacuum sealer. You've probably got everything you need but the cooker right now. You will not regret it. I've been hunting for quality steaks and other cuts of meat. If you've got access to Kobe or Waygu then don't hesitate on this. That sounds awesome.

Just like with hot sauce, IPAs and so many other things sometimes people take things too far for the wrong reasons. Medium rare is generally considered the best way to eat a steak, especially the leaner cuts. Fattier steaks can be better at medium and extremely tough, fatty, collagen heavy cuts of beef can require even higher temperatures be broken down properly. A filet mignon and a brisket point might both be beef, but they are very different things and need to be handled very differently. Also with traditional cooking methods it's difficult to get a steak properly cooked throughout. That often leads to a "medium rare" steak being nearly raw in the middle or way overcooked except in a narrow center band. That's where the sous vide comes in. It'll cook the steak perfectly every time. I wasn't a medium rare fan until I started using one. Now I love it that way.

My only issue with ziplock bags is that a few have leaked after being frozen. I make my own sausage in fairly big batches and always need to freeze a bunch. I need a new vacuum sealer for this. Mine doesn't have a variable vacuum setting so sausage, scallops and other easily squished food has gotten smushed. The ziplock bags work fine unless I need to freeze. My work around for the sausage is to freeze them in ziplocks and transfer them to vacuum bags while frozen before I thaw them to sous vide. Incidentally I've had superb results with sausages at 140 for 2 hours, then a quick sear.

His ceiling is very, very high. How close he can get to it is the question.

I've had few steaks out that are as good as what I can make myself at home. The best steakhouse I've been to is St. Elmo's in Indianapolis. Great cuts of beef that are cooked beautifully. I've not been to Black & Blue, but would like to try it sometime. The wife and I used to hit Jo Jo's regularly for drinks and snacking before it closed, but never made it next door. So here's what I recommend for a perfect medium rare steak. Buy a sous vide set up. I have the Anova immersion device and cook in a cambro that I notched out a hole in the lid for the Anova. I usually make filet mignon or other tenderloin steaks. Thicker is better so I try to get pieces in the 1.5" range. I season, bag and cook for 1 hour at 130F. Meanwhile I get my charcoal grill as hot as it can go with the coals right up against the grate. When the steaks come out I pat them dry and put a little bit of fat (butter) on them and quickly sear them on the open grill. About 1-2 min per side. Keep them moving and flip as needed. The point here is to get a crust, but not cook them any more. The higher the heat the better. No need to rest with the sous vide so plate immediately on pre warmed dishes or serving dish. You can also use a blazing hot pan instead of a charcoal grill. I do that sometimes, but I'd warn against using a gas grill. Even the infrared things don't work. Gas grills just don't get hot enough so getting a decent crust takes too long and the steaks cook. I tried it once and they came out med/medwell. Never again. If you use a pan don't try to cheat by putting oil or butter in it instead of on the meat. At the high heat needed it'll jump and spatter out. Put it on the meat. And open your windows and turn on your vent full blast. I routinely set off my smoke detectors when I pan sear. You can speed up and dial in the crusting process with a Searzall topped torch, but it isn't necessary. I usually use one for the pan, but not the grill.

I've been to Aro Tapas once and I'm interested in your opinion. Please post your thoughts.

I've never been to Oliver's, but you talking as if it's a good thing that the guy from there is involved gives me some hope. I've been to Creekview and it kinda sucks. Overpriced TJIFriday's level food with a very good location. I know it's the same guy, but if Oliver's is good maybe there's a chance for SEAR. That'd be nice because I do like the sound of dry aged waygu steaks.

That's a lot of "what ifs". There isn't much that can be done in regards to injuries once a player is acquired - sound conditioning programs, proper practice safety rules, etc. - and the rest is luck. The difference between drafting an injured player and drafting a healthy player is strictly in the valuation of the player as it pertains to draft capital. An injured player is (unsurprisingly) worth less than an uninjured one. That's why Myles Jack and Jaylon Smith went at the top of the second round instead of top 5 overall. Again, this isn't a criticism of Lawson, it's a criticism of the FO. Hopefully Lawson makes us all forget about the time he misses this season, but that doesn't mean picking him with a torn labrum at 19 was a smart move. It wasn't. But it could still work out in the long run. It's like a poker player drawing to an inside straight. Sure, sometimes it works out, but it's never a smart play and if he does it often enough it'll cost him.

The criticism of picking a player who had a high chance of missing part or all of his first season due to a pre-existing injury is valid. Some models of draft pick valuation consider the cost savings of a player on a rookie contract versus what an equivalent veteran would cost. The value portion of those contracts is for 4 seasons. The Bills are going to lose a portion of that value with Lawson, probably close to one full season - or 25% of his rookie contract value. He was at the end of the pick band that I had him in so I can't really give a bump for value at 19. Lawson at 19 is a mistake from that point of view. But those models use averages and variances. About 50% of the 1st round picks in this draft (every draft) will bust. So to your point, nobody will care about this missed season if he's a long terms stud for the Bills. I really liked Lawson as a player (injury aside) so I personally like his chances long term. We are all rooting for him to work out and become a difference maker. It is not fair to criticize Lawson for this situation or call him out as a bust. But the people and processes that led to taking him with a torn labrum at 19 do deserve scrutiny because even if they get away with it this time this kind of mismanagement will lead to problems at some point.

Texas has some extraordinarily business friendly laws and taxes. That's a huge driver. Houston is a terrible city from my experience. Other than money I don't know what could get me to think about moving there.

Lol. There you go.

I don't think you get how the numbering works......

No, outright assumptions are not necessary or helpful. But inferences can be made. We can look at what's known and fill in the blanks with reasonable accuracy. So, what do we know? We know that Rex guaranteed playoffs and a stellar defense to the fans last season, but we also know what a bombastic talker he is. It's reasonable to infer that he made some similar guarantee to the Pegulas. He obviously fell short on both counts. There are rumors of an ultimatum for Rex and Whaley - playoffs this season or else. I cringe at "ultimatum" here. Rumors often embellish facts so I take that with a grain of salt. Who freaking puts such an ultimatum in a memo anyway? And who gives it to a HC in his second season with the team? It'd really box in an owner, too. This isn't the Pegulas first rodeo either so I don't see such a mistake happening. Owners do have expectations for their organizations, however, and the playoffs for the Bills is certainly a reasonable one. I would be very disappointed in the Pegulas if they hadn't made it clear to Whaley and Rex that the playoffs are the expectation. I'd also be disappointed with them if they put themselves into a position where they would have no choice but to fire Ryan and Whaley if they missed the playoffs. Why would the Pegulas put themselves in position where they would be forced to fire Rex and Whaley if the team won 9 or 10 games and just missed the playoffs? That's not reasonable and I don't believe it. Are playoffs the expectation? Of course. Is ownership applying pressure to their GM and HC? Very likely in some fashion. Is there an outright ultimatum? Highly doubtful.

The discussion about CTE and football is now moving beyond the NFL, but it's been stalled for years by the league. The NFL has been attempting to influence government research as recently as this calendar year. And they're still fighting with their own, heavily biased research. It's awfully similar to the tobacco industry in that regard. And, yes, the NFL did settle some of the suits against them, but not all of them. They'll also have more exposure to further litigation from more recent players if they're found to be misrepresenting risks associated with playing football.

Part of the reason no one has a great understanding of CTE is that the NFL has suppressed accurate information on the subject. They've also advanced incorrect information about football and CTE and they've attempted to sidetrack and influence independent, unbiased research on the subject. So the NFL carries a lot of blame for the lack of understanding of CTE and its link to football. Fortunately there seems to be a push toward getting real, unbiased answers. At this time the logical response to a player worried about CTE is this: Football players are inflicted with CTE at a much higher level than the general public, so there is a correlation - and probably causality. We don't yet know the precise impact of playing football has on the risk of acquiring CTE. If we judge the impact of football on CTE by the actions of the NFL - who have gone to great lengths to obscure data and falsify research - we have to think it is severe. Right now the NFL is doing what the tobacco and lead industries did - they're trying to keep the debate centered on whether or not there is a problem. That is important because as long as that's the argument, they can avoid moving on to the next debate - which is what to do about it. Once everyone agrees there's a link between football and CTE, the NFL has to make changes (and possibly payout some settlement cash). They're kicking that can down the road as far as they can.

As the writer stated, it's the deception and continuing misrepresentation of risk that's the primary issue here. The huge smoking lawsuits were, in part, due to the tobacco companies denying the inherent risk of smoking. Those companies employed the same tactics as the NFL in denying the science. Notably, a big difference with tobacco was the addictive nature of nicotine. I've seen people's bodies broken down by a lifetime of jobs demanding physical labor. That's part of the reality of life. But people aren't free to make informed decisions about the risks inherient to those jobs when companies lie about them. It's one thing to go to work in an auto factory and know you're going to have aches and pains when you're older, but know it's worth it to provide a good life for your family. It's another to go to work in an auto foundry thinking the same thing, but wind up dead 25 years early because of the supposedly safe asbestos you were working with. I have several family members in the former category and one who died 5 years ago last week in the latter. This sort of thing has happened over and over in our country. Lead in paint and gasoline went through the same cycle of industry lies and faked science to maintain profits. That's where we are here with the NFL, although certainly on a much smaller scale population-wise. Players can make huge money and have a celebrity life playing football (though many don't) and that's certainly worth some degree of risk. But they deserve to have an honest accounting of what that risk is. The NFL is opening itself up to major liability by lying about those risks and that puts the game itself in jeopardy.