Black Shoe Diaries

What's worse is if you actually find that article...

It’s from The Wrap (presumably so named because it’s intended to wrap fish) and states in more than one place that police advised victims not to talk to the press – like that’s a bad thing. They try to make it out like it’s the same story about secretive culture (they interview one reporter who bitches about Penn State having closed practices – the horror!) but then in the final instance where they mention the police telling victims not to go shouting from the rooftops, they actually mention that it was PSP making that suggestion.

Thanks for the synopsis...

That way I can save them a page hit.

I’ve stopped going out of my way to read the same crap over-and-over… especially if it appears somewhere that I simply cannot justify supporting any longer (e.g., ESPN).

I'm not liking the

“Jerry Sandusky, a loyal lieutenant of Joe Paterno.” line much, either.

icavalera - February 21, 2012 reply

Yeah, I said the same thing to myself when I was reading that line.

Inappropriate line and could have said “former longtime defensive coordinator of PSU football, etc….” something along those lines could have been written instead. That line quoted above makes it seem like they were committing the abuse together or something. F’ing Reuters!

That Polk Award write up

is really stupid.

And really you should be ashamed

for posting it without further comment.

Great. Thanks.

Is he wrong?

Was it shoddy work on your part or do you agree with the sentiment expressed in the article? It was clearly one or the other.

BSM PSU 93 - February 21, 2012 reply

Can't it be both?

I don't agree with feeling "shamed"

but the 3rd paragraph of that quote does very little to support Ganim’s good work. Its just a statement of suspicion with no actual proof.

It is a summary...

much like the grand jury presentment. Which is to say that it summarizes things to the point that they are no longer truly an accurate representation of the facts that actually exist. Combine that with summarizing the “public’s feelings” and pitting it against PSU students and alumni, and it is as dishonest and inflammatory as outright lies.

Anybody got a bunny I can punch?

Sara Ganim probably deserves the award for actually hunting down parts of the story rather than regurgitating like just about every other media person out there (self-promotion aside)… but these paragraphs are insulting to the complexity of the stories she wrote and the entire reason she’s getting the award.

Things like this truly scare me.

I wonder how people can be so susceptible to dishonest information but then I think about the intellect of the average person. Then I realize that 1/2 the people in this country are dumber than that person and suddenly it makes sense. We really need to start educating people, because that is a terrifying thought.

Intelligence...

can be lumped right next to motivation.

Laziness and a lack of intelligence are what it is all about. Unfortunately, I think you only have to have one or the other to suffer from the disease called “ignorance.”

I'm not so sure it's all on the readers

There’s plenty of times I’ve read an article and later found out the “facts” reportered was just commentary or unsubstantiated sources. It’s not always so obvious and I’ve spoken with a number of “intelligent” people who were blind to the facts and not because they were dumb or lazy but because they were essentially lied to in articles.

"reportered"

Was that on purpose or did you just inadvertently come up with an awesome way to describe shoddy reporting in verb form?
/lawyered
/reportered
/used car salesmaned?

moosepsu - February 21, 2012 via Android app reply

Add "Joyner'd"

to the list, Moose.

As in, “My boss promised me a big bonus for Christmas, but I was Joyner’d — it was only $12.60 after taxes.”

Haha

…and it took him two months to scratch up the money. Meanwhile some random dude at your office swore one of the VPs told him everyone was getting a Saab.

moosepsu - February 21, 2012 via Android app reply

Yeah, except it was a

“sob”, not a Saab, story.

ha, no just bad spelling

from when I was altering what I had previously written.

I’m not denying there has been shoddy reporting, but I’m just tired of hearing people being called stupid just because they are not hunting down the supposed truth and facts of every single article they read.

It's bait

Need those 400 comment counts.

Cause those always end well.

It's all about the traffic...

who cares what bodies get burned in the insuing melee.

No one is ever going to be able to mention "IT" without the threat of the thread devolving.

Information Technology?

Depending on your industry, or IT department with your company, this may be true as well.

No

This. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_(1990_film)

Some people like car wrecks.

You ever seen Crash?

That movie contains some good acting, BUT...

Is real F#%ked up otherwise!!

James Spader did some weird as f--k movies..

ever see Secretary with Maggie Gyllenhall (sp?). WEIRD

Haha...very wierd...

HOWEVA’ it’s a great date movie (for those of you that are single out there). I never thought Maggie Gyllenhall was good looking and still don’t. But then I saw Sherrybaby http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0423169/

She is quite the woman in that one….

GREAT DATE MOVIE????

I’d like to meet the girls your dating

It was she who suggested it!

Hey I went to see THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST with a date, I am all about film! I try to keep an open mind as well

You probably made out

during Shindler’s List, didn’t you?

I recognize the Seinfeld episode reference, but no I did not...

Tons of making out was done afterwards though!!

So, you all should see that movie (Sherrybaby)

…since my sister wrote and directed it. And I was at the premiere.

Adam Collyer - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

Are you serious, Adam??

If so that is really cool. Many of the filming locations in Passaic & Paterson, NJ I’m familiar with because I don’t live that far away from those areas….

for real?

Yeah, he is...

Laurie Collyer is the director. Way cool man!

awesome AC!

Good luck to your sister Adam C., on her next film.

IMDB says that she is filming another one soon and it’s almost finished, I hope it is as good, or better as Sherrybaby! (which I liked).

Thanks! She's a remarkable person. Wish I had half of my sister's God given talent.

Excited to see what the latest project looks like.

Adam Collyer - February 21, 2012 reply

I tried it and it sucked?

jk man, very nifty.

really?

I saw it and really like it! I happen to be a fan of Maggie G’s work

letsgopsu - February 21, 2012 reply

My cousin was her daughter's nanny

Said that Maggie and Peter Sarsgard are pretty cool to work for.

lexi1031 - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

this comment is worthless without pics (Fixed)

Awesome....

She's not my favorite...

but I would not kick her out of bed for eating crackers.

Once I saw Sherrybaby...

I decided I wouldn’t kick her out of bed for eating a rack of BBQ ribs!!

checking this thread out at home, no wonder these pics wouldn't load at work

psualum9931 - February 22, 2012 reply

That movie started out pretty awesome

then the ending tried to get all sentimental and tender

Nothing says tenderness like a dead bug.

It's been a long time since I've watched it and I can't remember exactly

but it was near the end when they played some sappy sounding music and she had a narration of how he cleaned or kissed every scar and she told him every story and blah blah blah. Maybe it was meant to be funny, but I tuned out.

Never watched Sherrybaby so I’ve added it to my Netflix Instant Queue.

BUSTED.

Sports Journalism? Really?

I feel some heavy punishment coming my liver’s way.

thats where the major disconnect lies

that somehow jerry sandusky’s alleged child rape is a “sports story”

swiggy04 - February 21, 2012 reply

Unfortunately, College football is no longer

an entertaining escape from the nastier issues afflicting our society.

My reaction too

(until I got to the last paragraph, which just pissed me off)

It’s a crime story, and Ganim’s a crime reporter. She’s NOT a sports reporter. She deserves awards for breaking the story back in, you know, MARCH, but it didn’t become a sports story (rather than a crime story/college story/community story) until the GJ leaked and it was made into a sports story. I still disagree that it is a sports story.

Homeboy, you get no glory.

Since when do they hand out awards for

muckraking conspiracy theorists?

What do they get? A tinfoil trophy?

Kill, Kill, Kill Oh Crap Another 80-Yard Touchdown.

^^^ This. We will be saying this at some point this season.

From another thread but I'll post it again

I see the potential for a dumpster fire on defense and that terrifies me. What happens if LJ’s and Vandy’s techniques don’t fit or play well to what Roof is trying to do? Does he say, "Ok, these two have proven success for the last 10 years, I’ll listen to them" or does he say, "Look, I’m the DC, we’re going to do it my way" and then proceed to put square pegs in round holes?

I hope to be proven wrong but I have my concerns right now.

I really don't have any faith in him at all.

This.

I can either see this being an amazing boost, as we’ll finally see superior athletes let loose to their full potential. Can you imagine how well Bowman would have done in a Blitz heavy system?

Or we’ll see screen passes running for 40+ yards because it was dumped into the flat where the blitzing LB just vacated.

mvrck - February 21, 2012 reply

Well, if you play aggressive defense

that’s occasionally going to happen. But it’s the trade-off for not having to watch any competant OC with a passable QB (see Sanchez, Mark and Keenum, Case) pick us apart for four quarters while our corners play 15 off the LOS.

I've said it once

I’ll say it again. The defense did not lose that game to Houston. That was all on the offense.

Absolutely.

And if our defense didn’t play the way they did, it could have been much more lopsided. Their role isn’t just in preventing points, it also helps chew up clock, keeping us alive deeper into games.

I’m all for a more aggressive defensive scheme, but we don’t need to go from one extreme to the other. If we can get consistent pressure with our front 4, like we have been under LJ, we just need to tighten up our secondary. If we would have played tighter coverage against Houston and negated the quick passes off of 3 step drops, we would have given our front 4 time to put pressure on Keenum. We just need to have faith in our safeties that we won’t get beat deep.

Well there is no faith

We just need to have faith in our safeties that we won’t get beat deep

When they continue to get beat deep.

Which is why I wasn't too upset with our soft zone against Houston.

It was either 10-15 play drives that resulted in a field goal or give up 2-3 play drives that resulted in long TDs. I’ll choose the first option.

Didnt our defense get beat twice for touchdowns on long pass plays against Houston?

mjs2103 - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

One was because Astorino fell.

The first was due to bad coverage that we made an adjustment on and it didn’t happen again. (I think, it’s been awhile since I tried remembering all the specifics)

remembering what specifics?

what is this “Houston” game of which you all speak?

I'm going to get SubLime...

It sounds like you need a refresher on the difference between faith and knowledge.

Haha

Just saying that, while SWHA has a point, that point is moo because our safeties proved they were not capable of doing what was suggested. At least not in that particular game.

Gotta rec the moo point.

I completely agree.

The BBDB defense works great against a team that can’t throw the ball consistently. But when we get up against a consistent passer, you get USC and Houston. We made good adjustments in both games, but our offense just couldn’t hang with them.

I think we're on the same page

I just took exception to the remark that hinted at the defense being the reason we lost to Houston. (Which I know wasn’t said by you).

/fires up Madden '12

/calls punt block on every defensive snap

I remember

in the older Madden/NCAA games that this actually worked. I was unbeatable on NCAA 2003 in college because of the double LB blitz out of the Nickle package. I would run it almost every single play, after selecting one of the LB I’d just go right at the QB. My friends would get so mad because the O-line never picked it up.

Well if Jay was making plays on his Xbox

that explains our Oline play

My roommate

runs a defense in NCAA 12 where he blitzes 6 with zero coverage behind it (out of the nickel) and also brings the safety that is covering the back. Gets him about 10 sacks a game, on heisman difficulty

CMUWR12 - February 21, 2012 reply

Now that is impressive

Yeah

and he does all of that while playing as Middle Tennessee State…seriously

CMUWR12 - February 21, 2012 reply

But does he win?

Sounds like a high-risk, high-reward strategy. Does it pay off?

It pays off for him

he gives up big plays here and there, but I think he is in like year 6 of his dynasty and has only lost 1 or 2 games. He plays defense really aggressively, and usually gets a couple of turnovers per game, so that often offsets any big plays he gives up.

CMUWR12 - February 21, 2012 reply

I love blaming the offense...

because they usually deserve it, but let’s consider something.

If we have a competent offense (like actually a strength… gasp!… and I’m hoping BOB can get us there), then a more aggressive defense is going to fit much better. Why? We want our offense on the field, chewing up clock with drives and tiring out the other defense.

When you have an aggressive defense you either get the ball back quickly (3 and out the other team) or they score quickly (and again get the ball back quickly).

Obviously keeping points off the board is excellent, but it’s pretty clear to me that our defense was really exposed against teams that had good quarterbacks. We weren’t going to win those games without an offense anyway, but if we had been a bit more aggressive we might have created some turn overs and pressure that created mistakes rather than first-downs.

Bend-don’t-break works best when you know your offense isn’t very good and you just need to make sure you don’t get embarrassed and keep it close enough that maybe your offense can get luck… which is what it really felt like a few times this year (and every year we have a bad offense).

As long as the defense doesn't play reckless.

There’s a difference between increasing pressure and playing reckless. Our defense is solid, so we don’t need to be drastic. We do a great job of taking away the run and forcing the offense to beat us by passing. I don’t want to see too much pressure that it leaves us susceptible to weakening our rush defense. I want the focus to be on forcing more 3-and-outs and less on making big plays. If we can turn up the aggression on our 3rd down situations to end drives, I’m all for it. That doesn’t mean we need to do anything dramatic on every play and apply an all or nothing type of mentality. I’m not suggesting that is what Roof will bring, it’s just that we’re coming from such a conservative mentality that pretty much anything on the other side of the spectrum seems like reckless abandonment. Let’s focus on getting our offense improved. Once that happens, then we can adjust the defense to compliment the offense. No point in putting all our eggs in one basket.

We aren't that far apart on this.

I’d just rather see a bit more exciting a brand of football. Not because I don’t love PSU football the way it has been, but because I would really love to see us actually handle an opponent without wishing I could just have a coronary in the 4th quarter. Part of handling an opponent is getting their offense off the field and allowing our (hopefully improved) offense to light up the scoreboard. One definitely has to follow the other, but I think it’s safe to say we have enough athletes on both sides of the ball that it isn’t completely unrealistic to expect things to shift quickly.

I don’t mind “boring” PSU football, but that isn’t the way to the top of the polls either and it hasn’t been met with a lot of success again top 25 (and certainly not top 10) opponents lately.

Defense was pretty bad, but I think it was more surprising given that we expected bad offense

I thought it was a lack of pass rush, poor coverage by the linebackers and the secondary that was most egregious. Just a shitty game.

Yea, shitty game

Not saying the defense was blameless but when the offense had like 16 3 and outs to start the game. Never even gave them a chance.

Interesting

I didn’t know the definition of passable QB was to be an NFL starter in the near future or to own the NCAA record for Passing Yards and Passing TDs.

mancobob - February 21, 2012 reply

I think the point was that...

if we are going to compete regularly in the top 10 of college football and actually win those games we have to be able to regularly shut down offenses that are run by “NFL starters in the near future” and people that set passing records. Because in the top 10 of college football (and within the B1G) there are always a few QB’s who are stars.

If our goal is just pop into the top 25 a few weeks every season only to get torched by a legit top 10 team… we aren’t aiming high enough.

"Can you imagine how well Bowman would have done in a Blitz heavy system?"

Most of Bowman’s best plays came when he was lined up on the LOS and blitzed around the edge to hit the QB or tackle the RB for loss. There were games where he did this on at least 1/3rd of the plays. He was blitzed plenty.

PSUEnrg02 - February 21, 2012 reply

You sure you aren't thinking of Hodges?

Abosuletly. They did this a ton vs. OSU in 2008, for example.

PSUEnrg02 - February 21, 2012 reply

The problem as I see it is that Roof's style is going to be more aggressive, which now mirrors the front 7.

Bradley’s system was to let the front 7 do work, with an emphasis on getting pressure quickly, and then sit back. Roof is going to bump at the line, blitz from the corner, stuff the box with everyone, etc. Will we get burnt with the occasional 80-yard TD? yes. It will happen. But will we be more aggressive and hopefully not allow a pick-em-apart drive at the end of the game (or ever).

I see what you're saying

that the biggest change will be to the secondary and how they play. Which isn’t exactly a bad thing. Plus with the front 7 getting more aggressive, could potentially help create more havoc. I just know that it is the DC’s job to make sure all the parts fit together and if for some reason they don’t, which approach will he take? Only time will tell I suppose. I’ve been underwhelmed by him and his interviews but there’s probably a good reason I’m not a coach either.

It's Roof's job (and his ass if he fails) to make sure everything works together.

LJ, Vandy and Butler need to be trusted, but also organized under Roof’s system. He’s not an idiot; he’ll let these guys coach to theirs and the players’ strengths.

And as to OLDLION’s point, who commented while I was writing this, you’re spot on. Our secondary depth and talent is going to be sliding downward over the next couple of years, so there’s that. Could someone step up and be a world beater? Sure, but recruiting top end secondary talent HAS to be a priority ~~every~~ the next couple of years.

Despite my misgivings with Roof, I'm still willing to give him a chance....

Also because I do believe being a bit more aggressive can be beneficial. I loved TB, but sometimes I just didn’t think he was aggressive enough in his schemes. I am going to keep an open mind with Roof. But yes, JEFF I AGREE. Secondary is going to be huge in the recruiting field in coming years…

I'm hoping

that the new scheme will lead to better DB recruiting. It’s gotta be easier to sell the high-end guys on a scheme that more closely resembles what they’re doing in the NFL. It’s really not a secret that PSU hasn’t put out many pro-calibre DBs in recent years.

Who was the last one who played significant time in NFL...

That is a great question. Anyone know the answer??

Justin King

Oh yeah right..thanks jman

Wasn’t he getting burned last year for the Rams??

Well he had

47 solo tackles last season. 10 assists. 1 sack, 1 INT, and 5 passes defended according to profootballreference.

I don't know if he was getting "burned"

but I know a lot of Rams fans think he’d be a better safety than a corner.

Ok, so he isn't that bad...

And he is still relatively young so there is room for improvement. I just remember that whenever a Fantasy Football receiver of mine went up against the Rams, they would always talk about how terrible the Rams secondary is and that one should play that receiver against them.

But I’ve also read the same thing DrewRusse said, that he should be converted to Safety

If you look at

his game against the Ravens, you will probably think of toast…although he did better overall than that game.

I do agree with those that would convert him to Safety

He could be WAY better given his skills, DB may be too much for him…

He's a good

situational corner, useful for covering the opponents #3 receiver. Not so awesome against the #1’ and #2s.

Bryant Scott still playing for Buffalo

"still playing""

Did he actually get playing time last year BMan or is he warming the bench? I’m just curious….

starter, 4th on the team in tackles

couple ints, 1 sack

Cool...

Still got a lot of ability, I always liked Scott, he was a great player at PSU.

He also got moved

from CB in college to Safety in the NFL and is now playing outside linebacker. Was he a good DB at Penn State? Yes. In the NFL? Not so much, though he is a decent linebacker.

kflintosh - February 21, 2012 reply

He only played two games at OLB, due to an injury and went back to safety then

With an inexperienced secondary next year, this could lead to MANY 80 yard bombs...

While I also see what you are saying, some QBs could have huge games against us next year. I hope our secondary is great next year in man-to-man coverage.

Long passes are hard to complete...

and if a team wants to sell out everything on trying to get long balls on our guys, they hopefully won’t have the time to sit back there with a big rush on.

It’s all a balancing act is all I guess I’m saying. I could have lived with our defense giving up a couple of big plays each game if it also means they created a few turnovers in excellent field position for our offense.

I think an increase in pressure can be a great thing for our D.

It can help force teams to more 3-and-outs and hopefully cause some turnovers. I think the increased pressure is also the biggest gamble though because it potentially neutralizes our greatest strength on D which is our D-line and LBs. If we are getting burned by deep passes, it doesn’t give our line time to put pressure on the QB and wear down the O-line for domination later in the game. Don’t get me wrong, I think Roof’s style has potential, but we’ll have to wait and see if it’s an improvement over what we had. Especially if BOB can improve our offense, we might not need these dramatic changes on D.

If there's one thing that I think is great about an aggressive defense...

it is that the meatheads on defense (that is a term of endearment, honestly), love to blast QB’s and make tackles in the backfield. Defense has to be played aggressively to be fun.

Sure defenses don’t like to get toasted on a big play, but honestly I think sustained drives fray the nerves even more.

Thinking as a psychologist:

More plays during a sustained drive without a legit stop = that team is better than us, they are working us, and I’m getting tired.
One big play for a score = that team just got lucky (or player X just made a mistake) and that is not going to happen again.

The first conclusion saps motivation. The second has the defense come out next time aggressive and strong (and hopefully creating some havoc).

Sustained drives are not lucky and playing conservatively while you watch them pick you apart is not fun.

I understand the psychological perspective.

I still think our defensive scheme needs to be predicated on the offense’s success. If they are able to go score-for-score with the opponent, then I see no problem opening up our defense. If they’re still having trouble (which is a real possibility considering we’re going to have an inexperienced O-line and the QB problem of last year), going too aggressive will just put us out of the game sooner. I would much rather have some shot at winning a game (being down 2 scores going into the 4th quarter) under BBDB than having no shot going into the 4th quarter under a Roof-on-Fire defense.

Fair enough...

but do we really have a shot in most games when our offense only puts up 3 touchdowns worth of points against 4 opponents all season?

Or maybe I think I should attack this a different way. Is it more realistic to assume our offense can improve by 7 points a game? Or that our defense will allow 7 points more per game?

I think the balance of that equation favors the offense improving (can it get worse?). And, frankly, if the offense improves our defense starts to look better simply by cutting down the number of possessions in the ball game.

Imagine how godly our defense would have looked if we had ~~Oregon’s~~ USF’s offense…

Every team with 100 more yds/game than we averaged also averaged over 30 pts/game. That’s a 30-40th ranked offense for yds/game rather than a 95. At 30 pts. in our column our only loss is Wisconsin and most are still wins even if you give the other guys 2 TD’s or more. Also, you can bet Wiscy wouldn’t have put up 45 points if we had done better than 4-13 converting 3rd down and 12 first downs all game.

All I’m saying is, I can handle a more aggressive defense even if they give up one more touchdown per game to a long ball as long as they get a few turnovers in the process that helps our offense actually score some points.

Funny thing I noticed in looking at the stats above. Vanderbilt has nearly identical offensive stats to PSU for 2011, but Vanderbilt put up almost 7 more points per game against the great SEC defenses despite throwing 6 more INTs (point 1…on average I really don’t think the SEC is appreciably better and that bowls might go a different way if played in cold weather and in front of northern fans from time to time) .

What is the other difference? Vanderbilt’s defense had only 3 less sacks, but 5 more interceptions (19-14), 4 TD’s (to our none), and 190ish more total yards from interceptions. They allowed 798 plays vs. our 823 and gave up 31 TD’s to our 22 (most of the diff is in passing TD’s, so they got burnt a few times), and 25 more YPG.

That is the stats of a more aggressive secondary (without the athletes PSU has). They gave up 31 TD’s minus 4 INTs for TDs by the defense and minus about 13 more TD’s on offense (they scored 6 more points per game * 13 games). So their defense gave up 14 TD’s that weren’t offset by INT’s for touchdowns or for better scoring production from their offense (many of which pretty much have to be the result of better field position on certain drives since they threw more interceptions and had about the same number of yards/game). Our defense gave up 22 TD’s with nothing to offset. Even if you won’t grant VU’s defense credit for any of the 13 more TD’s that Vanderbilt produced, when all other offensive stats are similar, the comparison is 27-22 for TD’s allowed by the defenses. So PSU’s vaunted defense only did 5 touchdowns better than lowly Vanderbilt.

The only place this comparison falls apart is that Vanderbilt lost 3 more games than us, but they should have beaten Arkansas (a top 10 team that they gave a game they had won back to.. seriously, watch it… gift-wrapped), they took TN to overtime, and lost by 7 or less to GA, FL, and Cincinnati. Their big losses were #1 Alabama (34-0) and #9 SC (21-3), but we had worse losses. Their season could have been 9-4 just as easily as ours could have been 6-7… and most years we probably would both have had 7 or 8 wins.

TL;DR

We can afford to not be so good on defense as long as we are significantly better on offense… especially because a good offense will make our defense look better.

Oh, and, you might get burned being aggressive but you also create more turnovers and scoring chances for your offense. Finding an optimal balance means good things for your team and I think PSU’s balance has been a bit too conservative… in no small part due to our offensive woes.

We're completely on the same page.

I agree that if our offensive production picks up, I have no problem increasing the aggressiveness of our D. I love defensive plays, and seeing blitz packages and tighter coverage has the potential for much more exciting games. I want to see that happen first though before we increase the aggressiveness of our D.

It all rests on our offense’s ability to turn turnovers into points. Let’s say for every TD we give up, we get 2 turnovers (which I think is a generous estimate). If we can only convert turnovers to touchdowns 25% of the time, that means for every 7 points we get off a turnover, we give up 14 points. I know that this is a very simplistic example that doesn’t directly correlate to game time, however if we’re already having a problem keeping pace with the other team’s offense in terms of scoring, this only serves to put us further behind. Now if we are able to convert 50% of the turnovers to points, and the points we give up are offset by the points we get, then I’d say it’s a net win as our defense gets more rest and the opponent’s D gets more tired. It all just comes down to how successful we will be at scoring, especially off of turnovers. If we can’t score, there’s no point risking giving up more points for turnovers that won’t likely turn into points for us. It’ll just allow the opponent to get ahead quicker and take us out of the game earlier.

Also, don't forget we're in the B1G and not the SEC.

What I mean by that is in the B1G, you can absolutely dominate your opponent for 3 quarters and only be up by 14 points. In the SEC the margin is a lot higher. That’s why in the SEC it plays to your advantage to get turnovers, as you were likely giving up a score if you didn’t get one. That’s not necessarily true in the B1G. I want to see our defense play to keep us in games when we’re behind and shut down offenses when we’re ahead. Whatever schemes they use to do it are irrelevant if we can accomplish that. What I don’t want to see is a defense that focuses too much on turnovers instead of 3-and-outs. It’s great if we get a turnover, but it’s crucial that our primary outcome is on stopping drives. I want the minority of our opponents drives to fall in the TD or turnover categories and the majority to be straight up defensive stands. I think that is where the increased aggression can really help, but when you start getting into the TD vs. turnover trade-off, I think it’s gone a bit too far.

Rec'd

For this specific point: “I want to see our defense play to keep us in games when we’re behind and shut down offenses when we’re ahead. Whatever schemes they use to do it are irrelevant if we can accomplish that.”

I have ideas of what I’d like to see the defense do (and offense, and special teams), but if whatever they choose to do works and they can get it to work with kids who go to class and keep their noses clean, I’ll be happy if they switch to a defense of 11 DBs so long as it works.

kflintosh - February 22, 2012 reply

Well, maybe I'm an optimistic fool, but I think our offense

is going to be hotter right out of the gate. If for no other reason than nobody has tape on us and these guys seem to be excited by the changes.

And yes, the TD-to-turnover comparison is a bit simplistic, but I get your point. I would just like to throw this out there though… winning the turnover battle usually wins games.

And, as I said somewhere on BSD before, if you get torched long, they still have to pitch and catch the ball. How many times this season did we groan at long balls that our guys (should have) had and didn’t? Truly “explosive” plays are generally the minority.

I’m not complaining about our old defense, I just hope that people don’t start tearing the coaching staff apart if our defense is a little less dominant even though our offense is performing much better. I have a feeling as long as there are lot of W’s on the schedule at the end of the year nobody is really going to care.

BNittsDeMilo - February 23, 2012 reply

I just hope that his scheme

entices some secondary talent to PSU that would have otherwise scoffed at playing in PSU’s soft zone.

I also hope Roof is a good evaluator of talent and knows if his secondary is up for the challenge of being left on an island – and if it isn’t working he can adjust – but if it is working he sets phazers on kill.

Is there a metric

for long scoring plays given up vs. turnovers forced? I can live with occasional long scoring plays if we generate turnovers.

Yes, it's called the

“end-of-game score.” Teams that own the turnover ratio tend to win a whole lot more than they lose, even if their defense gives up a long scoring play or two.

Mostly teasing, Cville Lion. I don’t know of a separate metric that addresses your specific question.

No worries.

A “long scoring play or two” isn’t what I’m concerned about. Three or four on the other hand . . . :o)

I can handle giving up the big play.

Too many times, because of our anemic offense, the defense would allow the other team to have sustained drives, thereby keeping our D on the field for extended periods, which would cause the defense to get fatigued later in games.

I’m also looking forward to a more aggressive defense forcing more turnovers, giving us a shorter field.

If you look at the Roof interview, he said they want to pressure the QB, where he can’t sit in the pocket, pat the ball 2 or 3 times, and check down to his 3rd and 4th read.

While I hate the SEC, my wife has mentioned that when you watch SEC teams, they look soooo much faster and sharper than Big Ten teams. Maybe some of the staff with southern connections can get us that kind of OMG SEC speed.

Also, hopefully, BOB will bring a modern play book, where it’s not:

1. Throw deep incomplete on 1st down
2. Run up the middle on 2nd down for a 1 yard gain
3. On 3rd and 9 throw a 5-yard out or curl pattern.

I keep having flashbacks of Iowa 2008.

Iowa has 3rd and 7? Throw an easy eight yard out. Iowa has 3rd and 11? Throw an uncontested 12 yard pass.

And that's another one!!!!

Don't forget the phantom PI call

I’m not bitter.

/is still bitter.

ReddWhitenBlue - February 21, 2012 reply

No

Im still bitter. That one haunts me more than the UM game because if we had one that, I really do not see Florida or Oklahoma beating us and USC was absolutely the best team in the nation by the end of 08

won*

ReddWhitenBlue - February 21, 2012 reply

I think we'd get ripped by OU and do dece vs UF

ICEICETHATGUY13 - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

Well You know.......

Also, hopefully, BOB will bring a modern play book, where it’s not:

1. Throw deep incomplete on 1st down
2. Run up the middle on 2nd down for a 1 yard gain
3. On 3rd and 9 throw a 5-yard out or curl pattern.

GOTZ TO PLAY THE FEEELD POZITION GAMEEE PAWLLL!

The second down draw play after an incomplete first down pass . . .

It’s amazing how many times that actually works. I mean, Penn State runs that play what? — 70% of the time in that situation? That it works as often as it does has amazed me for forty years.

I feel like its one of those plays

that they know its coming, but still don’t believe it. The math could say Penn State does it 99.99% of the time, and the other team would still think they were going to throw.

It just won't be the same

if I can’t moan about the short-side sweep.

Don't worry

I’m sure BOB will have some tendencies that will drive us crazy. If not, I bet Roof does.

jman07 - February 22, 2012 reply

You say that now

Be a Steelers fan and watch their playoff game against Tebow and tell me how well you handle giving up the big play.

But seriously, the Steelers D is an agressive D that is quite the opposite of PSU’s. They have issues with teams driving down the field too, not so much because thy get nickle and dimed, but because after two great plays on 1st and 2nd down to force the other team into a 3rd and long, they let up a 15 yard pass.

I'll be truly OK with that one play

If I can have their 6 super bowls.

misdreavus79 - February 22, 2012 reply

Did anyone else

think of Alice’s Restaurant?

Nittanian - February 21, 2012 reply

Yes

Probably only the old farts.

blackjackfishtaco - February 21, 2012 reply

Ouch. Some of us younger folk know and appreciate Arlo Guthrie.

What if I know him but don't appreciate him?

blackjackfishtaco - February 21, 2012 reply

1/2 credit, I suppose. Ask me again if I get into academia.

Woodie also?

blackjackfishtaco - February 21, 2012 reply

Know who he is, but haven’t ever listened to him.

As you start looking

into Woodie, Pete Seeger, et. al., you start to realize the depth and breadth of this country’s folk music. It is really a bottomless well.

just a couple you probably have heard, maybe not

Bound for Glory (This Train)
House of the Rising Sun
This Land is Your Land, This Land is My Land

I always liked my version better..

this land is my land, this land ain’t your land
I’ve got a shotgun, and you ain’t got one
If you don’t get off my land, I’ll blow your head off
This land is private property.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I'm partial to

“Midnight Special” and “Stagolee”, but there are many other versions by other artists that are more popular.

House of the Rising Sun

has got to be one of the most covered songs of all time.

Free bird?

Summertime Blues?

That Jones article

Confirmed a lot of what I suspected/heard about the relationship between Roof and Chizik

OmarLittle - February 21, 2012 reply

Very fair article from Jones on Roof

I had zero respect for his coverage of Paterno and still do, but that was good stuff. His failures are easily explained away, and the guy has had some success.

I’m definitely one of the people who wanted a more attacking defense. I’ve seen PSU lose too many games due to the soft zone, without one clear, identifiable win it has given PSU since the ’86 Miami game.

What?

Did we beat OSU in 2005/8 by scoring 5 TDs in each game while I wasn’t paying attention?

I can think of about 8 games this year the defense definitely won for us.

mvrck - February 21, 2012 reply

You're missing the point

It’s that that PSU hasn’t won games while playing the soft zone, it’s that the soft zone in and of itself hasn’t won many since 86 Miami.

I'm not sure what coverage we were in,

but remember Darren Perry picking off ND in 1990 in South Bend. I don’t think we were going for broke on that defensive stand.

So, the point would be...

When we win, it’s not because of the “soft zone”; when we lose, it is because of the “soft zone.”

It just becomes more amplified in a loss

Because the “soft zone” is like the NFL prevent defense (which is a misnomer because it doesn’t prevent yards from being gained.) while it may stop points, a good offense can roll on a soft zone, like the prevent. That is why it is important to get pressure on the QB, and you can’t just rely on your front 4.

This whole "good offense" thing is tautological

“Good offenses” beat our defense when you define “good” as “someone that beat a PSU defense.” Just below this, we have the claim that Troy Smith and OSU in 2005 weren’t the kind of guys that would pick people apart. Yet in 2005, Smith completed 63% of his passes for 16 TDs and only 4 INTs.

Sometimes you lose games, and sometimes the other team’s offense is better than your defense.

Never thought OSU was a good offense that year...

And when I talk about “good offenses” I mean an offense like Oregon, Oklahoma State’s, our offense 1994, even Houston’s Offense this past year. I never thought that Ohio State team was great offensively. In fact, I bet they weren’t even top 50 in FBS that year…

Um...

They averaged 422 yards per game. We held them to 230, eventual National Champions Texas held them to 255. Feel free to peruse here: http://buckeyefansonly.com/2005.html

Ok, I was wrong, they did have a good offense that year.

OSU was better than I thought. But I still say that you have to be aggressive sometimes on Defense and always put some pressure on the QB. A softzone just allows QBs good or bad to hit open receivers and gain yards. And then even if they don’t score the first couple of times they will score a touchdown eventually.

You can’t allow any defense to just sit and allow a QB to dissect them. If you aren’t putting pressure on the QB with your front 4 you have to Blitz. I’m not saying you do this every down, but some aggressiveness is called for.

The net of it is,

I’d rather see us lose by leaving it all on the field (everyone is prepared to play at peak, the coaches have put together a solid game plan, etc., etc., etc. but the other team was better) than to get blasted because we played not to lose.

The “playing not to lose” is not directed at the previous regime — just a declaration that football is a game of controlled aggression, and should be played accordingly.

/End rant

Totally agree...

That is why it’s just common sense. You can’t always just depend on your athletes. Schemes come into play too, and it doesn’t hurt to be creative on defense every once in a while. Throw a blitz here and there…and make that QB jumpy!!

I know PSU played a conservative defense

but I think it was a little more varied than you are giving it credit for.

I loved TB as DC, but this was my problem with him.

Sometimes we were too conservative. That being said, this is where I have mixed feelings. I know we generally did do well defensively, but I also feel we could have been better by being more aggressive.

That last comment was fine

but I think many fans go way overboard and say some really dumbs tuff trying to make that legitimate point.

I see your point, FB and Lions 84 below.

As I said, I have mixed feelings. The only thing I am certain of is that we have to be a bit more aggressive on defense.

When it comes to last year, it was definitely the offense’s fault that we didn’t win more games. The defense played very well all year (except the last game when they clearly weren’t into it).

I share those mixed feelings.

Reminds me of the old story about the Pitt football player: A Pitt QB called and ordered a large pizza. The clerk asked, “Would you like that cut into eight slices or six?” The Pitt player said, “Better make it six; I don’t think I can eat eight slices.”

Point of that (tired) story is that, I fear there is a cosmic balance as it relates to football. Have a great defense? Prepare to endure a wretched offense. Have a great O? Be prepared to get into a scoring match with your opponent, because your defense will be horrible.

Please, guys, show me some teams with consistently great offense AND defense, so I can dream of a day when Penn State has both.

All I am saying is that

the defense has much further to drop, than it does to climb, if you look at rankings. There are a lot of “more agressive” defenses ranked below PSU over the last however many years than above them. Remember that.

Don't have time to phrase this well

but it seemed at times our defense relied too heavily on our one or two dominant players. Don’t get me wrong — our collective defenses have been consistently above-average to great, but there have been times when teams knew that Poz or Connor or Lavar was our number one weapon, and everyone else was a distant second. I think different schemes will help set up different challenges for the offense — whether we have a dominant player or not.

Sorta

I can think of a handful of losses due to the soft zone and only the soft zone. I can’t think of a win that could say the same.

I'll bite.

Which losses?

A few that come to mind

Notre Dame 06 — refs were bad too, but yeah, a Penn State team that was vastly more talented than ND got picked apart by Brady Quinn

Michigan State 07 — how do you blow a 17 point lead? Let the opposing QB nickel and dime you all the way down the field. Granted, going from “Morelli, throw!” to build the lead followed by a quarter and a half of nothing but runs and then asking Morelli to save the game late in the 4th didn’t help, but yeah, the soft zone lost that one.

USC Rose Bowl — Sanchez with time = death

Iowa 09 — Clark’s general failing against Iowa, in tandem with a costly Royster fumble, didn’t help, but a more aggressive defense wins that game.

Ohio State 10 — a game PSU had no business being in saw PSU with a double digit lead. Then we just let Pryor sit in the pocket, wait for the defense to break down, and run for 3rd and 8 upon 3rd and 8. A couple costly INTs inflated OSU"s MOV; they never would have had a lead with some pressure

Nebraska and Houston 11 — Martinez killed PSU with time, so did Keenum. A couple really bad calls / no calls hurt too

You say...

“the soft zone and only the soft zone” above and then qualify almost every example you come up with with comments about how our offense was detrimental at best.

Of those you didn’t qualify you need to remove Nebraska 11 from the list. Martinez’s stat line from that game is 13 of 26 for 143 yards and no TDs. That’s not a good day by a QB no matter how you cut it.

mancobob - February 21, 2012 reply

on the first point: yes, other things hurt too. In all of those games, a more aggressive defense wins. That’s why I said “the soft zone and only the soft zone.” It was sufficient for a loss in and of itself.

as to your second point: I realize his numbers aren’t good, but he made some clutch plays that he simply wouldn’t have made against more pressure in a very close game.

We held Nebraska to their (tied) lowest point total of the season

Seriously, the problem is that the offense can’t score.

what's your problem?

I never said the offense was good or even not terrible. I still say that a more agressive defensive scheme wins that game.

My problem:

The defense held Nebraska to their lowest point total of the season, and yet you identify the defensive scheme as the “only” reason we lost that game.

it is a convenient excuse

and nothing more.

You said "only the soft zone"

It’s kind of hard to believe you think the offense bears no responsibility for Nebraska and Houston ’11 — or do you think the defense is obliged to hold every offense we play under 14 points?

PSU 06 was not “vastly more talented” than ND 06 — at QB, for example, they had a below-average NFL starter, and we had an Arena League washout.

Iowa 09 featured defensive problems but it wasn’t “only the soft zone,” it was also the offense’s inability to convert TDs and predilection to turning the ball over.

In OSU 10, the problem wasn’t the scheme, it was losing Mauti, the final injury straw in our ability to stop anything in the middle of the field.

I clearly didn’t say that nothing else had any part in the loss. I said “only the soft zone” because it was sufficient, in and of itself, to generate losses in those games

We need to have a talk about what "only" means

Yes we do

I used it to mean in and of itself sufficient.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/only

Example of why "only" is a ridiculous word to use:

OSU 2010
Points scored by PSU Offense: 14
Points scored by OSU Defense: 14

So because the PSU Defense gave up ANY point to the OSU Offense they are the ONLY reason we lost that game.

mancobob - February 21, 2012 reply

Not much I can say except that I disagree, without getting into each game specifically.

And I don’t know that it gets us anywhere. I can’t see how you can say the defensive scheme is solely responsible for any of those. If you made me pick one where the real story of the game was not offensive failing, maybe you have something with Iowa 2009.

I also think it’s crazy then to not give them credit for the wins the defensive scheme led to such as (this season only): Temple, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, OSU. Let alone all the others throughout the years.

Its truthfully difficult to blame losses

on the defense because we usually have a championship caliber defense year in and year out. Its rare that we lose games 42-39 or something like that.

2010 was the only year I really thought our defense was terrible. We were like T-42 in pts/g. Lets not forgot either, that USC team was a freaking juggernaut. Most people said that they would’ve carved up either team in the championship game.

The only problem I have with the defense is that we don't often see

them simply shut down other teams. Sure BBDB doesn’t mean we shut them down, it means they go on longish drives only to be stopped without scoring, but we just don’t see our defense (at least not this season) win games for us by generating big turnovers that allow the offense awesome field position.

In order to be successful with a BBDB defense it HAS to be coupled with an offense that chews up the clock over a long field and then SCORES. If our offense does that, the most points we probably have to score to win every game this season is 25, because good offenses simply can’t score if they aren’t on the field and they are going to have lots of trouble with a nice fresh defense. When your offense can’t get a first down, BBDB still minimizes the scoring, but when you’re down in a game it doesn’t generate as many easy chances for your offense to get some momentum or to wear down the other defense a little bit.

It’s a two-way street… if PSU is more balanced next year, I’ll be happier… even if that means the defense regresses a little. More balanced means we won’t have to lean on one part of our team to bring home the wins and that if we are a bad match-up for a certain team, we might have another part of the team that’s a bit stronger that offsets it. The fact is, you’d be hard pressed to find a team that is more unbalanced than PSU last year. We were Top 10 for most defensive stats (even after the last couple of games) and we were 90-110 for most offensive stats. I think it makes us undervalue our defensive accomplishments and how lucky we were to even be in most of the games, but it also makes us overvalue them just because we seem to have gotten used to piss poor offense.

If our offense is up around 30 I think our defensive stats give Alabama a definite run for their money at the top spot in yards against and we finish in the hunt for the NC (’Bama’s offense was #30 in total yards and they won it). Yes, I understand we’re talking a jump of 60-70 spots… but all I’m saying is our D is legit… and I would trade some of that legitness if it means getting an offense that doesn’t suck. Both would obviously be better… which I suppose is everyone’s point… but we can still have a wildly successful team even if our D does slip a bit.

Thanks, BNitts.

This is the yin and yang I was trying to get to in my story about the Pitt QB and pizza.

I would think Iowa and Illinois this year

are examples of the defense winning the game for us the exact way you described you wish you would see.

Look at the QBs in those OSU games

Troy Smith and TP. Granted, Smith won the the Heisman, but he wasn’t the kind of guy who could drop back and pick you apart like Sanchez could. And we all know what and what not TP was capable of.

I don’t think it’s a “bad” defensive scheme per se, but I think it leaves a lot to be desired against a good passing attack.

I agree totally. A conventional pocket passer with time to throw can pick a soft zone apart.

How did we blow a 10 point lead AT HOME to Tom Brady and Michigan in 1999 with 2 minutes and 30 seconds left?

How did we lose to Minny the week before that?

We have the talent to be more aggressive, but the previous staff had this pathological fear of giving up the big play. The other team throws an 80-yard score? So the fuck what? Answer with your own scoring drive. You’re gonna get burned. This fear of the big play made me realize you can’t win if you’re afraid to lose.

How we lost to Minny the week before that:

LaVar got overaggressive and blew his assignment.

But that was a game that was in doubt from the start...

The game against Brady and Michigan, we should have never lost. I do agree with the point that we have to be more aggressive. Especially with blitzes.

I'm not sure that the Minnesota game was in doubt from the start.

Granted, I’ve tried to block it from my memory, but what I seem to recall is that we dominated that game early, then let them creep back in due in part to the BBDS defense and conservative play calling on offense.

icavalera - February 21, 2012 reply

My memory is hazy as well, but I thought we had a slim lead throughout..

And then Minnesota took the lead late in the 4th. But in any event, the game was closer than UMich 1999. In the UMich game against Brady, we had a 17 point lead at one point didn’t we?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/news/1999/11/13/michigan_pennstate_ap/

I know we were up 27-17 late in the game.

I don’t think we were ever up by 17, but my recollection is also hazy on this one.

icavalera - February 21, 2012 reply

You are right, and we were actually down that game as well in the beginning

We were down 10-0, came back and went up 27-17 late. So I was wrong. We may have had a 13 point lead but I’m not sure. The University of Minnesota game seemed much worse and tighter though, maybe because we were #1 and blew a game we should have won.

aw man

you had to bring up Minnesota in ’99

The "soft zone"

as you say psu used to run was really based on getting to the qb so he didn’t have a ton of time to throw. the qb having a ton of time to throw, being accurate, and the “soft zone” didn’t work well. when the defense worked weel, as in geting pressure, it could make eveng ood qbs like drew brees whither.

it really isn’t as bad of an idea as you are making it out to be, just because you didn’t like it.

After several interviews with BOB and Roof so far

I think that “multiple” is going to have to be a word for the drinking game. Add it with “Gameplan Offense”. Double the drink if they make it into “multiply” and use it incorrectly, as in:

"I think you’ve gotta be multiply aggressive."

Yes. This.

They will gameplan. It won't be the same plan for the last 40 years.

Defense, special teams, ball control. I’m sure they’ll get aggressive on D when they have to.

I think one advantage we will have this year will be the element of surprise. People can’t pull out any one 500 game plans and say “This is what Penn State is going to do.” The element of surprise might win us one or two games this year.

Yes This

I remember Pat FItzgerald saying that we were running some of the same plays as when he was playing back in the 90s. The thing is, is that sometimes we just had beeter athlets and the opposing teams just couldn’t stop us. But when we didn’t it wasn’t pretty.

Now, opposing defences will have no clue what we will be running, which makes me happy.

And that leads me to this thought....

If we don’t significantly improve on offense, I think it’s a bad sign. I think that should be one of the benchmarks in BO’B’s first season. I don’t think it’s unreasonable especially considering his pedigree. While I’m willing to give him a pass on wins/losses, recruiting, etc. for this year, I think some positives have to be established on the offensive side of the ball.

One thing that will help

Is that there will be 1 person calling all the plays, not 2 each with different ideologies. I mean when Fran was calling plays, we didn’t have this massive problem moving the ball and scoring points like we have been since he left. Now, 1 guy calling all plays, will hopefully make things more streamline and efficient. Also he will be on the sidelines, so he can talk to a player or two when they come off and make some adjustments on the fly.

I think that is a fair benchmark...

I can live with a rough season in the W-L’s and I can live with a little regression on defense (although I hope not to have that), but I cannot live with an offense that doesn’t at least start to climb the rankings in production. The bar is so low it will be practically inexcusable if he can’t get over it…

Yup, as I said, it's not a good sign if they don't improve offensively...

Then all our fears about this hire may be close to being realized…

The thing about football though

You don’t need a boatload of plays. If you execute the plays properly, the defense can know what is coming and still not be able to stop it. We may have been running the same plays but I wonder if Pat and his ’Cats were able to stop them?

I keep rereading the first excerpt

It reminds me why I am and will always be proud of my alma mater. Why I will always roll down the window when I see kids canning (even if they got me going the other way at the same intersection). Why I will give my (healthy) kids an extra long hug tonight. Thanks.

If I read the 3 planks of Roof's strategy correctly

Then we’ll see 9 guys in the box going after the ball carrier and QB, and 2 safeties lined up at the 5 yard line.

PSU Mudder - February 21, 2012 reply

Have you seen Ohio State's quarterbacks?

That could work

60% of the time

it works every time.

We should have done this vs Temple this year

ICEICETHATGUY13 - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

I'm taking the same approach I took when everybody was freaking about about BO'B being hired.

We haven’t given up any touchdowns yet, so I’ll give Roof a chance.

When we give up 5 touchdowns to Indiana/Iowa/, then we can talk about how horrible we’ll be on defense.

misdreavus79 - February 21, 2012 reply

Yeah, I second that.

That is why I am holding out. Ya never know, new conference and team. Maybe it starts to turn around for him.

Thanks for the free PR, CG.

Limited time offer: Everyone who reads the blog will get free beer and $148 BSD bucks!

the main page:
http://www.blognamedbrew.blogspot.com/

(disclaimer: by free beer, I mean not free beer)

FREE BEER?

Will it automagically come down the tubes?

SURE!

I guess.

You see, I missed

your disclaimer because you can’t expect any normal person to continue reading past the phrase ‘free beer’.

What does $148 BSD bucks buy these days??

Less than it used to.

Inflation is really eating away at the buying power of the BSD$ these days.

I now have Rocket Man stuck in my head.

Out of curiosity, what’s the beer you’ve liked the best so far?

Yes, I am also curious since I'm a beer fan myself...

I'll give you three:

My go-to every day favorite beer is Dale’s Pale Ale, by Oskar Blues in Colorado.

My best new beer so far (72 days in and counting) has been Anchorage Brewing’s Bitter Monk, a Belgian IPA. Didn’t review it, but their Love Buzz saison is amazing as well.

Something awesome but a bit more out of left field would be the Fantome Saison out of Belgium.

Love Anchorage's Bitter Monk!

I had it recently at Blind Tiger in Manhattan, phenomenal and one of the most unique IPA’s I’ve had. I haven’t had the others but will try them per your recommendations…

I'm partial to Belgian beers

and Anchorage puts out a mean, mean beer on par with the absolute best of the Belgian (or anywhere else) brewing world. Thankfully a few bars around me have bottles available.

I’m also on a sour ale kick, lately, so Duchess du Bourgogne and Blue Sunday Sour were winners.

There is a bar near me

That has 70 different bottled beers, don’t that much since it can get really expensive. But they are litterally from around the world. Have had some phenomenal beers, and some I had to chug since they were god awful.

There was one smoked beer, that I swear tasted like ring bologna, it was unique and I actually liked it.

You may have had a smoked porter

A few companies make it, Aries. It is different, but I also enjoy it. My favorite is this one:
http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/429/1769

http://www.porterspubeaston.com/beer.html

Probably what it is

Here is the list from the bar, it is 60, not 70. You can sign up with them and they track the differnt numbers you drank and when you drink them all they give you a nice mug and engrave your name on it, can either keep it there or tkae it home with you.

Next time you go

try the Ommegang Biere de Mars.

I will, if i haven't already

I really liked the Weihenstephan, was real good.

I'll have to check out this place sometime...

Sound like the place to hang in Easton, PA! I love the selection of brews

It a pretty cool place

Basically in the basement of a old house, real small the walls are made of stone, all original. Only problem is that on the weekends if you don’t get there early, you won’t get a seat and they have bands…again small space and loud music don’t really mix.

There is a second place like this not far from it, where they have tons of beers, and even now sell absinthe.

and sadly

I can’t stand any beer with “roasted”, “toasted”, “smoked” or “coffee” in the description, so by and large I don’t sample porters or stouts. Just can’t enjoy the flavor.

Just out of curiosity -

Do you like coffee? Or Oolong tea?

Negative on the coffee.

Never touch the stuff.

Tea, yes. Typically Prince of Wales tea, some Earl Grey or a mint tea mixed in.

Yeah, so that sounds about right

No wonder why you don’t like the porters or stouts. I am generally not a fan of the porters myself, but I love stouts…and I do like coffee.

The Duchess and the Blue Sunday I will try, I’ve seen it many times on Draft at the Blind TIger.

Just started getting into darker beers

I’m a big fan of the Atwater Vanilla Java Porter.

/ears perk up

That sounds like my deal.

One of the first porters I had the guts to try

Very very good and not all that heavy. Hint of vanilla with a coffee-ish finish. Highly recommend.

Yeah, I'm definitely going to look for that one...

Magic Hat tasting at Good ta Go Wednesday

worth stopping in

You guys are giving me some good places to check out

Next time I’m in H-burg. I’ll remember both of these places.

Good ta Go is in Chambersburg.

I’ve heard good things about Al’s and we are looking forward to trying.
GtG has 30 beers on tap, and they change as the kegs kick. Next week is Nugget Nectar tapping, can’t wait. hundreds to choose for mix a six to go

I know it's in Chambersburg,

A buddy of mine is in H-burg, not that far away, so I’d probably come from there…

If you come in the spring and summer

live music outside every friday 5-8, me about every 6 weeks.

It's a no brainer then...

I will be there!

I thought Al's was in

Reading (or in them there parts). I specifically recall having to take my own beer too.

I see you.

Also, Shady McGrady's.

They usually have 30+ craft beers on tap.

If you're trying vanilla porters

The Mrs. highly recommends Breckenridge Vanilla Porter.

Grovich does as well, but no one listens to him.

CRUCIAL INFORMATION.

Al’s of Hampden (across the river, in Enola) has both BVP and Southern Tier Creme Brulee stout on tap.

You don't say.

Both in Marci’s Top 25 for the year.

Next time I'm in the H-burg, I'll have to check this place out.

I like what I’m reading about it, definitely a place to try…

I'll be going there for dinner before the Hot Tuna show at the Whiticker Center on 3/3

was recommended to me by a guy from chambersburg. Wife and I will try the white pizza and I’ll have some good beer.

I like that one.

Haven't heard of that one, but would love to try it!

Just tried Dale's

for the first time on Friday. It wasn’t too bad. Wasn’t sure what to expect with it but I might be able to get used to drinking it if I needed.

Dale's is one of my favorite tap beers at the local spot.

It is also good in the can at tailgates since you can’t take bottles.

You try the Old Setter Red

or whatever it’s called? I thought that was pretty good.

Also a very good canned beer-

21st Amendment Brew Free or Die IPA. But not a very good tailgate beer – your day will end early.

That is some of the best stuff on earth….

It's the raw ingredient in Snapple?

I wish it were....

Then I’d drink a lot of Snapple!!

Have any of you beer heads

tried Founders Dirty Bastard?

A six is sitting in my beer fridge having a staredown with me. So far it’s winning.

Yup, it's good....

Pretty malty and complex if I remember, was almost too much for me..but left me with a nice feeling!

I just had one not 5 minutes ago!

But I am at work so it didn’t count.

Would love to have one right now...

But if I went home with beer on my breath, the girlfriend wouldn’t be pleased. So I have to avoid the temptation tonight….

That's why they make gum...

And why I date a girl who works at a brewery and gets me free homebrewing ingredients…

Your girlfriend sounds hot.

On bowling night last week

my buddy Drew said he has to drink at least two beers becasue if he doesn’t come home stinking like beer and bowling, she gets suspicious about what he was up to.

Sara Ganim is only 24-years-old?

Huh.

Bob Sacamano - February 21, 2012 reply

again mandatory

not really as exciting as I hoped it would be:

She looks older than 24

/a shame.

Covering IT for months has to take a toll on a person's soul.

This is what I thought of her...

Um, a little harsh?

Face is a little too manly for me...just sayin'

you could

hold a polish wedding underneath that snowzer too.

Am I the only one

That thinks, that picture is fake? The face just looks like it is made of plastic. I mean has anyonere here actually meet Sarah? Does she actually exist in this realm of existence?

If it's fake then I take the picture back and the comment above back

But c’mon you have to admit in that picture, she does have some masculine features…

She does have a prominent chin

But the look around the eyes and nose, just does not look natural to me. It seriously looks photoshopped or something. Perhaps she is a robot, out of the Twilight Zone.

I think it's just a bad screen capture.

And maybe copious amounts of makeup for a TV interview.

Yes on both counts

That still puts her

what, well above the 99th percentile for a newspaper reporter?

M1EK - February 21, 2012 reply

True, there's usually a good

reason THESE people are hiding out in newspapers and radio (rather than reading the news where you can view them).

I present The Patriot News Football Video Podcasts to back my argument.

I would say that's only partially true.

Newspaper reporters often do it because they love the print medium as opposed to video or audio.

Radio journalists, however… well… it’s a little truer there. There’s a reason for the phrase, “a face made for radio.”

says the guy who is on TV

are any of your forcasts on YouTube

letsgopsu - February 21, 2012 reply

They sure are.

Just a matter of finding them. If you search my name, they pop right up. Just don’t keep it to my last name only, that stupid guard from Stanford is quickly taking over those search results. Who even watches football, anyway.

I'm afraid it really is her.

She looks somewhat better in motion, but the overall package is still the same.

Still like my idea that she doesn't actually exist

Just a few people compiling all of her articles, like the rumors of Shakespeare.

Then my comment stands....

“IT’S A MAAANNN, BABY!!”

She does bear a resemblance to Jake Gyllenhaal...

/thread goes full circle

Well playes Sir.

UNCIVIL!!

Maggie is prettier than her, I say.

Didn't see your post before I posted below.

I think it’s too much softening with portrait software. Looks wax-like.

I watched the School of Communications' live feed of a discussion panel

after IT happened. From that angle, she seemed pretty.

And Adam Shell met her at Joe’s procession, he said she was hot. FWIW.

She looks ok to me

I’d hit it. But my standards are dangerously low.

here's a more natural picture.

mind you I was trying to do you all a favor and get you the best looking one:

Ok, this is much better...

If I could actually take away Austin Powers “It’s a maann baby” photo above I would. She definitely isn’t bad and that first picture was definitely photoshopped…

And I do think she is prettier than Maggie G.

So I hope you all are happy now!!

She's............

pretty attractive. She looks like she had about ten TV cameras on her in the picture further up #ifyaknowwhatimean

Too much Photoshop on that pic.

That’s not a slam at her looks. I mean somebody really over-applied the portrait skin retouch. Unless that’s a wax figure from Madame Tussauds museum.

I know this is asking a lot but

is there anyway we can get a weekday does of “Succes with Hyperlinking” It is a great lunchtime read for on everything PSU. I know that might be a lot to ask and I understand there is not that much information everyday, but this is one of my favorite parts.

jetskijoe - February 21, 2012 reply

We'll work on it. News is tough to come by, but we'll look harder.

Thanks

I know it gets better when the season is going on and more information is available. Thanks for taking my request.

jetskijoe - February 21, 2012 reply

Well.

Yeah. Why don't ya!

You need more minions.

NOW ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS FOR MINIONS.

I wonder if Graham Spanier has found work yet?

I mean, the skill set for a lackey has to translate to being a minion…

What's this?

Oh, it’s just the internet you won today.

+1, good sir.

Not true.

A lackey merely has to kiss ass, whereas a minion is sometimes called upon to do real work. For minion, see Igor in “Young Frankenstein.”

Eh, I'd disagree.

There’s a higher degree of boot-licking involved with being a lackey, but performing menial tasks (picking up dry cleaning, serving as cannon fodder, running a university) is a core job function of both positions.

Raquetball at Rec Hall

bbpennstate10 - February 21, 2012 reply

True Story

My brother when going to PSU, was playing raquetball and Spanier walkes in and challenges my brother and the guy he is play to a doubles. Well here Spanier brings in this amazing chick as basically a ringer and destroys my brother for like 3 games.

Brother still a bit pissed about those games, and wanted a rematch, 1 on 1, never got it though.

Tell your bro to find the chick

for the rematch. To heck with Spanier!

I heard he used to do the same thing with IM Racquetball

He wasn’t a slouch, but he’d pair up with a ringer from somewhere on the faculty who was like a world-class player.

I ran into him with a girl I think they were trying to get get to come to PSU to play racquetball for whatever reason, and I started up some small talk with him and ended up getting challenged by the girl who was visit. Got smoked. By a high school girl. My proudest moment.

Well look at it this way

it wasn’t the first time, and it probably wont be the last.

skarocksoi - February 22, 2012 reply

Getting smoked by a high school girl?

Please tell me she was 18.

I will apply

Where do I sent massive amounts of material for you to not give me an interview.

/looking for job for many years, gets my cynical

With grammar like that...

you seem tailor-made to write for w-b’s blog (when he gets one).

Clearly not my strong suit

Also a bit lazy.

Count me as one of those that favors an aggressive D

Is hooks like Concy & Vandy use it to make up for offensive lulls (and lol’s {Okay, terrible joke})
We might have to do that too this year

ICEICETHATGUY13 - February 21, 2012 via mobile reply

Question about THON:

Has anyone attempted to write a book about it? I’m thinking that a book chronicling everything that goes into it would be a pretty impressive compilation. It seems that there is so much that goes in to it all year round that doesn’t really get recognized but that is instrumental in driving $10.6 million. I’m just wondering because these are the types of books that are featured daily on talk shows, which would help bring a lot more attention to THON. 2 hours after they announced the total, I did a search for THON in the news, and the only newspaper I found covering it outside of Central PA was the Malaysian Star featuring an AP story.

It would be a long book.

When you say “everything” what do you mean? Everything on the administrative level— committees and overalls— or everything like… everything? I’m head of an organization that tops at around 20 people and I could still write 20 pages on our involvement, and another 10 on our plans for the future.

dwf5095 - February 21, 2012 reply

Maybe like a picaresque?

Thon Quixote?

Succss With Honor Always - February 22, 2012 reply

That would be pretty cool.

I thought about setting up a site where people could submit their best canning stories.

dwf5095 - February 21, 2012 reply

Actually,

they do sell the Diamond Guides at THON. Don’t those count as THON books?

dwf5095 - February 21, 2012 reply

I was thinking more along the lines of featured components.

The book could narrate the 46 hours of THON, and introduce particular people and discuss their role in the bigger picture outside of the 46 hours. Use the dance marathon component to segue between different people and their personal stories so that the beginning chapters could focus on the people who help organize it from the beginning and then transition through the book to different donation efforts and ultimately to the children and families themselves. Obviously it couldn’t cover every specific of the event, but I think using the joy and commitment of the dance marathon itself to incorporate the work and stories behind the scenes that you never really get to see could be very interesting. I’m just thinking of ways to get THON some national support, plus all proceeds from the book could go directly to THON. It wouldn’t be much, but every little bit counts, especially if the book would get featured on a talk show close to the event

I would buy it.

There are so many incredible stories throughout THON— you meet the greatest people through this effort.

dwf5095 - February 22, 2012 reply

WPSU is filming a full length documentary for it

They have been filming our meetings for the last 2 years along with all of the THON events. Looks to be a pretty good documentary, coming out in the fall. Google THON documentary “For the Kids” and you can watch a trailer.

psubach2013 - February 22, 2012 reply

Agressive x Agressive = ROOFIED!

Vegas won't even set a line on how many Roof puns we'll go through this season.

They won't?

Tear the Roof off that mother.

I haven't looked, I truss you on this.

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2012/2/16/2803126/bend-but-dont-break-is-over-what-will-roof-bring#

There's no ceiling on that number.

Paige2PSU - February 21, 2012 reply

lots of this

letsgopsu - February 21, 2012 reply

Please note:

You are in violation of my patent:

On Feb 16?

It was well in the BSD Public Domain by then. Sorry TS.

By the way, by patent I assumed you meant copyright or trademark.

Because, you know, patent?

Tell that to Apple.

mvrck - February 21, 2012 reply

ALL THREE

Now pay me my money.

1. Ted Roof joke
2. ?
3. PROFIT

It may have been in the public domain, but I was the first to pass it through the BSD patent office. ALL MINE.

As a patent attorney I get sad when people don't know anything about my nerd job.

:(

dont be sad

I’m an electrical engineer and nobody knows anything about my nerd job either.

…Ok, maybe you can go ahead and get sad.

No don't be sad,

I’m a college professor and nobody really knows anything about my nerd job – they just think they do. LOL!

Paige2PSU - February 21, 2012 reply

WBF

I spent some time on TESS earlier today so I know something about your nerd job. And that is: I can’t look up what you do on TESS.

Smee - February 21, 2012 reply

I am a college adjunct proff

And no one cares what I do, at all.

Tell people what I do and what I teach, usually get “don’t like those subjects at all” or “oh I hated those classes in school”

Really makes me want to wake up in the morning.

You teach geography, right, Aries?

People not understanding the importance of geography and its impact on civilization hopefully go no further up the management chain than “assistant to the third-shift french fry cook.”

Too many people out there think they can get a degree in underwater basket-weaving and then walk into a $100K a year job. More chlorine in the gene pool, please.

I have to know geography or I look like a total asshole.

Not good to point to a something and call it something completely wrong, i.e. pointing at South Dakota and calling it Kansas.

So, is the capital of Kentucky pronounced

“Loo-ee-ville” or Loo-ess-ville"?

Neither

Its pronounced “Loo-ville”

Actually, it's pronounced

“Frankfort.”

See, Aries, what fun geography can be?

All wrong

It is actually pronounced “poo”, strange place.

In reality, it is a much better place than some places around the world that I know of, that are out of the way and you have to be crazy as hell to live there. I like finding things like this out to tell students to they can atleast learn some stupid facts every now and then.

I've been told by the locals it's

either Loo-ville or Lul-ville.

Weirdos.

MainLion - February 21, 2012 reply

"It's spelled Throop, but the H is silent"

Also, how do you pronounce Nuangola?

letsgopsu - February 22, 2012 reply

Well, as already mentioned, it's actually Frankfurt.

But if we’re talking about Louisville, it’s “LOO-uh-vll” but the “uh” and the “vll” kinda get mushed together.

DAMMIT!

Trick question!

Sorry, TS, was looking to

build up Aries by reinforcing the importance of geography.

Thanks

I didn’t even really think about that question. Good thing I didn’t respond, would have looked like a real idiot.

AriesGD - February 22, 2012 reply

If you can pronounce the capital of South Dakota correctly

I’ll be somewhat impressed

SCsprinter13 - February 21, 2012 reply

It's pronounced "who cares."

South Dakota sucks.

Pee-Air

Oh, you mean "Peer"?

Yeah

I think someone decided to pronounce it that way to be able to tell foreigners from the locals

kind of like how Dubois messed me up when I moved here.

SCsprinter13 - February 21, 2012 reply

Ugh...

Remember back when Dubois was the punchline of Michael Jackson jokes?

I only made the mistake once in my Weather Communications class

and I was swiftly corrected.

Like Cairo, Illinois,

which is pronounced “Kare-oh” instead of “Ky-ro” as in Egypt . . . .

Silly people.

Not just Cairo...

Vie-enna (Vienna)

My-luhn (Milan)

Da-plane (okay, maybe not)

or All-Bainey Georgia

which is simply spelled Albany

letsgopsu - February 22, 2012 reply

Yeah try telling

A student at 8 am that and see their reaction. Even when I randomly have conversatiojns with people elsewhere they are still tell me that they hated geography, and history and even try and tell me it was useless for them to take the classes.

I change the subject before my hands start to hurt and be covered in some red sticky stuff.

I hear you, Aries, but if

you reach just one kid, who knows what s/he will do with that knowledge? Do the people at Google Maps hate geography? I had a great geo class at State, and it really helped my history minor.

Keep teaching — you will find a receptive audience!

Yes

1 student will be able to say that Africa is a continent not a country, I wish I was joking about that. So many think Africa is a country. /sigh.

I read once that many people don’t know Delaware is a state

letsgopsu - February 22, 2012 reply

Everybody knows Delaware is a county.

Duh…

A really small county...

where people like to shop and gamble but not pay taxes… so that people who actually work here have to pay them all (grumble-grumble-tax-season-grumble).

BNittsDeMilo - February 23, 2012 reply

A lot of people also think New Mexico

is part of Mexico.

icavalera - February 22, 2012 reply

You mean it's not?!?!?

If it makes you feel any better Aries...

I’m a psychologist… and I study how people learn to navigate and use maps. In the process I taught myself to use GIS to analyze human behavior…

So, I’m sort of a geography geek to. At least enough to have given a talk about applications of GIS for understanding how humans behave. I actually thought about getting a master’s in GIS from the PSU World Campus… maybe once I get a job from PSU and can take it for cheap :)

Look at how terrible people are at estimating the heading/distance of the pink cross while standing at the green cross…

BNittsDeMilo - February 22, 2012 reply

To be fair...

The range to the mean center is within maybe 25 m of the actual obelisk location (so off maybe 10%) and on average people thought it was due east where actually it’s slightly south (easily forgiven with the cockeyed layout of the street grid).

So while very few people got an accurate estimate on their own, overall they came up with a pretty good approximation.

Using the scale at the bottom,

it sure seems to me like the mean center is about 100 m from the actual obelisk location. That’s 1/3rd of how far they are from the obelisk itself. No one was able to make any guesses that were closer than 25 m. Overall their approximation is nowhere near what you would hope it’d be given the relatively small distances that are involved here.

dbl5030 - February 22, 2012 reply

Even if we feel the group did pretty good

(and this trial is not the worst of them, it’s actually the shortest estimate they made), the individual variance is amazingly huge. The yellow circle is 1 standard deviation… and it almost includes the location they were standing on while covering an area probably half the size of the park we were in (Centennial Park in Nashville… if you’ve ever seen the Parthenon).

These people were doing this from the memory of having walked the dotted path on the map (that wasn’t clear before). People using a map which included a scale (but not having walked the path) were actually worse on average at making both the heading and distance estimates. That, frankly, blew my mind. Using a map scale is one of the first things people are taught in geography (I thought) so I actually was worried those estimates would be too good for my purposes.

As a psychology guy I’m mostly interested in explaining the individual variability. But one interesting thing about the group (and something that would not be easy to see without GIS) is that the locations were systematically shifted right or left depending on the shape of the paths. The path we took follows the dark spot on the map (lake) in an arc that turns to the right starting at the green cross. Participants on this trial were pretty close on distance as a group but shifted the landmark almost 20 degrees counter-clockwise. In other words, they straightened the path out in their head.

BNittsDeMilo - February 22, 2012 reply

...and that's why I shouldn't drink before 6:30 a.m.

Seriously – I honestly believed what I typed this morning.

I don't hate geography,

in fact I wish I knew the subject better. I never had a geography class and because I moved around so much, I only had American History and Civics in HS. So on trivia nights I’m always weak on Geography, World Cities, etc.

Paige2PSU - February 22, 2012 reply

Fun Fact

Uzbekistan and Lichtenstein are the only two double-landlocked countries (ie, completely surrounded by landlocked countries) in the world.

From personal experience, this is an extremely handy fact to know for trivia nights.

dbl5030 - February 22, 2012 reply

Thanks!

Did not know that!

Paige2PSU - February 22, 2012 reply

I think you might be wrong

Of course I will be sitting in my office tomorrow tearing over my maps to prove you wrong.

AriesGD - February 22, 2012 reply

You can't spell "geek"

without double “e”.

I'm excited and having a celebratory after work beer

My Induced Test consol I designed arrived today from the company that built it and we can start testing our 150 kva transformers for Force Provider (tent cities)!
It is pretty cool too!

Can I get one for my house, BMAN?

Our power was out for about 12 hours starting at 9:30 Sunday evening.

Will this power a hot tub

at my tailgate?

it needs its own power source, actually two.

It will step up 208v, 400 hz to 350v+ then it has meters to monitor volts and current on all three phases. All for a 17 second test.

That's all away over my head.

Just need some juice to run a hot tub.

Your stupid job

Why does the kind of shoes you wear mean anything about the kind of attorneying you do?

M1EK - February 21, 2012 reply

Shiny make him feel good?

You have no sole, M1EK.

/Sticks tongue out.

Who hires an attorney with non-shiny shoes?

What if this guy had something to say about that?

Patent Attorney?

That has to be as enjoyable as being a statistician.

Or as Todd Snider says, “74 percent of all statisticians truly hate their fuckin job.”

I like it! Honestly!

Since one of the hats I repeatedly wear is a statistician and I have a graduate minor in stat.

I can assure you that what most statisticians hate is that no one else seems to really care about the right answer… just the one they want to hear from you.

That whole, “there’s lies, damned lies, and statistics” thing. Well it’s only partly true. There’s lies, damned lies, and liars who pretend to use statistics.

80% of your post is lies.

Yeah, but that's not nearly as interesting as the lyrics

to Todd Snider’s song.

Unless you can make what you said rhyme, and put it to music.

P.S. Just kidding BNitts,

and giving you a bit of a hard time. I hated stat class, but recognize the value of solid data.

I've got a thicker skin than that anyway, but I assumed as much.

But you did inspire me to rhyme. I prefer to rap it… only because I never thought I’d rap about statistics…

Statistics gotta be realistic
Can’t believe the mystics
Who write crazy shit with a bic stic
And hang out their little limp dick
Pretending like it’s all the shit
We’ve all seen this flick
There’s nothing there behind it

With this post

You just jumped a few echelons in the Must Read Commentariat Heirarchy.

jtothep - February 23, 2012 reply

I've actually taken some Intellectual Property courses

I just sensed that the commentariat would respond to patent more quickly than a simple copyright.

Hey, Tailgate Shogun,

I see you’re COMPLETELY lacking any beer from Wisconsin on that list (And there’s an Upper Michigan brewery that makes some pretty good beer). I can send you out a couple brews if you want. I can’t even count the number of Wisconsin beers that I see in the stores around here.

Beer, cheese, and brats. That really is all this state does. I didn’t believe it until I moved here.

Sprecher Special Amber!!

Awesome Wisconsin beer, had it when I was in Chicago a couple of years back

I have yet to have this one.

I’m slowly working my across the state with beer, one make-your-own-six-pack at a time from Woodman’s.

Well, in my defense

I do still have 290 days to go, but you are correct – there’s been a complete lack of Wisconsin beers. Definitely expect to include New Glarus, as I’ve had their stuff before (and it’s sensational). Stevens Point as well.

However, the whole point of the adventure is to turn up some new and interesting products. Bring ’em on!

If you’re serious, and if you can send me some, I’d be happy to trade from my collection or just send you some cash. Send me a PM or look me up through twitter/the site.

Oh, New Glarus is delicious.

And there’s this brewing company called Miller, I don’t know if you’ve heard of them. (kidding). The beer from the UP is from a brewery called the Keweenaw Brewing Company. They make a blonde, a bunch of ales, and a stout. They’re all very good though.

I’d love to send some/trade some. I’ll get a hold of you on Twitter or a less public forum to discuss the details!

One you should try

A Greensboro, NC brew called Red Oak. A nice lager type beer. Was really good, and highly enjoyed it, can’t get it anywhere here in PA, but down there was everywhere and tasty.

Were you here when they built the distillery near Gibsonville?

(Just to the east of Greensboro.)

The one where

They had the restaurant attached, like near Gilford College? Tried to go there once, but was closed, not sure for good or not.

http://redoakbrewery.com/contact.php

They built a whole new facility on the east side of Greensboro.

Heading towards Burlington. Address is technically in Whitsett, if you know where that is.

Never saw that one,

Must have been done after I left the area. The only actual Red oak place I tried to go to was the Red Oak Brew Pub, but I think it was closed. Was in West Greensboro, I think near Gilford College, as I alluded to.

AriesGD - February 22, 2012 reply

Was in NC

In October, definitely sampled a number of local beers, but don’t recall Red Oak. Will look for it on my next trip. Thanks!

Wife and I don't drink alcohol,

but will chat with you guys about bringing some cases of Red Oak if we get to HV for the BW game. (Assuming there is a BSD tailgate.)

Better be

I was going to try and get something going closer to it, like an open thread, to see who was all going so we can set something up.