header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Rankings ... ugh

 (Read 86983 times)

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25589
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2170 on: May 17, 2024, 11:08:04 AM »
They missed a number of big brands in that taste test.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13139
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2171 on: May 17, 2024, 03:30:05 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWT0kl1k32M

Each state's top dish ranked against each other. 

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72302
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2172 on: May 17, 2024, 05:22:32 PM »
They missed a number of big brands in that taste test.
I'm sure they did.  I surmise they tasted the hotdog with nothing on it.  Anyway, it's another pretty useless ranking.  I think individuals are pretty capable of forming their own personal opinions taking things like cost into account.  I formed mine obviously.

I've noted before, some rankings can be of value when the topic is something beyond what an individual could do on his own and where the ranking criteria are explained and it's not entirely subjective.  Take "Best Place to Retire", someone might read that ranking and spot a location that sounds interesting, maybe it's Number 10 on the list.  So, they visit and find it does suit them.  Great.

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13139
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2173 on: May 17, 2024, 07:03:29 PM »
I'm sure they did.  I surmise they tasted the hotdog with nothing on it.  Anyway, it's another pretty useless ranking.  I think individuals are pretty capable of forming their own personal opinions taking things like cost into account.  
It is very unlikely that I would ever buy 18 kinds of hot dogs to compare against each other

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 72302
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2174 on: May 17, 2024, 07:07:03 PM »
Over time, folks try things often as not, or they can. 


GopherRock

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2447
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2176 on: Today at 04:01:39 PM »
Nathan's hot dogs eaten in New York are better than the ones sold elsewhere. 

Raw onions on hot dogs/sausages > fried onions on hot dogs/sausage 


MarqHusker

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 5522
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2178 on: Today at 05:13:03 PM »

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13139
  • Liked:
Re: Rankings ... ugh
« Reply #2179 on: Today at 06:10:24 PM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWT0kl1k32M

Each state's top dish ranked against each other.
This was pretty interesting though a 27 minute youtube video is a commitment. But I was duty at work so I had some downtime.

The put each states dish in tiers then ranked the ones in the top tier. The overall winner was Oklahoma with the onion smash burger, which edged Illinois and their Italian beef sandwich. 

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.