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

I've posted about wine rankings before.  I even went through some training on how to rate wines using Parker's point scale.  Now, Parker forgot more about wine than I'll ever know, but his "system" to me is rather strange and anyone who chooses some wine because it got 92 points and another only got 90 is missing a point rather badly.  And anything he rates 95 and up almost certainly is tres cher and meant to be aged a while.  The other weird thing is he hardly ever goes below about 82, so really it's a 18 point scale and a point can be deducted because of clarity, for example.

My own ranking scale is simple and relates to whether I'd buy it again, and how much.  A really nice wine at a good price means I'd buy a case, that is a plus.

CD's Wine Scale

UGH pour it out
OK but I wouldn't buy any
OK I'd buy one bottle
I'd buy a case
I'd buy multiple cases.

Yeah, the issue with a scale like that is that frankly anything below an 82 probably shouldn't even be marketed for sale. Unless he's giving 82s to Boone's Strawberry Farm stuff, which I'm guessing he deigns to be below him to even rate. 

The homebrew judging scale gives you a lot more room, because there are some things that will be submitted to a homebrew competition that are just flat out awful. It's a 50-point scale:

• Outstanding (45 - 50): World-class example of style. 
• Excellent (38 - 44): Exemplifies style well, requires minor fine-tuning. 
• Very Good (30 - 37): Generally within style parameters, some minor flaws. 
• Good (21 - 29): Misses the mark on style and/or minor flaws. 
• Fair (14 - 20): Off flavors/aromas or major style deficiencies. Unpleasant. 
• Problematic (00 - 13): Major off flavors and aromas dominate. Hard to drink.

Unless it's absolutely atrocious, judges are usually asked not to give anything 13 or below, because it's borderline cruel--although I'd argue it's borderline cruel to submit that to a judging lol. 

But you VERY rarely see anything 45 or higher. In fact, seeing anything above 40 means you've made a superb beer. I've placed in competitions or advanced to the second round in a national competition with scores in the high 30s. If you can get into the 30s at all, it means that it's a beer those judges would probably happily drink multiple pints of. 

What was interesting is that I did an experiment with another brewer where I brewed one large batch of a beer, and then we split it into two fermenters. I have fermentation temp control capability, and he did not. The goal was to identify using one single variable (temp control) and determine how important it was. We submitted to multiple guys from the homebrew club, some of whom were certified judges. The control (mine) had scores of 39, 40, 35, and 41. The non-controlled (his) from the same judges in order had scores of 32, 29, 26, and 36. I suspect they were judging a bit leniently, but it was stark to see how much a single variable changed it. 

The good UT fans like yourself, Burny, and Hooky said at the time it would be nuts to take the ball away from your best player. I remember you guys posting about this.

The media and casual fans did not take that position at all.

Casual fans didn't care one way or the other.  Like I said, the "Vince Young to WR" was an invention entirely of the mediots, and also a common message board talking point of racists in our rivals' fan bases.  The aggies actually nicknamed him "Radio" and commonly used that slur on their message boards.  Really upstanding folks, those guys...

This score is achieved through a blind tasting, usually by sommeliers and experts, and consider factors such as:

• Wine appearance
• Aromas
• Finish
• Flavors
• Balance
• Aging

I was looking for the rating score card and couldn't find it, we had them for our "training".   I recall that "nose" was worth 5 points and then "bouquet" was also worth a separate 5 points.  The difference was explained but I forget now.  Clarity was 5 points.  So, a wine with an indifferent nose and bouquet and clarity could lose 3-4-5 points just on that alone.  Flavor was ten points, so maybe it hung a 10 on flavor, but got cut for rather ancillary reasons (clarity can be important).  I dimly recall aging meant whether it was worthy of aging.  That's a tough one, an expensive wine drunk too young can be rather harsh and tannic, maybe the pros can see through that for age worthiness.  But most of us buy a wine and drink it within a month or so, I have a few laid down for later, but not many.  And I tend to age them too long anyway because there never seems to be a time to drink such an expensive wine.

I did this for my 50th birthday, we opened a bottle of 1966 Lafite I had for years.  The cork disintegrated and the wine was past its prime.

Butyric acid, or butanoic acid, in German is "butter sauer", which is what you smell in bad milk.

The worst thing I ever smelled was 1,4-butanedithiol, it would be a hellacious crowd control substance.

That four carbon chainlength often smells really bad.

So in '05, what changed for VY as a passer?  Did Brown just let go of the reins?  A 35 point passer rating bump is pretty massive.
All the way to the end of '04, he was kind of like a cheeser video game QB:  he was most effective as a scrambler and only passed really as a change-up.

new WRs?  New TEs?  New o-coordinator?  new QB coach?

O-line pass pro improvement?