Official IF Romar Steps Down Who Do You Hire if You are Pool Boy Thread

CokeGreaterThanPepsi

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Tequilla

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Pepsi is more dialed in

RoadDawg55

Sark wasn't getting fired. He wasn't getting an extension either. He was getting a sixth year.

ThomasFremont

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Argue the % all you want. He wasn't firing Sark.

Gladstone

RoadDawg55 said:

Sark wasn't getting fired. He wasn't getting an extension either. He was getting a sixth year.

Citation needed.

Gladstone

ThomasFremont said:

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Argue the % all you want. He wasn't firing Sark.

Citation needed.

ThomasFremont

Gladstone said:

ThomasFremont said:

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Argue the % all you want. He wasn't firing Sark.

Citation needed.

Disagree.

FreeChavez

ThomasFremont said:

Gladstone said:

ThomasFremont said:

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

ThomasFremont said:

Tequilla said:

Not sure why you say it was a foregone conclusion that Pool Boy wasn't going to fire Sark. There does not appear to be much evidence publically that he worked hard to refute the efforts of Pat Haden FS. I definitely agree that it would have been more likely than not that he would have retained him ... but it was a % that was greater than 0 ... and perhaps far greater than 0.

The O/U is 5%

It was over 5%

Argue the % all you want. He wasn't firing Sark.

Citation needed.

Disagree.

Obviously none of you do this for a living