and I started talking about it, I experienced this still, what it was, avoid them. And that's how we got this session. So, for those of you that are interested, really long URL, not that false. But here's a shortcut. These are some of the things that we felt were the most common, yeah. Yeah. These are the things that we felt were most common and it's not like, well, they're the most common for us. We've been doing it for a hundred years. But for clients who are either new to Drupal or trying to get the most out of Drupal, these were some real challenges, you know, multisites. There's a terrific pull from multisites for efficiencies and lots of different reasons and discoveries, so easy to skip because subject matter experts know their subject so well, right? So, but this is not so much about the pitfalls as how to avoid them because what we really do is put together a list, but we really can't anticipate when you are going to encounter these. Handy dandy road signs are difficult to come by. And, you know, we talked about these pitfalls specifically because of their inexorable quality, right? They have a way of sneaking up on us. Constraints prevent us from steering clear of them. Time, scope, budget sometimes force us in our projects to take risks and pull us in closer than we really are comfortable with being. So what do we do? What we figured out through our conversations with one another and our staff is that we needed and we usually employed early warning systems in our projects and that our practice that had evolved over time. Early warning systems come in different shapes and sizes, but they are systems. Now, neither, none of us have the luxury of having a fully functional character programmed in multiple technologies as data was, but he's still an early warning system and he had certain sensitivities. His character was written to have certain sensitivities that the next generation could rely upon to ward them away from danger before it got too catastrophic. We don't have data, but we do have early warning systems. We've had them for a long time. Miners used to bring canaries into the coal mines to warn them of dangerous gases, right? So the concept of an early warning system is one that we're very familiar with. Yeah, so, and we can't really bring a canary onto a Drupal project and it might be very sweet, but they wouldn't be a very good early warning system, right? And we don't have this guy as much as we'd like him, right? So what do we have? What's a more common analogy or metaphor for an early warning system? Ever notice how your crash test dummies on television are always the most talkative, right? And of course they're getting banged around and the purpose of a crash test dummy is really to prevent worse injuries as the concept of harm reduction. They are a type of early warning system and they ask lots of questions. They're very talkative. So where we're going with this is a concept of early warning systems or personas. And this is not something that I think is really very intuitive for us on our teams. You know, we wanna have folks ask lots of questions in front of the client? Asking lots of questions, that gets a little scary sometimes because we're supposed to be the folks that know the answers, right? And if you're a client and you have a vendor that asks a lot of questions, you might say, well, why are they asking so many questions, aren't they? The ones that are supposed to know the answers? Personas will be different people at different times. They might be a developer, a designer, they're pretty much concerned. They're trying to conversation with a client and they're telling you about a migration they have to deal with and you just have to ignore stuff like that. It's not a question for a reason. And the question is, do you need to be able to answer during that phase? Don't. If into those details you discover that it's something far more complex than you realize, then that's something that bites you and then chances are, that's something that requires additional work and you have to pay attention to that and you're concerned that, you know, a low level person in a project you will bring up, maybe there's a content editor or a standing comment. And all the people in the room are like, oh, who cares? That's just so-and-so being dressed and you might just be in a feature or something like change of the heart or it's just giving you a very small insight into maybe a problem that's that person knows about that you might want to dive into the ego, right? They're asking these questions and they're pointing out these different things. Don't ignore that stuff. Don't assume people ask you the questions.  And sometimes there's essentially a line of inquiry that may resemble one thing at the beginning upon the first question and then may evolve into something else a few questions later. And if you shut that process down at the beginning, you don't get to realize the potential value of those questions. Implicit in this equation is that you have some system, some persona, some processes asking and some system, some process, some persona listening and analyzing and thinking these things through. And we developed this particularly because we didn't want to put anyone in a position of we wanted to develop something authentic, right? So we have in our projects, the limitations, the famous iron triangle of time, scope and budget. It wouldn't be fair to come and present a solution that involved you moving any one of those three points. Your limitations are what they are, right? The only time any one of those can move is when there's a real authentic reason. So we had to develop a way of avoiding these pitfalls that could function within your time, your budget and your scope requirements. And really what we came to after talking to enough folks was that this is something that had to become a habit within our teams and each member of the team had to internalize it and support it and embrace. And we developed this and then the first time we gave this session was at the Drupal Camp New Jersey at the beginning of the year and we had one of our most awesome staff members, Marias Boyanova who's a program director at FFW and used to be a project manager. And we gave the presentation and she came up to us afterwards and she says, I'm the crash test dog! Because she recognized it immediately because Maria is famous for always asking questions and always zeroing in on it. So what we thought we would do is go through each of these pitfalls and sort of have like a call and response, what you might listen for and some questions that you might ask. And what we thought we'd do is we'd run through the list really quickly and then time permitting, go back and have some kind of discussion. We're a big group but I think we can still have a discussion about how you might approach these different pitfalls. So the idea is to develop sensitivities to the pitfalls that we listed at the beginning of the session. And then furthering that, if you buy into this idea of an early warning system, what you wanna do is you wanna develop your own list of pitfalls. Maybe you'll have some in common. Maybe you'll have some that are special for your service organization or for your university, your university, your enterprise, your small business. And they'll be, you'll have a particular set of pitfalls based upon your strengths and your weaknesses. So the idea is to take this concept, internalize it, customize it and make it resonate and be relevant for everyone. So you're ready to go through each of the 10 pitfalls, put our crash test dummy and our canary to work. Mistake number one, planning without performing a thorough discovery. Who's never done that? Skipping discovery is really bad, okay? It's been really easy because you're working all the time with folks that know your stuff. They know their stuff, that's what they do all the time. But we forget things, we lose track of things. There are things that different stakeholders care about, that others care less about. So never, ever, ever skip discovery. You're kind of, they tend to know their system and their people, so they're very kind. And so everybody knows that discovery is so important. So everybody in this room is gonna have a discovery in the next project. You know you're headed for a pitfall if when in the middle of that discovery, someone asks, where is so-and-so? Shouldn't they be here? And then, of course you've budgeted for three days or three weeks for discovery on site.  You track the fact that your stakeholder wasn't around the table. It's an early warning sign. Hold the marketing on the site only at the top. Never happened? Neglecting the content audit, often a part of discovery, often bigger than the discovery itself, right? Depending upon the size and scope of the project. Who would ever ignore a content audit? No problem. We know what it can give us, how much trouble it can get us in if we don't pay attention. But you know you're headed for a pitfall if I thought that this might ring true for some folks, right? Well, what are you gonna do with those PDFs and how many of them are there? What's in them and can it be structured? Do you want it to be a web page or do you want it to live forever as a PDF? I'm old school. The same used to be free the bound to periodicals and issue the important to you and me. PDFs, how do they live? Are they gonna be searchable? What's gonna happen? Who's gonna break them down? Who's gonna do that work? Oh, just a couple of PDFs turns out to be thousands and thousands of pages. You have a really good one on this. This is like an entire session. So, each accrete, sometimes get it wrong in the sense that they think about what it is. We all understand a scope of work. We wanna find comes to you and want conditions to that scope of work. And so, I decided I wanted to also add this to that. And that's what we're already affecting for a particular future. If you make assumptions about what something's gonna do, you and maybe a project manager can really make assumptions about what this future's gonna do. So, you make all this wasn't exactly what I thought it was gonna be. Now, you're sitting there negotiating with the client trying to fix it, trying to get them exactly what they want. Paying attention to the query, they're asking questions like, I brought up earlier, a developer saying, well, what exactly do you do that thing? What's that supposed to do? They're asking proper questions about, well, is that supposed to be a sign challenge? Well, whatever that future's supposed to be, you have an image that shows up in a box. Am I supposed to go to click on that image? I don't think. Because when you send it back to them, they look at it and they try to come across an additional two hours, five hours, six hours, 10 hours. And it's another example of future creep, all right? Is when either a member of your own team or the client is excited, this is good. We're all, we love to use Drupal and we love to talk about all the amazing things it can do. I was in business for years before I realized that I was responsible for half of the Ogridges, right? Because I kept talking about how great it would be. So. Just honestly, what's on the website? So the point is, somebody's listening out for this warning sign and then someone's acting to qualify and ask questions about it. Maybe it's a legitimate future that needs to be added to the scope or the backlog. But we never go into it without being very wary of what it can do to our scope, our other items on the scope, our budget and our timeline. User stories, we can't talk enough about not defining user stories. And this is something where on simple sites people say, oh, it's a simple site, what do I need a user story for? I need user stories for every level of your project, especially for the folks actually putting the content in. Your user experience always benefits from a clear set of user stories. The warning sign might be, oh, they're just gonna have to do that, put it naturally off there or not. So, we're gonna run through these and then we wanna hear from you. What might be some warning signs that you'd watch out for? What are some experiences that you encountered? Do you think this early warning system is gonna work for you or would you do something else? Skipping or skipping entirely? Testing. Everyone has a proper QA concept here? Who here has got six people on their QA team? How many people have one person on their QA team? Awesome, right. How many people are the developers of the QA lead? Honest, honesty, that's what we need, okay? Time, budget, scope pushes us. Into these conditions. We know it's a problem. We know it's not the best way to do things, okay? But we've got a long standing client and they need some help. Is it gonna be a case of no good deed goes unpunished, okay? Or are we going to be able to avoid the worst of these problems? So sometimes you can't steer clear of these pitfalls completely, but that's how we have the concept of harm reduction, right? I'll take a broken leg, please. I don't want a broken head. QA and testing, you know? When was the last time somebody saw that actually working? And this is a pretty common thing, you know? A lot of us are working in agile environments and we're sprinting and we're iterating. Well, when was the last time that thing that we sprinted on three sprints ago worked? That's why we have... Oh, there was a change order. I don't know, did we change the project management project? What percentage of our development time is project management? How's it gonna change? Is it gonna be part of the discovery, not part of the discovery? Part of the creator, part of the strategy? The code can be rewritten. Lots of code will take more time to rewrite. You're more likely to get, have to rewrite lots of code if you don't have enough project management. So is your lead developer gonna be your project manager? Hopefully not. Chances are, been there, done that. What are you going to do to mitigate the risks, to reduce the harm? What are you going to do to avoid the worst of these pitfalls? How many folks have worked or dreamt of working? Dream or nightmare with multi-sites, right? What type of experiences have you had? Good experiences, so-so experiences, bad experiences. Okay, it's about even. We want to change that ratio, right? So there has never been a multi-site, both the old kind and the new kind, launched in Drupal that didn't require careful, careful thought. Not every one of those projects got the careful thought it needed. Multi-sites, especially some time ago, were a really appealing option. They saved a lot of time, they saved a lot of money, and some of the complications weren't readily apparent. Now, we have a lot of technology that has come about that makes the old kind of multi-site where we shared a single code base. Only one of the options that we can take if we want to get some efficiencies across many different sites. But those new strategies and new options have a different set of considerations and risks, right? Oh, those great rings, you know? So, you know, like anything else, there's two sides to this. I mean, we were talking about how we had a presentation last year in New Orleans with General Electric, and General Electric raved and loved and still raves and loves their multi-site setup that we proudly built for them. A lot of time and effort was put into planning that multi-site, and it is a traditional multi-site, right? And but we've got a lot of other stories out there where people have called us and said, oh, I've got this multi-site, please get me out. Skipping the specialists. How many people have a webmaster on their staff? How many people have advertised for a webmaster recently hired one? Seen any unicorns walking around? There are. But webmaster, webmeister, used to be ubiquitous when the web was a very simple place. It's not a simple place anymore. There's so many different technologies. How often have you worked with organizations that have said, yeah, we're trying to decide whether or not to hire one person who really knows everything or a firm that has lots of different people, and we're like, oh, okay, let me know how that goes, right? So there's a tendency to really not embrace and understand that everything is a specialty. And yeah, we do have awesome full-stack developers, but we need our specialists. Because the world, the web, the internet is just too big and too specialized. So warning sign. Why can't David just do it? He's a full-stack awesome Drupal contributor developer been at it for many years. Why can't you do everything, David? Depends on what else we have you're doing. So I'm sorry, these are a little difficult to read, right? Neglecting to plan for continuous development policies, tools, and workflows. So you just have to build a site, right? That's all you're doing. You're gonna deliver the site and then it's over, right? Not so much. Warranty period is over. And this is the typical thing we hear. And it happens just as often. We hear it just as often from the client as anybody else, right? And I'm sure clients have heard vendors say it. And if you haven't heard them, they've said it, right? So in all these things, you're listening out and you're asking questions to qualify these things. So if you're in a project and there's a crunch, okay? And you've got, you're sprinting literally to the finish line. You've still gotta have this discussion in order to avoid the worst of your problems. You've gotta take the time out for the discussion, okay? Build a series of if, then, else statements, right? Let this discussion surface those statements. Well, if when we go to launch and we've only got a 24-hour window on a Monday, to go live, what are we gonna do if this happens? If then, else, right? So not an ideal situation. It's easy to give you a list of pitfalls. One of them could be, you know, don't go live on X-Day. Make sure you're going to have a team who's showing up to work the day after a go live. What does that mean? Well, you test most things. So the point being that, you know, harm reduction. You know, if you've got a launch in a week, if you possibly can, you should launch three times before the real actual launch day. Right, and build that into the project plan. So, and finally, not engaging with the awesome Drupal community. So you guys are light ears ahead of the curve because you're here and you're talking to one another, but a lot of folks are not. And, you know, you might have some developers that are lone wolves, and they're a really great Martin out there, and they may not be that comfortable talking on anything other than IRC. But there are some things that need to happen face to face. And if not at a big con, then at a local meetup, your clients in particular, all right? And it's to your benefit, the more your client knows. So what we just take as gospel is that liaising and joining up with the community accelerates everything. It greases everything, and it really accelerates your project toward success in so many different ways. So, and so remember, you're out there and you're sniffing, you're establishing this mentality in your team of an early warning system. And if you find that you're a client, you've been talking for a couple of months now, they should be pretty enthusiastic about learning Drupal and meeting other people in the community because it's part of the value equation. And if you find a couple of months into it that they are not into it, that's an early warning sign.  They're not gonna be a partner in helping you solve certain issues. All these things should flag a call and response inside of your early warning system. Let's question what's going on here? Is it people's schedules? Do you not have anyone particular on staff that can do that? Is it something I said? And so these are ours. These are what we've identified as some issues folks and clients that we work with. This is our response to helping us and we think others avoid some of these pitfalls. What do you think that in your experience has been some common pitfalls are and how we can go about avoiding them? So we're interested in having everybody here, hear from as many different people as possible and not just our experience with avoiding these pitfalls. So I noticed some heads nodding up and down here when we talked about discovery and content audits way back at the beginning of the list. We can pick a pitfall, feature creep. How many times have folks fallen prey to what David has said by failing to precisely identify a driver or a spec and then finding that you've all had to build it more than once? Yeah? No? If you want. I just had a question, I'm sorry, a question about feature creep versus scope creep. In my mind as you were first introducing it I saw feature creep as more something that's driven by your internal team.  I just came back from DrupalCon, I learned about this. Is scope creep a different thing? Is that what's being presented by the clients and saying, oh, we forgot to tell you about XYZ? Or in your mind is feature creep everything and are you watching the entire team to try and mitigate that? No, you've been a really great one. Okay. I think it's really helpful to think of any kind of creep as not necessarily a good thing. Might be, might be a benevolent. But so feature creep would be really specific around certain behaviors, applications inside your web and they can certainly come from your own development team and the client. Scope creep is very similar, but I think a much broader category where you're forgetting or not aware that there are certain major portions of your project that were not adequately planned, right? And you're realizing that in order to accomplish the things that you nailed down in your scope you've got to do all these other things first. There are certain larger dependencies. Well, someone's got to pay for that, right? And there might be budget, there might not be budget. Now, sometimes there's a limited amount of funds. Folks have to be willing to take things off the table when that happens. So the interplay between scope and features are important because if you find that you've missed something in scope that can't be accomplished any other way you might have to take some features off the table in order to accomplish that. That would be my response. What do you think, dude? How side of that? You're like, oh, that's great. That sounds like a really cool thing that we want to talk about, not in the scope of this. Backload. Thank you. Yeah, kind of following on with that. I think I would add to your list there one of your warnings is not having a clear enough or defined scope because those are the problems that we've seen in the past that you run into where we talked about a lot of cool ideas. They didn't talk about some things that they actually need but never mentioned. And then we thought of a bunch of things that maybe they didn't need, but we had it anyway. One of the things we found to control that is that we do, at the start of the project, write a really painfully nauseatingly detailed scope. I hate doing those, but it's like eating your vegetables in terms of health for the bottom line.  If it's defined in the scope as to what it is we're building in such a way that both the client understands, when I click this button, this is what it does, and the developer understands, we're using the paragraphs module and we're putting this field in there or we're making a custom block that does exactly this with this database field. Like, that sucks to write, but when it comes down later to negotiate about what we thought it would do this, well, before we started we gave you a whole scope and said what it does, and so it's a lot easier to manage that expectation and have, like you said, that budget conversation about, okay, well, what do we, we miss this part collectively. It's not just, hey, developer, you missed it. We all missed it together. What are we gonna do to still get under budget and still get this done? Knock something else off the back, add more budget, something else, but the answer's not, well, the developer will eat it because it's their fault, so. Yeah, I think that's what Maria said. I wanna ask a slide, what has it done you've done? Done something really done. Oh, okay, now we get it. How do you define done? So I would say, how do you define your scope? When do you know your scope is done? When do you know it's complete? And I think that, I think, Say again? Except it's criteria. Except it's criteria. But again, suppose the folks that you're working with don't have a clear vision for just how precise the scope should be, right? So there needs to be, how it's a month, and given one example of it, words will avoid pitfall, but your teams need to be so adept, not just technically, but at communication of this process of call and response. And when you've got a scope and you think it's done, you have someone on your team that says, hmm, does that mean that we're not going to do this? And somebody's listening for this response, and they're sort of distilling it and zeroing in on it. And so you're developing these, nail thing down, really put them in company. And it's a big challenge, right? Because we're often working in these agile environments where we're helping our clients understand what they want. They don't know what they want, and they see something that we produce and spread. And they're like, wow, it's not very effective at all. I love it, you know, let's have more. All right, so we have to, so you're not, in that case, was that in scope? Where's it going? Is it change order? Is it in the backlog? You know, what assumption would you make about it? So I think that's a little bit of an answer. James Titter. Eight, 16.  Yeah. I understand that. It's better than they think. And I think your point is really important, especially when we think about budgeting project management, right? So often those project managers are best things, but often when we think about project management, I think one purchasing part of a shared service project management is on both sides of it, particularly because the project manager on the inside has that business experience. Something like that can help avert scope treatment. Right?  It's a foundation where we're going to talk about projects next month down the road and not going to be thinking about doing it. Yes. Sorry. That's a tally for you. Okay. I can say that. All right. So. Thank you. For me, one thing that I look at. So, this morning, I said it then, and I'll say it now, I had a privilege of being up on stage and doing some things, and we talked about three different things, right? We talked about communication, sharing, leadership. And I think when you're engaging clients, you know, those three things are really important, right? So, we talked about communication all the time. Like David says, what does that mean? Does that mean that your partner is volunteering information that they are sharing willingly and generously with information that they may or may not expect to be helpful, right? Because they don't know your business. They are willingly sharing it because it might be relevant. Like, that is a habit of mine. That is a cultural issue with organizations. And that's not always something that is present in a renovation. You can tease that out and draw that out. I think that it increases the likelihood of everyone's success. So, I think that leadership, sharing, communication, like we talked about for our community, right, is extremely important in the relationship between a vendor and a client as well. Leadership is actually consulted through the influencer. You know, we've sat around meetings before, and you get this really passionate individual around the table, and you realize that it's got this great title. They're articulate, but they're an influencer. They're not an owner of the project, right? And there's all sorts of internal struggles going on that we're not aware of, or somebody's not aware of. So, to that end, structure is a part of that. So, communication is good, but there's different types of communication, unstructured and structured. And when you get down to that scope, that's a very precise form of structured communication. Your stakeholders may not say, again, your stakeholders, your stakeholders may seem negative. Your stakeholders are not necessarily the audience of the website that's in the line. So true. When we get that a lot and not the profits, right, because we have, this is the benefit of our sense. And you know, when it's any diversity, it's right, where you have this deferred, you know, staggered sort of, I don't want to say misplaced, but outsized structure in others, and not the profit of a university that are your stakeholders. But who's the audience, and are their needs being met? And guess who gets the benefit? We're talking about a race, a race, who's responsible for the capital, who needs to be consulted, who will discover it, who will find it. Again, it doesn't matter whether it's a non-shared, right? It's just thinking, well, I'm sure of my budget. Who's cars, right? Some completely backed teams. Both on the client side and on the open. No continuity, no consistency. And I've seen projects stretch, either out there, particularly in the audience. It helps you when you have a stable reserve of bearing on how you structure, all right? So you try as much as you can to break things up into very logical things. Something other than native stuff. So, this list of stuff. What about sharing this? Yeah.  That's great. Yeah.  I've been on both sides of this. I've been on both sides of this. Maybe soft. Thank you all very much. I realize you're actually right on the...


Hey Pat! This is Megan with Oxmore Toyota. I just wanted to send this quick video greeting just to personally introduce myself. It has come to my attention through Toyota.com that you're in the market for a new 2015 Toyota Avalon. When you can't, go ahead and give me a call. You can reach me at<PHONE_NUMBER> and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Bye!


Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. I want to welcome not only the students from the U.S. Naval War College, but the multitude of tenant commands here on the base here in Newport, from the base itself, Naval Academy Prep School, Officer Candidate School, Naval Supply Officer School, as well as the other commands. Today, it's my distinct pleasure to introduce to you our Secretary of the Navy. Secretary Mabus is a native of Mississippi. He went to the University of Mississippi. He got his graduate degree from Johns Hopkins, and then he did this small thing at Harvard and got his law degree. He has had a lifetime of service to our United States here and abroad. In 1988, he was elected the governor of Mississippi. He was the youngest in 150 years to be elected to that office. And from 1988 to 1992, he stood on a record of improving education in that great state and was awarded and recognized many times. So he is no stranger to the academics of which we profess here and how important that is in our country. Two years later, President Clinton asked him to go overseas and be our ambassador to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Now, what you may not know is the Secretary has also served as a naval officer. In fact, he was home ported right here in Newport, Rhode Island on board the USS Little Rock, a cruiser, and he's very proud of his time on a bridge as an officer of the deck in his service in the United States Navy. On May 19, it became our 75th Secretary of the Navy. Ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm welcome to our Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Ray Mabus. Thank you. I'm glad to be back in Newport. He and I were talking on the drive over. I set where you did, where you're sitting now. I went to communication school here, although we didn't have quite this nice a building. I hope they've torn that one down. It's been a few years.  Going to putting out to sea, the reason we called it the $2 bridge was then in the early 70s the toll was $2. It was astounding that it was that much. We would take bearings and call it the $2 bridge. I say all those things because I want to start this talk by telling you a naval story of mine. I did ROTC at Ole Miss and I went through Ole Miss in three years and I took the last two years of naval ROTC as one year so I had to take my midshipman cruise after I graduate. That was the summer of 1969. I went to the med, did my cruise and when it came time for me to leave I had orders to I was flying back into New York from Naples and I was told to go to Columbia University and be commissioned at the ROTC unit there. So I did and I got to New York the night before and the next morning called the captain who was commanding the Columbia ROTC unit about arranging to come out and be commissioned and one of the things he said he said now you don't have to wear a uniform if you don't want to which is a strange thing to tell somebody about to be commissioned into the armed forces of the United States and I asked him why not. He said well there have been riots about ROTC the year before at Columbia and he was a little bit concerned about safety and he said that nobody wore their uniforms out around campus. My notion was that if I was going to be commissioned I was pretty clearly going to do it in uniform so I put on my uniform, got on the subway, went up to Columbia nothing happened but the notion that you shouldn't wear a military uniform even on the day you were getting commissioned was not a strange notion in 1969 you're in a very different Navy you're in a very different military from the one I was in. The relationship that the Navy today and the military today has to the American people is a fundamentally different one than when I was during and immediately after Vietnam the military frankly was not very trusted it was not something that a lot of people looked at as something to be trusted or emulated or to identify with. Now in that period of time from 69 until now the American military has gone from that relationship to being the most trusted institution in America. Americans have separated the warrior from the war regardless of what Americans think about any conflicts we're in. The trust, the confidence, the level of respect for the military is higher than for any other institution in this country and that just didn't happen that wasn't an accident a lot of people who wore the uniform worked very hard a lot of people sacrificed a lot they lived up to a very high standard they held themselves and others accountable and because of that the level of trust, level of respect, level of confidence in the military is as high as it is but that's a fragile thing and it can be undone. Now the people I'm talking to here today you're the current and the future leaders not just our Navy but our our military and Admiral Carter talked about the various commands here starting with the war college but also the department has school for surface warfare the command leadership school supply school so many other so many other commands you're all on your way back to the fleet for command are very high levels of responsibility jobs and that's the reason the war college was founded to prepare people for that responsibility to prepare people to command to prepare people to lead and to do so with ethics with integrity to measure up to the exceptionally high standards that we do and should hold people to every time a commanding officer gets relieved for bad behavior every time there's an ethical lapse and I'm talking now about whether uniformed or severe every time it erodes that trust that the American people have in us and the misdeeds of the very few and I want to emphasize I am talking about the very few now both in terms of numbers and in terms of percentages but the misdeeds of the very few have the potential to undermine the great work of the many every bad headline about unethical behavior about unprofessional behavior has the potential to do great damage now having said that I will repeat what I said at a press conference in December at the Pentagon I would rather get a bad headline than let bad people get away with something and I think those things the way to keep the trust in the face of some bad acts in the face of unethical behavior is by that long neighbor tradition of being absolutely transparent when we find misconduct pretty unique not only in the military but also in America we announce it we are completely transparent particularly for those in high in places of high responsibility we do it for a couple of reasons partly to actors of deterrent but mainly because it's just the right thing to do now some of the cases that we've been dealing with all the ethics classes all the speeches all the instruction all the guidelines all the rules aren't gonna help one bit if you don't know it's wrong to cheat if you don't know it's wrong to steal if you don't know it's wrong to take a bribe ethics training probably gonna help you you miss something that your mother told you a long long time ago and so the only way we're gonna reach those people is to set up a system of oversight of accountability to find these acts when they happen and to hold people accountable for it I've spent a lot of my public life trying to do that my first elective office before I was governor I was state auditor of Mississippi charged with looking at every dollar of money taxpayer money that was spent in that state where the local federal or state money there have been two cases that have gotten a lot of a lot of ink a lot of attention and we'll talk about them very briefly one is Glen Defense Marine Asia husband and contract that the the allegations are that the head of Glen Defense Marine bribed people including NCIS agent bribe officers to tell him what our classified ship movements were so he could bid on he'd know what ports to get ready to bid on bribe people to give him the the contracts gave gifts lavish completely inappropriate gifts to higher level people but the thing that has not come out as much as it should have is that the reason you're reading these headlines the reason you're hearing about Glen Defense Marine is that we did it activities that that company engaged in moved across some tripwires and caused NCIS to begin an investigation that investigation went on for three years and it never leaked and one of the things that investigation found was that there was an NCIS agent who was taking money and providing information on where the investigation was going so NCIS I put it this way gave him information that wasn't completely accurate we did it we found this and that's what I meant about I would rather have a bad headline than allow somebody that's doing this to get away now right now that case is with the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California but whatever action criminal action that the U.S. Attorney takes if there are people involved for whom the statute of limitations is passed or that didn't do anything criminal but violated Navy ethics or may have violated Navy ethics I've set up a consolidated disposition authority and we will hold those people accountable and it's a higher standard than just criminal acts the other thing that's gotten some attention lately is the cheating at the nuclear power school and once again the reason that came to light was a sailor was approached about participating in the cheating and he said no and he not only said no he reported it and in both cases we were the ones that made it public both cases we didn't try to hide it didn't try to sweep anything under the rug and in fact in the nuclear power school we announced it two days after we found out about it as I said if you don't know it's wrong to cheat if you don't know it's wrong to take bribes you're not going to respond much to ethics or rules but we can set up a system to make sure that whatever those bad acts are that they don't go unaccounted for and that when we find them that people are held accountable and held publicly accountable but when you get past that obvious stuff when you get down to the day to day some of the hard choices that we we all have to make we hold people and we should do a much higher standard than any other organization any other part of society and that's the reason that's the bedrock reason that that trust is there from the american people they know we hold people to a higher standard they expect us to and we expect us to and that's what a big part of leadership is all about it's about upholding those higher standards not just for other people but for yourself it's about being a model it's about not cutting corners it's about not giving excuses and there's a lot of levels and types of leadership i mean one is speaking up if you see something that's going wrong another is listening to what other people are trying to tell you something's going off the rails and it's about loyalty to an institution making decisions that's good for navy or marine corps making decisions that are good for the nation and it pops up in some interesting places one of the things that i get to do it is not my favorite task by any means but i get packages of promotion cases where somebody has done something that's just not acceptable a dui things like that and the question is whether to promote or not and on the package that comes to me there is a chain of command does the commanding officer recommend promotion does the next in the chain recommend promotion all the way up to the cnf and i have to say it is very rare very rare for the immediate superior to recommend not not to promote and in the times when i've just asked out of curiosity it's usually well i didn't want to hurt somebody's career he's a good guy she's a good person rock the boat that's not making decisions based on institutional integrity now you ought to do it on a case by case basis not saying that there ought to be a lot of non-promote things here but it ought to be done with the notion would you like to be commanded by that person would you like to have your son or daughter commanded by that person supervised by that person and it comes out in fitness reports too nobody wants to be the bad person nobody wants to upset a career and it's a little bit like school when teachers just say all i gotta do is make it to me and then that kid's gonna be somebody else's problem it's just passing along the problem that's what you've got to think about that's what you've got to that's a test of leadership and i'm also not saying be be bad to people be nasty to people try to ruin careers but do hold people accountable do hold yourself accountable now the one thing i'm definitely not talking about the goal is not sort of a defect free force a mistake free force when amiruf had was cno he kept a copy of chester nimitz's fitness report as a young officer after he had run a ship of ground he was court martial for it he was exonerated at court martial he was a destroyer captain and he said his defense at court martial was i have been trained to be aggressive and i was being aggressive using my ship getting close to shore in order to support troops on on the ground i don't know what would have happened in world war two if we had been this mistake free force then and chester nimitz hadn't continued his navy career that's not the goal but there's a big difference there's a big difference between taking measured risk which we want to encourage we don't want to encourage just conformity don't want to encourage just doing exactly what you have to do without taking any sort of risk or taking any sort of initiative there's a big difference between that and ethical lapses now it is not easy today it's not easy today to be a leader it's not easy today in the navy or the marine corps in the military our deployments are long and they're getting longer marine corps drawing down if you what's in use as i suspect most of you do you know that there are financial issues about the military in washington and what we're going to be able to do but hard times make leadership even more crucial it's pretty easy to manage in good times hard times is not a reason not to make some of the hard decisions hard times is not an excuse to become lax to say well one little thing won't hurt and i'll tell you one more political story when i was running for state auditor a guy was trying to get his support said well i got a question for you he said do you think stealing five dollars is as bad as stealing five million dollars and i said yes just a matter of degree it's not a matter of kind and he said that was the answer he was looking for he said i'll support you a lot of cities have driven down crime because they started enforcing all the laws small ones as well as big ones misdemeanors as well as felonies it's really hard to tell people they ought to pay attention to the big things when you're not willing to pay attention to the small things because people notice and they learn and they act accordingly finally you have earned the positions that you have and the positions you're going to you've earned the right to be here the military is the most merit-based organization i have ever been privileged to be a part of you are absolutely the right people to be assuming these positions of leadership but as you do remember the long journey remember the journey from the middle of vietnam until today remember those that came before you that had to repair the relationship between the american people and the american military remember those who had to do that work to make sure that the trust was there with the people that you defend with your lives and with your careers so i'll go back to that day in 1969 a day when i was commissioned i was given a piece of paper that was my commission same piece of paper every one of you who are wearing uniform got reposing special trust and confidence is on that commission and you uphold that every single day by leadership by integrity by your willingness to serve america so from the navy semper fortice forever courageous from the marine corps semper fidelity forever faithful thank y'all who's got a question come here a minute if y'all if any of y'all have been on all hands calls with me as some of you have first question gets a coin but only the first sir first of all thanks for coming to talk to us today mr. secretary is truly a pleasure my name is lieutenant commander rob crossby and i'm from hot coffee mississippi you and stella stevens an actress that none of you remember because you're not old enough but uh i i high coffee mississippi to me is sort of like the guy who was asked if he believed in baptism he said believe in it well i've seen it done um i don't even know about hot coffee i've been to hot coffee mississippi you're the first person to tell me they they know of hot coffee when i was 18 years old i cast my first vote for then candidate ray mavens when he was running for governor of mississippi so i feel a connection uh with yourself you get another coin for that i joined the navy as a cook and if it had not been for servant leaders in the navy helping me think beyond my socio economics i would not have made it to be a nuclear submarine officer today how has servant leadership impacted your career and do you believe this type of leadership will help the president and his agenda and reach it now to some of the underserved youth of today well all i can say is that when i came into the navy i was 20 20 years old when i was commissioned and i didn't serve for very long and sure one very distinguished but it was the most consequential time of my life suddenly i was a division officer i was responsible for a whole group of folks i was there priest rabbi psychiatrist banker sometimes i became an officer of the deck it was nobody to blame i was responsible i grew up and whatever success i've had in my life i do not think would have happened absent my service in the united states navy you know i went to law school after i was in the navy people were complaining about how hard it was didn't seem that hard to me it was always at exactly the same place you could wear whatever you wanted to nobody's going to put you in jail if you didn't show up and you could quit none of those things is true about about the military but i mean and i've said this publicly on on a lot of occasions um it's it's not only great for the country but it's equally great for the people who serve at least it was in my my experience and you know i do a lot of college graduations now um and i say you don't have to join the marine corps although we need good people but do something join the peace corps do something bigger than yourself beep a part of something bigger than yourself so that uh nothing wrong with making a lot of money nothing wrong with providing for your family a lot right for about that but i've never seen a hearse with a you all you just don't i think the things that matter in your life or what you've done to touch people what you've done to serve other people and i'll tell one more story and i know i'm talking too much here but my father um owned a hardware store town of a thousand people i'm from ackerman not much bigger than hot coffee and he was really the only true hero i think i've ever had he grew timber when he sold the hardware store he died uh 1986 when he was 85 years old after a long and very good life the year before he died he planted trees now he knew for a fact that not a one of those trees would do him any good he knew for a fact that he would never see any benefit from him he knew for a fact that he would be long gone by the time they were grown but he did it he didn't cut a single tree that year and he did it as a matter of faith he did it as a matter of hope he did it for me he did it for his granddaughters that he never met he did it for the future and that's the same reason i think a lot of us serve so sir captain carl tiscomb on the faculty here mr secretary the q dr was released this week and i believe two days ago the chairman of the house armed services committee put out a short letter that said that the q dr did not meet congressman's intent and if i remember the wording right he said it was actually in violation of the legislation that congress passed and we expect to see a redo on the q dr and sir if not how do we how do we square that with the organizational integrity that you spoke of earlier well i think that the the q dr is supposed to be and is just a overall overarching strategy that we're going to pursue for the next four years and beyond but it's to give a sense of what the military structure ought to look like and this is the second q dr i've been in the pentagon for and i think it's fair to say that every time there are complaints about concerns about the q dr and criticisms of the q dr um and one of the things that that i have pointed out is that no matter how smart you are and there are a lot of smart people working on the q dr four years ago and this time no matter how foresighted you are you're not gonna know what's coming at you if we'd have done a q dr right before the wall came down in 89 we would have been a hundred percent wrong as to what challenges we're going to face the military if we'd done a q dr on september 10th 2001 we'd have been a lot more wrong than right over what challenges so i think if you view the q dr as here is with the best knowledge that we have today what we're gonna face but i also think it underscores the fact that we because we don't know what we're gonna face we have to give ourselves we have to make sure that we are agile that we're adaptable that we are flexible and that we don't get sort of stuck in well this is what's going to happen i take a brief from every carrier strike group that comes back and also from every amphibious ready group and the one constant is that they had to deal with something that was not foreseen when they left port so you know i am testifying in front of that committee next wednesday and i'm sure there will be some questions on it and i have enormous respect for the chairman of that committee i think that um not only looking at this q dr but looking at q drs in the past and the concerns the criticisms about those q drs is helpful and i think it also regardless of what concerns there are regardless should not keep us from focusing on making sure that we have that adaptive capability to and i think that maritime services are particularly suited for that to do whatever do whatever the nation calls on us to do that we're not sure what the future is going to hold all we can be sure about is we have to be ready and that goes back to the thing i was talking about we've got to have the trust of the american people that we are that we are this ethical this professional this force that can be counted on to protect them to defend them and to do so in a way that that that honors who we are as americans who else mr secretary thank you so much for speaking with us today lieutenant jamie talbot from the navy supply core school mr secretary my question is regarding cases of ethical issues are there any concerns with swift prosecution and are there any plans in place to improve investigative efficiency um i've always got a concern about swift prosecution or swift resolution i'll put it that way we need to the resolution needs to be quick so not only for the person involved but also for the command or the institution so that either way it goes exoneration or accountability that people know things have happened sometimes that's out of our hands but to the extent i can we make those determinations as as quickly as we can without sacrificing making sure we got all the facts making sure we're there's not a there's not a rush to judgment in terms of investigations in one area we've hired 54 new ncis agents to investigate sexual assaults in particular because the time that it was taking to investigate those assaults was just far too long and it was it was damaging to the institution it was damaging to the investigation and so we have brought those times down pretty significantly um if we can do investigations quicker if we can reach a resolution quicker we will um but it does have to be balanced against making sure that we do know all the facts making sure that the investigation was done correctly and making sure that the whatever accountability is assessed is appropriate we got we got two right in a row so we'll do the first one and then morning mr secretary thank you so much for giving us your time this morning senior chief armetta currently attending the sca station and strike fighter squadron 25 or more my question is about tuition assistance obviously that's a huge topic that's been brought up with possibly going away not only in the united states navy but in other armed forces what are you and the other secretaries doing to ensure that that stays within our grasp to continue education because of how important it is for all of the armed forces there was um you're correct that last year there was a movement um different services were looking at it in different ways in terms of tuition assistance it was a purely budgetary driven thing um congress passed a law that uh said that tuition assistance had to continue basically in its current form so it's sort of like gravity it's not just a good idea it's a law um i do think that as we go forward there's there's some things we should look at we would have to get congresses okay do it but things like making sure that the education you're getting with tuition assistance is leading somewhere is leading toward a degree or toward a skill that you can use either in the navy or outside the navy um things like that but it's tweaking it's not uh it's not ending good morning mr secretary senior for adrian walkins i'm also sca student coming from navy personnel command my question is the current status of the ohi replacement program is that still progressing and how is the common mystical department development coming along the ohi class replacement is the top priority we're doing engineering work right now we're doing r&d work right now we'll start doing acquisitions buying stuff to begin building the first ohi class replacement in 19 uh she'll go to c in 29 the and that's on track we've protected that in in the budget the common mystical compartment um call that because the british are also buying the same missile compartment is also on track they will need it before we do they will get the first of these um they will do the initial testing of the common mystical compartment and we are also on track for that now it's also true and i think that a discussion has to be had or needs to be had if the ohi class replacement is paid for completely out of navy ship building it will take up about half of all navy ship building funds for more than a decade it will devastate every other type of ship in the navy including other submarines the attack submarines but surface subs the ohi class replacement is part of our strategic deterrence and as that is a national program and i think that that discussion needs to be had about what's the appropriate way to pay for it and are we willing to to so completely um um cut into the navy's other ship building uh accounts other ship building lines other other responsibilities to do that how should we approach that to keep the other missions of navy that are so vital to this country whole all right we got one more if anybody wants to do it morning mr secretary me as a clinic manager kurtis a student here at the war college thank you for coming this morning my question is about uh cuts to personnel costs secretary hegel spoke last week and admitted it's a tough sell to tell us that it's for our safety and for our readiness of personnel costs are being cut and my question is to you sir when i look at an acquisition world that is very much still stuck in the preparation for another cold war fraught with overrun costs fraught with behind programs how do you help the secretary sell that that pitched us that cutting personnel costs pay and benefits is what really needs to be done when we can look across the way at an acquisition program that many could argue is broken okay um well the first way is that we have fixed virtually every major acquisition program in navy um if you if you look at shipbuilding virginia class submarines coming in under budget ahead of schedule ddg 51's we've gotten competition put into that and we're saving over a hundred million dollars a ship um and ships and ddg 51's are cheaper today than they were a couple years ago um amphibs the cost also is being uh cost and schedule are under control the lateral combat ship um costs are down more than half from the from the lead ship in that class the last of the 10 ships in a block by they're coming out of the lcs the first ones that were built 10 10 years ago or so cost over 750 million dollars the last one coming off the line will cost 350 million dollars we're doing we're attacking that acquisition program in a lot of ways firm fixed price contracts instead of cost plus the navy acquisition professionals had just been gutted we're hiring those back private companies were being asked over to the other private companies so protecting taxpayer money was not one of the really high priorities um we're doing multi years we're doing block buys and we're not just looking at programs like that we're also taking a very hard look at service contracts we spend more in service contracts than we do in acquisition contracts um and very frankly it was really hard to follow a dollar from appropriation to expenditure what were we getting for that dollar so we've set up a lot of things including something that sort of informally it's called contract courts contracting officers got to bring in all the contracts every year make a decision do we need those or not and so we're stripping out big ins of dollars in service contracts going forward and we have gotten some of those savings already and i'm confident that the rest of those savings will be had and that's not easy um people sort of don't like you to know what contracts they got one of the things that the government shutdown did was i did not delegate the authority to contract out of my office every contract the navy had during the shutdown came up to me and it was interesting the number of contracts went way down because there's just a bunch of folks didn't want me to know what was what was going on so so i think there's there's one program that is still running over budget and that's the carrier um some decisions were made 10 years ago in terms of trying to put a lot of new technology onto one onto the first ship of the class we've reigned in a lot of those cost overruns but we're not we're not going to be able to to keep that from happening in that program but what we can do is on the next one on cvn 79 we're taking those lessons and learning it learning them and pushing costs down now we have done things like claw back some of the profit for the shipbuilder on cvn 78 so i say all that say that um i think it's a fair criticism about acquisition but i also think we've done a whole lot to to attack some of the waste some of the unnecessary expenditures and and i'll go to the second part of your question personnel costs are now more than about 50 percent of the defense budget and they're rising and the request that went in with the budget isn't a cut it's just slowing the rate of growth a little bit personnel costs in the military have gone up 40 percent more than in the private sector and more than inflation over the last 10 years so if you mean cno talks about not only quality of life that salary and benefits but also quality of work do you have the tools that you need do you have the equipment that you need there are only a couple of places if personnel costs keep rising to go to replace that money and it's not just rising for people on active duty it's rising also for working age retirees so are we going to take platforms are we going to take weapons systems are we going to take the tools that you need to do the job that you do or the other way to to do it is take personnel so would you rather be in a much smaller military that really doesn't have all the tools or all the people it needs to to get the work done and we are there this is not something for the future we are there the final thing that i'll say is i've done i don't know i've lost count hundreds of all hands cost and it is at least my sense that while money pay benefits are important that's not the only reason people join the military and to make it all about the money i think also risk that trust with the american people because the people in this room and the people that i know that have joined the military have joined it i don't want to undercut the patriotism the service the sacrifice by making it just about money but we're going to have to control personnel costs personnel costs or the decisions that we're going to have to make are not going to be good for the individuals and they're certainly not going to be good for the for the navy and marine corps or any of our services so i want to thank y'all again thank you for thank you for your questions thank you for being here today and more than that thank you for what you do every single day i really meant what i said it's a very small number it's a very small percentage of people who don't live up to the standards that we do they get outsized attention but the huge huge majority of people in the military are professional their skill their patriotic and it is not easy and it is a sacrifice in so many ways to wear the uniform of this country and for that the country and i am profoundly grateful thank you


Today we did qualifications on the Mark 19 weapon system. This kind of training is important because not all of us out here, but at least from Bravo Company, we're on the dart team. And this is something that's really important for us to know for if we actually have to go out after a downed aircraft and we're needing to convoy out there and there might be enemy forces or even just as we're pulling security in the area. Targets, they weren't too bad until you got about to the 1,100 meter range, but I was thankful to have my AG who was my assistant gunner. He was able to swap them and help kind of guide me into those right targets. Give me on the right track to where I needed to hit them.


Exercise is interesting in terms of the effects on the brain because it works in about four or five different ways. One of the most obvious ways is blood flow.  So that's the main way that we thought it helps. The other way that's sort of interesting is it's been thought that exercise produces new neurons. So exercise induces the production of growth factors, one's called BDNF, and it actually stimulates the production of new brain cells.  So when you're born, that's your lot, you know, you're not going to make any more. But more recently, we found that exercise is a really good way of stimulating brain cell production. And some of these are functional. And so just this notion that something that you can do can generate new brain cells is a really great thing to think about. So we were wondering why exercise helps the brain. And what one theory is, it just reduces stress.  And so we scanned a whole lot of people with high cortisol levels. So if you're stressed, if you're angry about something, or even if you're stuck in traffic, your cortisol levels can be very high. One of the things we found is that the people with high cortisol levels lost brain tissue faster. Well, that's a serious problem. So as soon as you know that's true, you can look at ways of reducing your cortisol. And so that's a very easy thing to do. I mean, we can get less stressed by exercising, walking, taking breaks. So imaging established a physical connection between something in your blood, cortisol, that's a sign of stress, and actual physical changes in the brain that's very useful to know.  And there's a lot of ways we know that you can take care of your brain. You can eat a good diet. You can exercise. You can reduce stress. You can make sure you're well educated. And these things just build up a sort of mental bank account for the future. And so even though it seems like work is hard, I mean, you're building a store of brain connections that you'll need for the rest of your life. So these are practical messages that we've learned from imaging a lot of people.


Hi everyone, Joe for jazby'scasebrakes.com coming at you with 2022 Panini Capstone Baseball Eight Box, half case, random team break number three, one spot gets you two teams and all cards ship. So big thanks to these three right here, Raymond, Austin, and Steve. We'll double you up like serve mix a lot. Oh, double up, oh, oh. And there are the teams right there. Let's roll it, let's randomize names and teams, six and a three, nine times each, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and nine. Got a few Steve's down to Steve, six and a three, nine times for the teams, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and ninth and final time. All right, so, well, let's kind of do it this way. Steve, you've got the Red Sox Marlins, Nationals, Angels, Rangers, Padres, Diamondbacks, Tigers, Mets, Blue Jays, White Sox, Yankees, Guardians, Giants, A's, Orioles, Royals, Twins, Pirates, and Braves. Raymond, you've got the Rockies, Reds, Dodgers, Cardinals, Brewers, Phillies, Rays, and Mariners, and Austin, you've got the Astros and the Cubs. All right, let's sort alphabetically by team. We're gonna pause the video when we come back, we're gonna see if there's any trades, then we'll have the break. Stick around, be right back. All right, welcome back everybody. No deals were done. We just learned during the trade window that Taft, President Taft was the last president with a mustache, and he had a pretty impressive one too. I think all presidents have been clean-shaven since. And I suppose if Taft sets that tone, Taft sets that tone, then that's it. All right, Capstone, 16 box case. Where's my knife? We can pop this baby open, see which eight boxes we're gonna do here. Yeah, Teddy Roosevelt did rock some good facial hair. He was before Taft though, wasn't he? I'm just gonna take the top eight boxes right off the top, right here. Let's do that one. One, two, three, four, five, four, six, seven, and eight. The other eight, excuse me, we'll save for next time. All right, so we've got that squared away. All right, settle in folks. So eight cards per pack, 12 packs per box, two auto, two memorabilia cards per box on average. We were talking presidential facial hair. Mike's asking, have there been any candidates even for Presidents that have facial hair since Taft? I don't think so, I don't think so. Like not in like the last 20 years, right? Not in the 90s. I mean, have there even been any Vice Presidents that had facial hair? I mean, which would probably be candidates as well. I don't think so. Biden Harris, no mustaches, no beards. Trump Pence, no mustaches, no beards. Obama Biden, no mustaches, no beards. What was it before that? W and blanking on his name, but no beards. No beards in the 90s. No beards in the 80s. Carter Ford, Nixon, no beards in the 70s. JFK. Yeah, how many, like how many US senators? Yeah, I guess Ted Cruz, yeah, Ted Cruz, but Ted Cruz has gone clean shaven too. He's rocking more beard these days maybe, hmm. All right, we've got Austin Hayes, piece of his jersey going to Steve and the Orioles. We've got Tariq Scoogle will be for the Tigers. It's also for Steve. I think these gold foils not numbered. So I'm kind of breezing by them. You know, these ones aren't numbered either. There's Otto Lopez and Otto Otto for Toronto. Steve, there's a list on, yeah, I just shared that list Rex. Welcome to the show Rex. Well, no, it says the most recent president to have facial hair was William Howard Taft. Truman briefly grew a goatee. Now you're looking at Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter. They're under the sideburns category. Read the chart Rex. Beard mustache, nose. Though I guess Truman had a beard mustache at times. Maybe for a year they said 1948, but the last one to fully rock it, William Howard Taft. Come on Rex. Matt Manning, two color dual relic for Detroit. All right, we were talking beard mustache. They had sideburns. Which I can, yeah, facial hair technically, but. Wow, look at that. Otto Lopez, but nothing on the front. Warner Franco and numbered to 75. All right, first box down. More to go. Now, Warner Franco goes to Raymond and the Rays. What's that? I said I guess Rafa's injured. Oh, Nadal's injured? Oh. Australian open. When they get to go to the back, what is it they get to Mr. Miyagi or something? So they don't see him private? Is that what, yeah. They get Mr. Miyagi, it's hiding back there. And just slaps his hands together, warms them up and fixes Rafa. They look at him on the bench and then they took him for that. I think it's like a privacy thing, like the blue medical tent. Yeah. I think that's kind of what they're. Yeah, they did that, so. Apparently social scientists have researched the effect of facial hair on the electability of president of the candidates and currently consider facial hair to have a negative effect on candidates. Today, the existence of facial hair and potential presence of candidates is according to the Wikipedia article, is regularly noted, albeit somewhat jokingly as a harmful factor. So that's this Wikipedia article has a whole list of quarterback, or quarterbacks of Cardinal Mintry, of presidents. And there's columns with checkboxes, beard, mustache, sideburns. John Quincy Adams was the first, oh, that should have been a trivia question for you guys. Who was the first president to rock, no, he only rocked sideburns. I'm talking beard or mustache. It really hasn't been a lot. Abraham Lincoln, obviously, had a beard. Ulysses S. Grant, beard. So Lincoln, first president with a proper beard who rocked a beard. We had Quincy Adams, Martin Van Beeren and Zachary Taylor knocking out sideburns. Abraham Lincoln rocking the beard, no mustache. Ulysses S. Grant, beard mustache. Ruther B. Hayes, beard mustache. James Garfield, beard mustache. Chester A. Arthur, only mustache. Grover Cleveland, only mustache. Looks like the beard mustache combo was out. Benjamin Harris brought back the beard mustache combo. Theodore Roosevelt says no beard, just mustache. Taft says no beard, just mustache. Harrius Truman, I think was clean cut most of the time, but apparently at some point in his presidency in 1948 he did rock a beard mustache. Must've been a rough year. Or no, maybe that's post-World War II. He just let it go. He's like, I'm good. And that's it for beard mustaches. And then Ford and Carter apparently rocked some sideburns. But no beard, no mustache. Any bald presidents. John Quincy Adams was bald. Martin Van Beeren was bald. At least that's what I saw from those pictures. I think maybe in the early years there were bald presidents, but I think as time went on, as we kind of settled into being a country, I think people are like, we just need strong, fully-haired men to be president. 55 out of 99, Nicoladolo. That'll be for Raymond and the Reds. There's Seiza Zuki to 99 for the Cubs. It's gonna go to Austin. Mike Tower, would you vote for a bald, maybe you're bald? Would you vote for a bald president? If you watch Curb Your Enthusiasm, you know what Larry David thinks. Thinks there's some bald bias out there. There's Mike Bowman, two-color dual relic. That'll be for Baltimore. That's gonna go to Steve Birch. We got Seattle's JP Crawford, two-color dual relic. For Raymond. Got Helio Ramos, autograph for the Giants. That's gonna be for Steve Birch. Right a long time ago. The reason why all the people of the original Conor and such wore wigs was because of syphilis. Causing to lose their hair. That I don't know. You don't have to fact-check Rex on that. But that I don't have any thoughts one way or the other on that. Maybe syphilis causing you to lose your hair. Julio Rodriguez going to Raymond. Raymond also has Tampa Bay.  A lot of wigs were just a fashion of the time. I know that French leadership, 1700, 1800, 1700 definitely, were a rock and powdered wigs. Judges in England, the United Kingdom, I think they still wear like a form of that kind of old school powdered wig as a tradition. I got John Heasley, Halsey, Haisley. Haisley, John Haisley. Dual relic for the Rangers. That's gonna be for Royals at his different blue team. That's gonna be for Steve. Brett Phillips, Rays. That's gonna be for Raymond and the Rays. MJ Melendez, Royals, Steve. Rhys Hoskins to 35. That's for the Phillies, Raymond. And we got a Luis Patino. Jersey and autograph for Tampa Bay. Raymond with the Rays. Kyle Tucker, 40 home runs this year? I feel like that's a lot of home runs for Kyle Tucker. How many did he hit last year? Hit 30 last year? 40 homers for Kyle Tucker. I guess if he hit 30 last year, that's, I guess that maybe that doesn't sound too, sound as crazy as I thought it would be. But 30 is pretty common. Hitting 40 is pretty hard. Trout had 40 last year. Trout had 40 playing only 119 games, which is kind of crazy. Pete Alonzo had 40 last year. Shorber had 46. Obviously, Judge had 62. Those are your only guys with 40 and up in 2022. 2021, only one, two, three, four, five people hit over 40 home runs. A lot of 39s, a lot of 38s. It's a bold prediction though. How much are you putting on the Kyle Tucker over prop? I don't think it's gonna be, I don't know. It'll probably be at, I don't know, home run prop? Probably, probably 29, 27. Hammer that over, I guess, Steven Punk, if you believe in that. I think what's tricky too, is that, is he in a lineup, where is he usually hitting? Is it a spot where he gets more opportunities to hit those home runs? Are they asked, do they want to hit that many home runs? Do they just want him to, I guess he's only a 250 hitter, so maybe he is more of a power guy. Here's a Bobby Whit Jr., different foil on the front for Steve Birch and the Royals. Here's a Julio Rodriguez, for Raymond and the Mariners. We've got an Alejo Lopez, for Cincinnati, that's for Raymond. Pablo Lopez, no reason for him to be filled. Maybe that was a variation, I don't know. All-card chip. Joe Adele, autograph. Who do I pull, Alejo Lopez? Probably just signs a lot. Joe Adele, wouldn't even, I don't know, is he in, is he in bust zone now? Rysel Iglesias, dual relic for the Angels. By the most, let the rhythm take you over by the most. I've got Jorge Polanco, peak relic. Minnesota, Steve Birch. All right, another box down, another box to go. What do you think Aaron Judge does this year, ladies and gentlemen? Ridiculous season. So he hit, for the regular season, 570 at bats, hit 311, 62 home runs, 131 RBIs, 16 stolen bases while you're at it. He says he wants the Barry Bond home run. Did he really say that? No, he didn't.  He's a little ways from that. Oh, he wants the single season. Oh, I got it, okay, okay, that makes more sense. That's quite a goal, if he really said that. I have a feeling he wouldn't really actually outright say that, though. I'm looking it up. Well, I think back in September, he says, you know, 73 is the record, he's saying. In my book, no matter what people say about that error for me, they went out there, hit 73, 70 home runs. To me, that's what the record is. They ale record 61, so that's the one I can try to go after. If it happens, it happens. If it doesn't, it doesn't, it's been a fun year so far. It's Kevin Smith, Steve Birch with the Oakland A's. Got a fact check sometimes. It's A-Sazuki, 12 out of 25. Cubs, Austin of the Cubbies. John Gray, new age materials. Dual relic for it, Steve Birch and the Rangers. I wouldn't be surprised if Aaron Judge never hits 50 homers ever again in his career. Bobby Wood Jr. Goldfoil, let alone another 60 season. Let alone a 70 season. I guess if he does it, he'd have to do it within, I feel like he'd have to do in the next two or three seasons.  It's, I mean, Aaron Judge makes it look easy. It's not an easy feat. It's Jake Berger, dual relic. Oh, that's a good question. What did Barry Bonds hit the next year after he broke the single season record? Okay, that's a good line of thinking there, Steven. All right, according to baseballreference.com, the year before he hit 73, he hit 49 home runs, then he hit 73, then the year after that, 46, 45, 45, five in an injury shortened season, 26 and 28 before you hung them up.  Well, no, those 49 home runs the year before. That's some good trivia. Rex is saying, do you know that in Don Manning's entire career, he only had one season where he hit a grand slam, and in that season he had six, guess the year? I'd say 1989, Steven Punk guessing 1986. So what year was it? We're close, apparently. I don't know, I'll just start rattling off years. Matt Manning, two-color dual relic. It's for Steve Burch and the Tigers, 87. Six grand slams in one season, and that's most by a player in a single season, or at the time, most by any player in a single season. Aaron Ashby, 33 out of 99. I kind of like the design of these Summit autos here. It's sort of like the mountain in the background, or maybe like a moon setting in the background, or something like that, that looks pretty cool. Milwaukee, that's for Raymond. MJ Melendez, to 75. Did the Yankees make the playoffs in 87? That was the year the Twins, I think, won the World Series. I don't remember who else was in that playoffs. Playoffs. Got Josh Lowe. Reyes, that's gonna be for Reye, Reye with the Reyes. Julio Rodriguez, also for Reye. I'll be with Junior. I don't know if Rex has that info handy. In 1987, they finished fourth in the AL East. Did not make the playoffs. All right, two boxes to go. Did he not make the playoffs any time with the Yankees? No, one year, there's only one lonely line in his post-season batting stats area. 1995, his age 34 season, where they lost to the Mariners. Played five games in the ALDS. Hit 417, Homer, six RBI, four doubles. But that was the double by Edgar Martinez. How was that? Was that year? Bottom of the 11th, Jack McDowell, facing the two, three, four hitters. Joey Cora hits a weak bunt down the first base line. Singles, Ken Griffey, Junior. Ground ball with eyes. Joey Cora goes to third. And then Edgar Martinez rips the double down the left field line, scoring Alex Cora. Joey Cora, that is, scoring Ken Griffey, Junior. And the Mariners win. Huge moment. You know, Teddy Jaspy would know that. Does Wade Boggs have a World Series ring? Yes. He must, didn't he get one with the Yankees at one of those Yankees teams? There's Michael Taylor for Kansas City. Luis Urias to 99. That's a pretty good one, Rex. There's Zach McKinstry. Well, he didn't win one with the Red Sox if he won one at all. Yeah, you're right. He got a World Series ring in 96 with the Yankees. Zach McKinstry goes to Raymond and the Dodgers. Is this a case hit? I feel like I've not, this is the first time I'm seeing a blue steel card here, goes to Austin and the Cubs. Maybe it's a short print. Oh no, but it looks pretty cool actually. Steel look in the background is really neat. Yeah, he turned into a Yankee in 93. Shea Langleers for the A's. That'll be for Steve Birch. Craig Vigio, Astros, Austin with the Astros. All right, here's another Julio Rodriguez. Last box. We made it. I'll do a little recap after this last box too. Oh yeah, for you. The Cubs game winner was the best World Series game win. The Louis Gonzalez ones. Remember how that was like post 9-11? Nobody wanted the Diamondbacks to win the World Series. Maybe the one time in history where everyone was rooting for the Yankees. Like even Neutrals and Rivals rooting for the Yankees. Oh, that's a good question. It had to be the Yankees, right? Marlins against the Yankees in 97. I used to know all the World Series winners, the 60s through like early 2000s, but I ran out of hard drive space in my brain and I had to, that's some of the information that had to get put into a recycle bin. Great, final box. At long last, we made it. There's Ronzi Contreras, two out of 10 for the Pirate. Steve Birch, I need more 55 Toblers. No, we're almost there. Matt Brash, 38 out of 50. It's for Seattle. That's gonna go to Raymond. Another Bobby Whit Jr. for the Royals. That'll go to Steve Birch. Cal Ribken, Relic. Nice, little stripe in there as well. That's gonna go to Steve and the Orioles. More Bobby Whit Jr. Steven Punk thinks this guy, 40 home runs. Alec Bohm, two color, dual Relic for the Phillies. That's gonna go to Raymond. Got a Gavin Sheets to 49. And the last little bit here, India, Yepez, and Luis Robert. Done. Thanks everybody for watching, for getting in on this break. Quick little recap here. This is random team three. Half case, fresh case. Second half of the case in the store now, jaspyscasebrakes.com. Lot of hits, lot of Relics, lot of Autographs, lot of Bobby Whit Jr., Nicaea Suzuki, Julio Rodriguez's, Relics, Wanderers, numbered Wander, Auto Lopez, Tariq's, Google, and Austin Hayes to start things off at the beginning of the break. There you go, gang. I'm Joe for jaspyscasebrakes.com. We'll see you next time for the next one. Bye-bye.