Hey so, I'll address some of this stuff here point by point.

I'm not entirely following the logic of being happy with the hirings we chose and also feeling like the process was rushed. Tig and Hotdog were HANDS DOWN the best options for the job, we all provided internal commentary on every single application we received and thoroughly reviewed every single one with the help of all HO members and the owners. It's easy to say the process appeared rushed from the outside looking in when you've seen none of the apps and weren't a part of the process, but we picked the best set of GMs for this team and we have an insane amount of confidence in both of these following their experience and application.

Head Office has had almost no precedent for follow up interviews for jobs. If that's something you guys would like I'm definitely not saying no, I think any suggestions to improve the application process is more than welcome, but I don't like the insinuation that we didn't do our due diligence on this hiring. And to be quite honest, yeah the apps we received from Hotdog and Tig were quite literally in a league of their own. We reviewed every single app and we found a few that were on par with their apps (all of which we DID in fact reach out to, anyone who was a finalist we touched based with following the hiring).

Again to this next point, I'm not OPPOSED to giving feedback at all, but that's never been done in the past at all and no one complained. That's something we can explore going forward but I'm not fully understanding the anger stemming from us not doing something we've never done before to no complaints. Not to mention that the expansion process is more than just selecting GMs, we need to set rules for selecting coGMs, we need to figure out divisional realignments for the new playoff format, we need to figure out deadline dates for protection lists, and so much more to prep for expansion. We had 14 apps, I'd love to be able to sit down and talk to all of them but we have a lot to do, and again, we DID our due diligence in the process to ensure we picked the best people possible (case in point, no one has an issue with who we actually hired).

Idk, I don't want to invalidate anyone's feelings here, like I said we are open to exploring application feedback and hiring interviews in the future, but the insinuation that we're treating this like its not a big deal feels unfounded when we have been discussing these apps, debating and weighing options for days now. I'm positive we did the what was needed during this process and we have picked the best people, not by luck, but through hard work from everyone involved.