Just as we predicted following the announcement that Sam Sifton will be leaving his post as restaurant critic at the Times, there's been a whole lot of speculation about what will happen next. But is getting paid to eat out every night really the dream job that it appears to be? Maybe not so much.

Robert Sietsema over at the Village Voice says the gig ain't so glam—being a food critic requires "extreme overwork," all but ruining any semblance of a normal family life you might one day hope to have. His sentiments echo those of Atlantic food writer Ari LeVaux, who laments that being a critic "often puts me at odds with my own values about food, and if I'm not careful it will take years off my life." Another hidden danger of the job: as amateur critics online start forming popular opinion more than the experts (see: Yelp), critics run the risk of being abruptly fired after 27 years on the job.

While it's easy to mock critics for complaining about eating, there is some truth to their cries: as a critic, your every meal is planned, you must order certain things, and sometimes you might not even like what you have to eat. Forget about those nights where all you want is takeout Chinese and a trashy movie—as a critic, it's not gonna happen. For some final thoughts on what Sifton's departure means for the state of restaurant criticism today, take a look at this surprisingly articulate and amusing farewell from BaoHaus's Eddie Huang, who posits that Sifton was one of the rare critics who understood food's place in pop culture. Godspeed at the National desk, Sam—and—seriously—good luck to whoever takes the dining gig.