So I've decided to brew my next batch. My 1st batch, the British Ale, will probably suck. I've tasted a few times in recent days, and it sucks still, but may get better. My 2nd batch has potential. The Yellow Dog should be good to go in a few weeks.
So, I've tried a new beer since my last batch, and I've decided I love it and need to try to clone it. My inpisration was the Beer Buzz Radio with Ben Stange, who discussed new beer year resolutions, and I decided to try beers I usually would never try. My comfort zone is usually Pale Ales, IPA's, ESB's, and some other selections from Boulevard, Schlafly, Mother's and Lienie's. Porter is usually not in my game plan. I like Guinness (regular, not extra stout), but I didn't' recall a porter I ever liked. So I saw this on the shelf and decided to give it a shot.
OH my. This may be my new favorite beer. The vanilla is subtle, but just enough to make it an awesome brew. So I figured I may as well try and brew it. Found some recipes online, but they were mainly all grain (not extract, which is the only way I'm set up to brew), so I figured why not brew some porter and just add some vanilla?
I read some forums online and they said to either use pure vanilla extract, or a few real vanilla beans. I decided on the real beans. They sell them at the shop in Ozark, so I bought two. They suggested using one in the last 2 min of the boil (for vanilla flavor) and then using the other in the secondary fermenter (for aroma).
I bought and started brewing this kit - the London Porter. The brewing instructions were very similar to my first two batches. The specialty grains and the dry extract were darker though, seeing as this is a porter.
Brewing went as expected. Added the vanilla bean and seeds with 2 minutes left in the boil, as suggested by my Home Brewery homies. This is the vanilla bean I used. Cut it open down the middle, scraped the seeds into the wort, then threw the bean shell in there too.
I froze some extra ice bombs for cooling the wort, and used about all of them. I changed the water 3 times, and it went well. Took about 40 minutes to cool to 75 degrees this time. (it took a lot longer last time, no matter what my previousl posts "extimated"). I would like to stir the wort (with a sterilized spoon) next time as it's cooling, since that will help cool it more quickly.
Next I aerated the wort for about 1-2 minutes, pitched the yeast ( I went dry, and did not re-hydrate this time), let it sit for about 10 minutes, shook it just a bit more, then set it to ferment. the original gravity (OG) was about 1.054. The recipie kit said it was supposed to be around 1.048. Not sure if this was because of the vanilla bean or what, but we will see what effect this increaded OG has.
Plan is to rack to a secondary fermenter in about 5 days, and add the vanilla bean and seeds to the secondary fermentation. Hopefully will end up with a lovely Vanilla Porter.
I meant to do this earlier, but I need to update what has happened. I bottled Beer #1 - British Pale Ale - a few weeks ago. Bottling was fairly uneventful, except for the fact that the Mother's Brewing Company bottles kept breaking. I discovered later that these did not have the ideal "lips" for capping homebrews, so I will stop using them.
My next batch was some Yellow Dog Pale Ale, a dry malt extract kit bought from The Home Brewery in Ozark (just like the first one). This time, I tried to follow my own advice and make the improvements I mentioned in my first post, and for the most part, it worked. I rehydrated the yeast, with somewhat mixed results. Still don't know if I did it right. I still had some trouble bringing the temperature of the wort down, so I planned on freezing more ice for enxt time.
Since then, I've bottled the Yellow Dog and it's still conditioning in the bottles as we speak. I've sampled the British Ale (i.e. the f'ed up batch) vs. the Yellow Dog, and even though the Yellow Dog is still a few weeks away from proper tasting time, I can tell it tastes "cleaner" than the British Ale, and will end up being the better brew.
So, my wife bought me a Homebrew kit at the store in Ozark for an early X-Mas present. It included all the stuff shown here. I also bought a 9 gallon brewpot and a portable propane stove to add to my list of equipment.
The Ozark Homebrewery store also had several ready-made kits available for beginners to make their first batches. Ami bought me a Yellow Dog Pale Ale kit already (Matt, Fred and I cooked up a batch of this 2 years ago in Fred's garage), and I bought a British Pale Ale kit.
Of course I had to dive right in that night. I had previously done a batch w/ Fred, so I thought I could remember how I did it and handle it on my own. The instructions (I figured) are pretty foolproof, so after a quick scan of the instructions and the brew guide that came with my kit, I was off....
After I brewed this batch of beer, I read the entire How to Brew book, by John Palmer. Apparently it's a sort of bible for first time and experienced homebrewers. He's also made it available here online for free. The book suggests keeping a journal of your brewing experiences and recipies, so you can track and learn from your past. This is that journal.
For the most part, the majority of the brewing was uneventful. I sanitized all my equipment and followed the instructions to a T.
I started with 5 gallons of water in the brewpot. I raised it to 170 degrees F, then added a specialty grain mix (Crystal and Chocolate malted grains) included with the kit. How to Brew mentioned specialty grain was a good way for beginning extract brewers to add some complexity to their beer recipes. The instructions said you could try to steep the specialty grain (in a cheesecloth grain bag) at 170 for 10-15 minutes, but to be careful not to get the temp above 170, or else there was a danger of off flavor releasing into the wort. I tried to maintain 170, but since I was using a brand new propane heater I was still unfamiliar with, I didn't eactly know what setting to put it on. I steeped for about 2 minutes, then saw the temp creep above 170, then turned off the heat and took the specialty grain out.
Next step was to mix in the dry malt extract - mix of Light, Amber and Wheat DME (bittering hops were also included in the bag) that came with the kit, and then raise the wort to a boil. The boil was really rolling once I got it to temp. I wasn't sure how vigorous to boil it, so I went pretty high. The wort didn't ever raise up and threaten to boil over, so I thought I was ok. Added the Irish Moss (supposed to clarify the beer) at 45 minutes, the Flavoring Hops at 50 minutes, and the Aromatic Hops at 58 minutes, as instructed.
After the 60 minutes from full boil expired, I took it off the heat and tried to cool it as fast as possible. Since I don't have a copper wort chiller, I prepared an ice bath in a tub I had laying in the garage. I covered the wort and put it in the ice bath. I had to add more ice after several minutes since it was melting quick.
The recipe said to get the wort down to 75 degrees as quick as possible. Problem was when I would put the floating thermometer I have in the wort to check the temp, it was touching the bottom, so it would give me improper readings. I had to hold the top of the thermometer for 10-20 seconds to get an accurate reading. It was kind of a pain. I did not time how long it took to get down to 75 degrees, but I would guess 20-30 minutes.
When I got down to 75 degrees, I started the siphoning process. Since I didn't have a helper, and since I forgot about Issac Newton, I didn't place the wort pot higher than the primary fermenting bucket. I guess I thought the "auto-siphon" that came with my kit would take care of all that. Instead, I was constantly pumping the siphon and trying to keep the tube in the fermenting bucket. Ugh.
Eventually I pumped the wort into the fermenter, and saw that I had barely over 3 gallons. Yikes. Guess that means I over-boiled, since almost 2 gallons evaporated. Evaporation was expected, so I pre-boiled and cooled some water back in the kitchen before I started. I poured this water into the wort to raise it back to 5 gallons. I then took a hydrometer reading by placing the hydrometer in the wort. The Original Gravity (OG) was 1.035 (or 35 for short). I think it was supposed to be around 1.040.
Next was the addition of the yeast. I just tore open the packet and sprinkled it on top of the wort, as per the instructions. I didn't "aerate" the wort (as I later learned I needed to do after reading HTB) before or after adding the yeast, other than the aeration that occurred from my poor siphoning, and the sloshing that probably occurred as I carried the wort from my garage to my spare bathroom. The instructions just mentioned that it was "OK to splash and introduce oxygen at this point". They failed to mention that this was a vital part of making sure the yeast began the fermenting process properly
I then sealed the fermenter, attached the airlock (partially filled w/ vodka), and put it in the bathtub of my spare bathroom. It's an area I can seal in darkness, so I thought it was best.
After a few days, I noticed that the airlock wasn't bubbling or "burping" as I read it should be doing, so I was a bit worried. I then opened and checked the wort (you are NOT supposed to do this, but I was desperate), and noticed that the lid of the fermenter wasn't actually closed as it should've been. I really had to push hard all around the outside to make sure it sealed. Once I did that, after a few hours, I did notice some occasional bubbles in the airlock.
Also, after reading HTB, I saw that most homebrew ales need to ferment at between 60-75 degrees. My spare bathroom gets a bit chilly, so I put a space heater in there to try to raise the temp after a few days. The ferment seems to be percolating now (5 days later). I will probably take a hydrometer reading on Saturday (7 days) and then Sunday, to see if we are ready to bottle. Another few weeks after bottling it's time to chill the beer, and pray it tastes ok!
Very detailed, but I wanted to recall my first brewing, hopefully to avoid future mistakes. This is the list of things I want to fix for next time:
Start with more water. I started with 5 gallons, and ended with just over 3 after the boil. Next time, I'm going to turn down the boil a bit, and start with closer to 6 gallons.
Try to perfect the steeping of the specialty grains. As I get more used to the propane stove, I should be able to keep the wort at 170 to steep the grain for the recommended time.
Turn down the boiling heat a bit. Boiling off nearly 2 gallons of wort is probably a bit too much.
Be sure to take into account gravity when siphoning. Damn you, Newton.
Get some more ice ready before brewing. I ran out during the cooling process last time. I'm going to freeze some extra water before the brewing next time to ensure I have enough coldness.
Re-hydrate the yeast, instead of just sprinkling the dry yeast on top. Rehydrating the yeast activates more yeast cells at the outset, leads to a better and quicker fermentation, and hopefully, a better tasting beer. There are a fewvideos that tell you how to do this online. Not sure whether to do this before the brew or when I'm chilling my wort. Will check the HTB book.
Be sure my primary fermenter is completely sealed before putting it away. Push down hard on that damn lid!!
Set up the space heater in the spare bathroom when fermenting begins. Be sure that temp is above 60 degrees.
Alright, on to part two of my season preview. This time, I'm focusing on the individual players. Some of these guys I've watched for a year plus, but most of em I've just watched for the three games I've attended so far, so these are purely initial impressions. But first impressions are often accurate, as they were last year, in my brief analysis of Hobbs, Weems, Rhine, Mayhew and Brumfeld after a few games. Which of this year's batch will go the way of Weems and McFarland and thrive and improve throughout the season? Which players will go the way of Hobbs, Brumfeld and Mayhew and play very little, show no improvement and fade and not even be on the team next year?
This guy is our star, plain and simple. And we've got three full more years of watching him get better. Sweet. He basically became our star player during the second half of last year, his freshman year. Weems can score from all over the floor, though he seems to fall in love with the three point shot a bit too much sometimes (most 3's attempted on the team last year, only 28% made). He's made some big shots from outside though. He seems like he's money from inside the three point line - I wish he'd take more mid-range jumpers (47 % from inside three point range last year). He's athletic, can get past guys on the outside, can finish at the basket or can pull up for the 10-15 footer off the dribble. Also is money at the line (82% FT shooter). He can, and hopefully will, take over games when we're struggling on offense and need him to score. Well on his way to being a MSU stud.
#44 Will Creekmore (junior)
He changed his number this year, but unfortunately, despite his off season work and weight gain, he seems to be the same player he was last year. And that player wasn't that good. He was a starter a lot of last year, he started the first game vs. Auburn, and appears to be our starter at the 5 spot this year. Last year, I remember him missing a lot of shots inside, and us forcing a lot of plays into Creekmore. Hopefully, with our increased offensive options this year, there will be less need for that. He just doesn't seem to have an inside game, and when he does get good position in the post, he can't finish with any consistency. That's what I saw from him last year, and that's what I've seen from him so far this year. He really didn't have the opportunity to show his game vs. Auburn, as we ran very few plays for him (or anyone) in the post, but I really hope he can get better, as that will help the team in the long run, and help free up some outside shooters if we can establish something inside. I just don't have high hopes.
Another holdover from last year, and a big part of our future. He was slowed a bit at the start of this season with a hand injury, but played a lot of minutes versus Auburn. He didn't start the first game, but I imagine that as he gets healthy, he'll be in the starting lineup soon enough. He's got a nice outside shot and can take people off the dribble, if need be. Handled the ball a lot last year, but seems more like a 2 guard. Luckily, we have more true point guards this year, so maybe he'll be able to play off the ball a bit more.
Our only senior. I had high hopes for Fury after his first two years, but he never seemed to get his groove and improve last year under Cuonzo. He's currently out with a hand injury, and I don't know what to expect from him this year. Even if he comes back, he's probably just a role player and a backup point guard. Maybe he can regain his outside touch and defensive tenacity when he comes back, but we'll see.
One of our 3 juco transfers (from Eastern Kentucky). Good outside shooter, and our starting point guard. Based on what I've seen so far, he's already better than the Lauries ever were. Was 4-7 from three point range in the first game vs. Auburn, and he had a nice outside touch in the Exhibition games too. Can shoot the outside shot off the dribble and on the move with good accuracy. A good ball handler and made some nice passes in his first few games. I'm excited about this guy.
Another juco transfer, and a starter this season. He's listed at 6'3", but seems to play bigger than that. He did everything in the first game vs. Auburn. Played the most minutes, had 12 points (on only 6 shots), 8 rebounds and 6 assists. Very athletic. Plays the 2/3 spot on the floor, and has a good inside/outside game. Like many of our newcomers, has good ball handling skills and can get by his guy on the perimeter. Cuonzo has talked him up, and he could become a star by the end of this year.
Our last juco transfer. I had high expectations. He was the national juco player of the year last year. I figured he'd be the starting point guard this year. Unfortunately, he's struggled, at least from what I've seen so far. Had several had turnovers handling the ball in the exhibition games and the game vs. Auburn. Ricks just hasn't ever seemed in tune with the team this year. With his credentials, I hoped he would provide a nice athletic spark, but I just haven't seen it so far. Doesn't have an outside shot from what I've seen, and when he does get past guys, I don't remember him finishing. Didn't play many minutes in the first game (partly due to fouls), and needs to pick it up quickly to become an integral part of the team.
One of our 3 freshman this year. A starting guard in the first game, but could lose his spot once McFarland gets healthy or Ricks turns up his game. Has played an unspectacular (but not bad) guard so far this year. He's only a frosh, but he doesn't look bad. One of our athletic newcomers, but probably just a role player this year.
Another freshman. A 6'6" big man (at least for the Valley). Kinda reminds me of Randal Falker from SIU with the size and inside presence, but it might just be the dreads. He played the first Exhibition games, but had an appendicitis shortly before the Auburn game, and will be out til early December. In the exhibition games, he showed good tenacity on the inside, fighting for loose balls and rebounds, and bodying up other teams' post players. Haven't seen much offensive game out of him, mostly garbage points cleaning up on the inside, but I like the athleticism and tenacity I've seen on both ends so far. When he comes back, he may not be a starter, but I see him being one of the first bigs off the bench.
Our last freshman, a 6'5" forward. Good size, but doesn't seem to play inside very much. Had a nice driving the lane thunder dunk in the first exhibition game, but not much play vs. Auburn. Kind of a chucker. Has got a funny looking outside shot that doesn't inspire much confidence, but he made a few of them in the exhibitions. Could be a bit too raw to really contribute this year, but we'll see as the year progresses.
A 7-foot big man now eligible to play after sitting out from last year following his transfer from Colorado. My impressions so far of Patterson are - eh. He's tall. He seems athletic enough, but I haven't seen any impressive play in the post from him, and he doesn't exactly seem to dominate on the boards inside. Weird for a 7 footer. When he does get the ball inside, all I've seen him do is take fade away jumpers, and miss them most of the time. Fade away jumpers from a 7 footer in the Valley? Really? Unless you've got the touch of Hakeem (or Danny Moore, for that matter), I don't want to see you shooting fadeaways. We've got plenty of other (and better) offensive options I'd rather see shoot jumpers - I don't want to see our 7 footer do it. It would be huge if he can become an inside presence in the Valley, but I don't see it happening. There was probably a reason he played very little as a 7 footer on a last place Big XII team.
He's a solid player. Got decent size, can play inside or outside. Always seems to play hard and get after it on every play. Classic scrappy player and garbage cleanup man, that gets the most out of his athletic ability, that can provide solid minutes and occasionally hit the open outside jumper if needed. What can I say? I like seeing Jehle out there, even though he doesn't play much. Had decent minutes vs. Auburn, but unsure if the minutes will keep up when Porter gets back. We'll see. Also, still looks like Clint Baer.
Lastly, our 6'10" big man off the bench. Still looks very raw and somewhat nonathletic. But hey, he's big, so he'll get minutes. Plays hard, but is not fast nor quick. Gets rebounds, I guess. Cleans up some messes inside, but has no real post game to speak of. Still, right now, I have more faith in him than I do Patterson. Still has 3 years to complete his development, so hopefully we see some signs of his improvement this year, and have something to look forward to as he heads into his junior and senior seasons.
So there you have it - initial impressions of all the 2009-2010 Bears. Lots of newcomers, lots of room for development. Get used to these names. We've only got one senior, so we're gonna have a few years to see these guys develop and hopefully thrive under Coach Cuonzo.
Alright, Ima post this again, because I love it more each time I see it. Mallett is just nasty.
Great article from Chase Stuart (New York Times NFL Blog) on CJ's pursuit of 3 different NFL records this year: Rushing yards, yards from scrimmage, and yards per carry.
Some interesting excerpts:
"With 1,091 rushing yards in nine games, Johnson is on pace for 1,940 rushing yards. That would be the sixth most, behind the five men who rushed for over 2,000 yards in a season: Eric Dickerson, Jamal Lewis, Barry Sanders, Terrell Davis and O.J. Simpson"
"Johnson’s YPC average through nine games is the third highest by any player (with 100 carries) since 1960: only Jim Brown (’63) and Mercury Morris (’73) were better"
"LBJ is on pace for 2,405 yards from scrimmage, which are calculated by adding a player’s rushing and receiving (but not return) yards. Only one player, Marshall Faulk in 1999, has ever topped 2,400 yards from scrimmage."
OK, I love the powder blue colors of the Titans (and former Oilers jerseys), but there's gotta be a better nickname out there than "LBJ" for one of the best players in the NFL. Light Blue Jesus? Seriously? Anything is better than that. C-J. C-ya. 4-2-4. Twitch. Anything but LBJ.
It's a new season of Bears basketball, and it's really a fresh start. Tons of new players, and from what I've seen so far, a lot more athleticism. Last year was a fresh start too, and we struggled, to no one's surprise, after Barry left the cupboard almost bare.
Now that Barry's had a year to get back on his feet, serving as "administrative assistant" to Bill Self at KU (if that's what you call a person who solicits donations from alumni over the phone and is not officially listed on the coaching staff), surely he's found a coaching job, right? We were such fools to let Barry go (according to Sporting News, and many others), and surely another quality program has snatched him up by this point. No? Not even a D-II or D-III school? NIAA? High School? YMCA? Nothing? Wow, that's weird. Maybe he wasn't such a great coach after all...
Anyway, now that the Barry-taint is mostly off the program (good riddance, Knapp and Lauries), Cuonzo is starting his 2nd season in charge with a team that is starting to resemble something that maybe can win in the coming years (how's that for extremely tempered optimism?). I still think that we can't evaluate his job performance until the end of his 3rd year (time to get his recruits there, coach them up and assimilate them into his system), but I like what I've seen so far from some of these new players.
There are 7 new players this year - 3 freshman (Jones, Porter and Pickens), 3 juco juniors (Leonard, Mallett and Ricks), and 1 sophmore transfer who is now eligible (Patterson). For the returning players, we've basically got 1 great player (Weems - sophomore), 1 pretty good player (McFarland - sophomore), and a bunch of average to below-average players (Fury, Creekmore, Jehle and Rhine). Even though Creekmore is a starter and Fury is our only Senior, I'd put them both in the below-average category, but more on that later.
The Bears won both exhibition games by 20-30 points, as expected. There was a lot of rotation of players in and out, so it was tough to gauge our lineup or the flow of our offense, since players wouldn't stay in for more than 3-4 minutes at a time. Nothing too memorable overall from the Exhibition games - the teams we played chucked a lot of threes, made a lot of turnovers, and didn't have much size, so you can't really evaluate the Bears play vs. those teams. Henderson State did play zone for about 75% of the game, so that was some nice practice for what we may see going forward. Any Bears fan knows that the Bears do NOT handle the zone very well, and I'm shocked more teams don't play that exclusively against us. The first half of the Henderson St. game was a bit of a struggle, with us settling for outside shots and threes against the zone (sound familiar?), and we had a small halftime lead. In the 2nd half though, the Bears seemed to penetrate the zone a lot better (McFarland did a good job of this) and get more mid range jumpers or drives/passes to the basket, so we ended up pulling away. I'm still worried about going up against the zone defense, but at least this year, it seems that we at least have guys on the team that can (and hopefully WILL) try to dribble to the middle of the zone to create something besides outside jump shots. With Fury and the Lauries as our primary ball handlers the last few years, this was often not possible.
The game vs. Auburn was a nice start to the season. Auburn was the exact opposite of a zone team - they were a man to man team that constantly pressured the ball handlers, often before they even crossed half court. For the most part, the Bears handled the pressure well, but there was a spurt of a few minutes in the second half when the Bears were up double digits that Auburn was especially aggressive with the ball pressure (i.e. reaching and slapping for the ball) where we had several turnovers in a row from our primary ball handlers (namely, Leonard, Ricks and McFarland). But that eventually got straightened out through some foul calls and better and safer ball handling and passing, and we somewhat cruised in the 2nd half to a double-digit win.
The first half started sloppy, and brought back memories of last year's team, which had a lot of trouble scoring points most nights. I can't recall exactly, but I think we probably had 9 points through the first 10 minutes or so. Aside from this too-sick-for-words dunk from Jermaine Mallett, there was little going good early on. Luckily Auburn was struggling as well, with plenty of turnovers and missed threes (they were chuckers), so it was still a close game. Eventually, we broke out of the funk with some nice fastbreaks off of turnovers, some Adam Leonard threes and a few drives to the basket, and ended up scoring 36 first half points for a halftime lead.
In the second half the offense got going a bit better, with Adam Leonard sinking some big threes (4-7 for the night, including a 25 footer as the shot clock expired) and Weems and Mallett providing a decent midrange-to-inside driving game. Rhine and Jehle actually had some nice inside play, cleaning up after some nice passes or missed shots, and aside from that turnover spell described above, we pretty much cruised in the 2nd half, holding a 10-15 point lead most of the way.
Overall, the performance vs. Auburn was encouraging, but far from great. We ended up scoring 73 points, which is a huge step from the 60 or so we averaged last year, so that was nice. On the other hand, Auburn really did play pretty sloppy overall (partially due to our defense, but mostly due to their carelessness), and their turnovers really helped us build our lead. Auburn also relied a bit too much on their outside shooting (24 attempts, only 20% from 3-point range), and their misses really helped us. I say "their" misses, because most of Auburn's three point shots were pretty open, with very little pressure from the Bears. Lots of drives and kick-outs by Auburn, or poor- or over-rotation on defense by the Bears, leading to wide open three pointers. On Monday night, Auburn missed a lot. If they made a just a few more of their open threes, it could have been a different story. But hey, we could have made more too, and that's just the way it goes.
As for the Bears offense, it was scattered. Leonard made several threes while he was covered, which is encouraging. At the same time Weems missed a lot of threes (1 for 6), and I'd like to see him take less 3's and drive a bit for more mid-range shots. Those are his bread and butter.
There was very little inside game to speak of, and frankly, there seemed to be very few plays run for the post players. Very little "set up on the block with your back to the basket and try to score" like we've seen in previous years from Richards and Knapp (unsuccessfully). But that's probably a good thing, since our post players suck, and Creekmore could do very little from the block last year. But I was pretty shocked at how little we even attempted to go inside to the post. Creekmore only took 3 shots, and very few plays were run for him. I'm down on Creekmore, but I'd still like to see if he can develop as a post presence. Luckily, we didn't force it down in the post to Creekmore (as we so often did last year, with poor results), and instead relied on our athletic perimeter players (Mallet, Pickens, Weems, McFarland) to handle the ball and make something happen. That seems to be the Bears M.O. this year, at least through one game. Hopefully we can gradually mix in a better balance of inside play and start shooting better from the outside, but that's entirely up to the development and improvement of Creekmore and Patterson. If they don't get better as the year goes on, we can't force it, and will just have to find other ways to win, like we did vs. Auburn.
So there's a brief overview and my take on the Bears through the two exhibition games and the first regular season game of the season. I will follow up in Part 2 of my Season Preview with my observations and my impressions of each individual player on the Bears from what I've seen so far. Til next time....
Much like Joey, my favorite food is sandwiches. Is there anything they can't do? The stately gentleman pictured is John Montagu, the 4th Earl of Sandwich, and often cited as the inventor of the sandwich. The man is my hero (ha!). Though I can't believe it took until the mid 1700's to come up with this wonderful invention.
My love of the sandwich must have been born of my elementary/junior high/high school upbringing, where everyday, a sandwich would be waiting for me in my lunch bag (sometimes 2 - I was a chubby kid), courtesy of my mother. No exceptions. These sandwiches were so good, I remember even selling one of them (on days I had two, or course) at the lunchtable, to classmates eager to share in the sandwich bliss. Also, some of my sandwich snobbery came from these sandwiches. For example, my mother never used "regular" bread to make my sandwiches. I'd always get some sort of nicer bread, like some slices of french bread or rye, and she'd always put just ham, cheese and butter on the sandwich. I didn't realize that butter on a sandwich was weird til much later, but I've grown to love it. I thought mayo on a sandwich was weird and gross at first, but have grown to appreciate the compliment that just the right amount of mayo can give to a sandwich. But ever since then, I've tried to avoid using regular sliced bread to make a sandwich (exception: grilled cheese), because I think the low-quality bread robs from the overall sandwich experience.
Sandwiches are the #1 staple of my diet. I eat between 5-10 sandwiches a week, and I never get tired of them. The most common sandwich I eat is just a normal Ham and Cheese on sliced sourdough Panera bread, which I keep fresh my buying a couple loaves at a time, and keeping them in the freezer until I plan to have a sandwich. Sourdough is my favorite kind of bread for a sandwich, but I can appreciate a nice French loaf or Rye. I use Frick's lean ham and fat-free Kraft American cheese, and put butter on the bread. That's it. No frills, just the basics. And it's wonderful.
The basic sandwich described above makes up about 90% of my annual sandwich consumption, but I get outside sandwiches as well. I'm a connoisseur of all types of sandwiches, and like everyone, I've got my favorite places. But not just any sandwich will do. There's the basic places, like Subway, Blimpie, Quizno's, etc., and sure, they'll make a passable sandwich, but really they are all varying degrees of suck. I've had Jimmy John's and Lenny's later in my sandwich career, and they were both overrated.
But anyway, here are my favorite sandwich places, from best to worst.
W.G. Grinders I discovered this place in Columbia while I was in law school, and it was a weekly staple. A grinder has come to mean just an open-faced sandwich, often toasted. WG Grinders serves their sandwiches toasted, and they use wonderful, fresh sourdough bread. I've always believed the freshness and taste of the bread makes the sandwich. No matter how good the meat or toppings are, crappy bread will ruin a sandwich. But it's a delicate balance. The bread has to be fresh and taste good, but it can't overwhelm the sandwich. It's got to compliment the overall experience, and not dominate it. A lot of places (Subway, for example), puts too much focus on the variety and flavor of their bread, but that ends up ruining the sandwich. Their bread is so big and flavor-dominant, that it ends up taking over the sandwich. That's not a true sandwich experience.
Anyway, the WG Grinders sandwich is awesome. I usually get the standard Club, which has ham, turkey and bacon, then add provolone (with pepper jack, my favorite type of sandwich cheese), and usually top with lettuce, tomatoes, onions, and just the right amount of mayo. After its toasted, throw some pepper on that bitch, and enjoy the taste explosion.
Unfortunately, I recently heard that WG Grinders in Columbia may have shut down. Damn recession. It's a small place that originated in Columbus, OH, and has a bunch of stores in Ohio, but I believe the ones in Indiana and Missouri have been closed down. I have mourned ever since hearing the news of the closing. I look forward to my next trip to Ohio (which will be the 2nd of my life). RIP WG Grinders (if its true)
Planet Sub This is a place I discovered last year upon the recommendation of a buddy. There is a location by SMS campus on Kimbrough, so I decided to stop by before a basketball game. I was not disappointed. They've got a shop on Battlefield and National now too.
Apparently, it's a place that has its roots in Lawrence, KS, but I don't hold that against it (sandwiches > MU alumni loyalty). They have cold and hot sandwiches, though I've only tried the toasted ones, and they're awesome. It's pretty basic, but basic is good, if it's done right. Fresh, good bread, quality toppings, and a bit of a local sandwich shop feel make this my favorite sandwich shop in town. Get the first sandwich on the menu, appropriately called The Planet Sub - Ham, Roast Beef, Turkey, Bacon, Swiss (I sub Provolone), Lettuce, Tomatoes, Brown Mustard (I go no mustard) & Mayo. I freaking love it. You will thank me later.
They also have a good selection of bottled beers that cost between $1-$2, so that's a plus. A great overall sandwich experience.
Mr. Goodcents When I was first introduced to this place in high school, I was blown away. Back then, I always thought Subway and Blimpie's were the best (and only) places to get good subs. Then I located a Campus Coupon for a $5 Goodcents sub, and gave it a shot.
Great sub. Far, far better than the aforementioned Subway or Blimpie subs. First of all, their "full" subs are actually 16" instead of 12". More sub = more good. Again, their bread is always fresh, soft, basic, and compliments, rather than overwhelms, the flavor of the sandwich. I always get the Penny Club, and am never disappointed. You won't be either.
Sub Shop (Columbia) First, some clarification - there's a Sub Shop in Springfield (on Seminole and Glenstone), but this isn't it. The one is Springfield is pretty darn good in it's own right, but the one in Columbia is better.
I was introduced to this hole in the wall sandwich shop during the summer after my first year in law school. I worked in construction that summer, and we'd often get Sub Shop to deliver sandwiches to the site for lunch. This place reminds me a lot of Planet Sub with their bread, ingredients, and toasted sub selections - all excellent. Maybe I thought these sandwiches were better than they actually were because I always had them during a lunch break on the site, when it was 100+ degrees, and I just needed a break, so anything would taste good. But there were many occasions after that first summer when I'd be studying for a test in my study group or whatever, and a Sub Shop delivery gave me that extra fuel to burn through those study sessions. Highly recommended.
I always got the basic toasted Ham and Cheese, and sometimes I'd get a side of tomato soup, which had a gigantic glob of melted cheese thrown on top (Mmmm, cheese), perfect as a compliment to the sandwich, or as a dipping agent, were one so inclined. I'm not a big sandwich-dipping guy, as I feel a sandwich should be good enough to stand on its own, but this is the exception.
So that's the list. There are some other places out there that I think are pretty good (Sub Shop in Springfield, for example), but none crack this elite list. I'm planning on trying Which Wich this week sometime, as I've heard good things, so I'll give an update if there's some groundbreaking sandwich-happenings going on there.
Cat Tarot Cards
-
[image: Cat tarot cards]
Cat tarot cards
The Gatti deck is an Italian Tarot of 22 cards, each featuring a cat
illustrated in black and white.
What does th...
Comment Cheater Sur Roblox Pc
-
Comment Cheater Sur Roblox Pc
Robux. Robux is the currency of roblox that can be purchased with real
money, although there are also other ways to receive ...
All Right, Time to Clean up My Blog
-
As I have stated, I would like to keep my blog going. So I will be
redesigning my page. I just wanted anybody who actually follows this blog,
to know that...
