We’re staying close to downtown Vermilion, and this morning I decided to walk down to the lakefront area, where I stood next to the iconic lighthouse to watch the sunrise. It was a cold, clear morning that gave a hint of the autumnal weather to come. The waters of Ohio’s great lake were calm, the clouds were banked against the far eastern horizon and began to glow as the sun started to rise, and a passing train sounded its whistle and rumbled through town. To the west, the moon hung low in the sky, casting a silvery light on the waters of Lake Erie.
We’ll be hanging out with some young children during our visit to Vermilion, and yesterday supplies were laid in to prepare for their arrival. They included a few boxes of Nabisco Animal Crackers, which looked pretty much like what the boxes looked like back when I was a kid (except for the nutritional information prominently displayed on the front of the box, which was not included until well after the reckless, uninformed ’60s ended).
It’s reassuring to see that animal crackers are still a staple of the young kid diet. I well remember sitting down at our formica-topped kitchen table with a big glass of ice-cold whole milk and a box of animal crackers for a wholesome post-grade school snack. You’d put, say, a lion in your mouth (although elephants were the best), take a slug of milk, let the milk interact with the cracker until the cracker virtually dissolved, then squish it against the roof of your mouth with your tongue to let all of the tasty animal cracker goodness immerse your taste buds. You could just eat a crunchy dry cracker, of course, but the immersion/dispersion method was universally recognized as the preferred kid option.
It was interesting to see the nutritional information related to animal crackers and to learn that the recommended “serving size” is 12 crackers. Hah! I sneer at any self-respecting kid who, once opening a box of animal crackers, would not consume the entire box. In reality, it was almost impossible not to, unless one of your siblings took a few. According to the nutrition information, that meant you were likely to ingest about 300 calories from your snack, with a meaningful input of sodium and sugar, too. Thank god the crackers don’t have any saturated fat and are a good source of calcium!
We’re up in Vermilion, Ohio this morning. The drive from Columbus to Vermilion took us into the very heart of northwest Ohio farmland, through towns like New Berlin, Ohio, and past countless fields of crops–especially corn. When we went out to dinner last night, at the Angry Bull restaurant between Huron and Vermilion, we parked right next to the field of corn shown above.
Thanks to the soil, the flat terrain, and modern farming techniques, Ohio is a big corn-producing state. The Ohio crop report for 2022 notes that Ohio farmers grew 595 million bushels of corn for grain on 3.18 million acres, for a yield of 187 bushels per acre. (In case you’ve forgotten, in America a bushel equals 64 U.S. pints.) Ohio thus made a significant contribution to the overall U.S. 2022 corn crop, which came in 13.7 billion bushels grown on 88.6 million acres. Those numbers are impressive, but all are down slightly from 2021, which was a record production year for Ohio corn growers and the U.S. generally.
Ohio farmers plant soybeans even more extensively than corn, with soybeans planted on 5.08 million acres in 2022, but the corn field is the sight most native Ohioans associate with the farmland in their state. If you’ve grown up here, you’ve seen countless fields of corn over the years–and yet, seeing another one is curiously reassuring. Corn fields show that, outside of our cities, people are still working the land and growing crops to help feed us all, that the seasons are changing and the growth cycles continue as they have for centuries, and that life goes on as we transition from summer to autumn.
And if you stand next to a corn field, you look down the long, straight rows between the tall, leafy plants, and you hear the breeze whispering through the stalks. There’s something a bit mystical about it–which no doubt is why Field of Dreams occurred in a corn field. Soybean plants just don’t send the same message.
Earlier this week I was working in my office when a car alarm on some vehicle parked on Gay Street went off. I immediately looked out my window to see if a would-be thief, caught in the act by the alarm, was sprinting away from the scene.
Alas, no apparent thief was fleeing the area. Nor did the alarm cause police officers to rush to the scene. Instead, it was clear that someone–including, perhaps, the car’s owner–had inadvertently tripped the alarm, and everyone in the vicinity got to be treated to the loud, alternating beeping horn sounds that make car alarms one of the most supremely annoying sounds you routinely hear in a city. The racket went on for about five minutes, then someone happily figured out how to turn it off.
I found myself wondering if there are any data points about how often car alarms have actually deterred car theft, and what percentage of car alarms involve either a malfunction or some other unintentional triggering of the device. Regrettably, these kinds of useful statistics don’t seem to exist, although evidently there was a study back in the ’90s that showed that car alarms don’t deter professional thieves, who know how to quickly disable them or just ignore them. But a Google search for “do car alarms deter theft” yields some suggested alternative search queries that indicate that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the sound of car alarms, like “has a car alarm ever prevented a theft?” (and I’m guessing that whoever created that search would have italicized and bolded “ever” if Google permitted it) and “what is the point of a car alarm?” For that matter, do any car sales people talk about a car alarm as a useful feature in a car as part of the sale pitch?
Perhaps, back in the past, someone thought car alarms were a good theft prevention idea, but years of blaring false positives have refuted that notion. Yet, car alarms still seem to be a standard feature on new cars, like the human body retaining now-useless tonsils. I’d say it’s time for car manufacturers to give us city-dwellers a break, ditch the irritating alarms, and find some other, more effective protection against thievery.
I freely admit that I do not like cole slaw. In fact, I find it to be stomach-turning. Typically, it is a cold, wet lump, leaking a gross white fluid that looks like landfill leachate, ready to turn even the most delectable sandwich into a sodden, inedible mess.
So it was with some trepidation that I perused the menu at Del Mar SoCal Kitchen in the Short North last night. I was in the mood for a handheld, and the chicken sandwich looked good–but the description included the dreaded “s” word. And yet, the slaw was said to be “brussels sprout slaw,” and brussels sprouts are one of the few vegetables I will readily try. I decided to accept the significant risk, reasoning that if the slaw topping was of the wet lump variety I could always scrape if off the sandwich and eat the damp remains with knife and fork. (I did, however, ask our server to hold the pickled fresno, because I absolutely draw the line at anything pickled.)
The sandwich above is what I got. To my happy surprise, the slaw was dry and crispy, with a healthy allotment of chopped brussels sprouts as part of the sandwich. It added a welcome crunch and an enjoyable textural element to a very tasty chicken sandwich that I consumed with happy contentment. I would definitely order that sandwich again.
The experience at Del Mar shows that a little culinary inventiveness in the kitchen can pay dividends–and a little adventurousness on the part of the diner can make a difference, too. I’ll have to scratch “slaw” off of my “absolutely do not eat” list, and move it to the “perform careful analysis of the menu and potentially ask a lot of annoying questions of the server before ordering” list. It’s a small step into a brave new world of food consumption.
Ohio’s Lt. Governor Jon Husted, who participated in the Google announcement, said that Ohio is establishing itself as “the tech capital of the Midwest.” I’m sure that our Midwestern neighbors might challenge that statement, but it’s not hard to see why Ohio is an attractive place for investment in massive tech complexes. Those facilities need cooling water, electricity, and employees–all of which Ohio can offer. The availability of copious amounts of water and reliable electrical power distinguish the Buckeye State from other potential locations where power grids are taxed and water is in short supply.
Of course, Ohio will need to pay attention to its infrastructure to make sure that it can continue to offer those crucial building blocks of tech development. We probably don’t have to worry about water, thanks to Mother Nature, but we’ll need to make sure that we continue to upgrade the power grid and increase its capacity as new loads come on line. We’ll also want to make sure that Ohio continues to be seen as an attractive place for high-tech employees to live and work.
The Ohio State Buckeyes won a thriller over Notre Dame in South Bend last night, scoring the winning touchdown from the one yard line with precisely one second left in the game. The touchdown capped a gritty two-minute drive, with the Buckeyes converting multiple long-yardage plays to get in position for the winning score against a tough Notre Dame defense that, up to that point, had stonewalled the Men of the Scarlet and Gray repeatedly in crucial short-yardage situations.
Much as I enjoyed the win–which is the kind of win that makes the sun shine just a little bit brighter in the morning–I was also struck by the emotional reaction of Ohio State head coach Ryan Day after the game, both in his on-field interview and at the postgame press conference. Coach Day is normally viewed as a quiet, cerebral kind of coach who keeps his eyes on his playcalling sheet, but after the game he was demonstrably fired up. He clearly had been bothered by critical comments by former Notre Dame head coach Lou Holtz questioning Ohio State’s toughness and saying that the Buckeyes have lost some big games for that reason. In the heat of the moment, Coach Day called out Holtz and others, saying that the win should put that “toughness” argument to rest.
In the modern social media world, where critics can be found on every broadcast and website, we seem to expect public figures–be they in the political realm, in entertainment, or in the sports world–to either ignore the constant hectoring or just sit back and take it. But those public figures are people, too, and you cannot expect them to be immune from the normal human reaction of getting upset about constant criticism. I would imagine that it is particularly difficult to do so when you are coaching young people, dealing with them every day and knowing that they have been dedicated and hard-working . . . and tough. Through his comments last night, Coach Day gave us a glimpse of the human side of coaching at a high-level college sports program.
With last night’s win, Ohio State has answered the “toughness” question–for now. But the social media world never rests, and criticism from Monday-morning quarterbacks never really ends, either. Part of the toughness that the Buckeyes showed with their dramatic win last night is being able to stay focused and calm during the middle of the media circus, then execute and play your game–and let the emotions come through in the aftermath. I don’t see how you can fairly say that a team that can do that when the chips are down, in a hostile environment against a top-flight opponent, isn’t mentally and physically tough–but then, very little of what you see on social media reflects a rational view of the world.
Today Ohio State plays Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana. It’s a “big game” by any definition of that well-worn phrase. Both teams are undefeated, both teams are ranked in the top ten, and both teams are storied college football programs with lots of tradition. It will be nationally televised and played in front of a crowd of frenzied fans and “Touchdown Jesus,” and the Fighting Irish will be wearing their lucky all-green uniforms. It will be a great atmosphere and a great test for both teams.
But by midnight tonight, all of the hoopla will have ended, the game will have been played, and one team will have won and the other will have lost. And the coaching staff and fans of the losing team may well shake their heads and wonder: why did we schedule this game? I’m guessing that is exactly what Alabama’s coaching staff and fan base thought when the Crimson Tide lost at home to Texas earlier this year.
That’s the big question about “big games” in college football. If you schedule a tough non-conference opponent and win, it’s a great resume-builder that helps to put you into position to qualify for the College Football Playoff. But if you lose, you fall out of the ranks of the unbeaten, and you’ve got that loss on your record that you need to overcome when the CFP selection process starts. So, is it better to take the risk and look for early-season challenges against other big-name programs that will excite college football fans, or to schedule a bunch of patsies that will allow you to get to your conference schedule without a loss? Obviously, some teams take one approach, and some take the other.
I like the challenging match-ups like today’s OSU-ND tilt–and I’m pretty sure I will feel that way after the game, too, regardless of the outcome. Such games are fun for the fans and the players, and good for the sport. I also hope that the committee that ultimately decides on the CFP participants is savvy enough to recognize that losses in early-season “big games” shouldn’t be disqualifying.
But next year, when the CFP expands to 12 teams, I’m hoping that the “big game” equation will change. A single loss won’t be such a black mark, and perhaps then the CFP selection committee will start looking carefully at strength of schedule and quality of wins. If that happens, the teams that go on the early-season cupcake parade might regret their lack of a meaty “big game” on their resumes.
This week the Washington Post reported that the United States Senate formally relaxed its informal dress code–for Senators. The Senate’s Majority Leader, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, instructed the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms to no longer enforce the unwritten (and according to the Post, selectively enforced) dress code that required “business attire.” In a statement to the Post, Schumer said that “Senators are able to choose what they wear on the Senate floor.” Senate staffers, however, will continue to need to wear business suits.
This development is good news for Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who has blasted through the different levels of dress code requirements by routinely wearing hoodies, sweat shorts, and sneakers as he performs the functions of his office–like appearing for the press conference seen above. The Post notes that Senator Kyrsten Sinema, of Arizona, also has been a fashion maverick in the halls of the Senate.
So, is this a good thing, as some have argued, or is it the latest sign that the United States is sliding inevitably toward moral decay and societal ruin? I’d say its neither. To those who say that a hoodie and sweat shorts on the Senate floor reflects a positive trend toward more comfortable attire that is in line with the loosening of suit-and-tie requirements in the fields of law and banking, I would respond that I haven’t seen many lawyers or bankers sporting hoodies and basketball shorts in their workplaces. On the other hand, I don’t think that Fetterman’s slobbish hoodie-and-shorts look is a sign that the apocalypse is upon us. I’m sure the country will soldier on, regardless of the fact that one Senator looks like he’s ready to shoot some hoops on the outdoor court next to the neighborhood grade school.
I’m old school about these kinds of things. I think that, in many settings, your clothes are a sign of respect for the occasion and the surroundings. I wouldn’t wear a hoodie, sweat shorts and sneakers to a funeral, for example, and I expect that most people wouldn’t either. I don’t think many judges would permit lawyers practicing in their courtrooms to wear such outfits, either. I also think that casual clothing is associated with casual thinking. If you don a suit and button-down shirt and tie, you know that you are off to do something important, where your behavior will be important, too. Professional attire helps to create focus. Slouching and slovenly clothing don’t.
Years of experience have taught us that Senators ultimately get to do whatever they want, so I’m not going to change the mind of John Fetterman or anyone else in the Senate. I just think that looking and acting professional isn’t too much to ask for someone who is supposed to be wrestling with what to do about the important issues of the day.
In walking down Gay Street today I noticed that the City of Columbus has created a designated scooter parking area on the sidewalk. I applaud this initiative, which is a long overdue effort to stop the chaotic deposit of discarded scooters anywhere and everywhere on downtown Columbus sidewalks. The big question now is: will the scooter-riding scofflaws, who routinely ignore signs instructing them not to ride the scooters on our sidewalks, actually use the designated parking areas? I’m not holding my breath.
On a recent walk, we noticed another new eatery in the Arena District. Yesterday, on a very fine, sunny September day, we decided to check it out. Goodwood Restaurant and Brewery occupies the large space formerly occupied by the Gordon Biersch brewpub, just a short stroll from Nationwide Arena, the home of the Columbus Blue Jackets.
Goodwood’s menu offers your standard array of lunchtime options of starters, salads, sandwiches, wraps, and entrees–with one welcome addition. Rather than fries (or , , , shudder. . . broccoli) you can get seasoned tater tots as a side. After we sat down at our outdoor table, on Goodwood’s fenced-in patio, I put the kitchen to the test by ordering the classic burger and, at the recommendation of our server, the tots–which ended up being a veritable avalanche of golden brown, spud-filled nuggets.
The burger, which had two patties, was very good–fresh beef cooked to juicy perfection, with a nice sauce, cheese, and a well-toasted bun. The tots were quite good as well, crunchy on the outside and moist on the inside. The first bite of the tots inevitably brought back memories of school lunches back in the day, when I was first introduced to the concept of tots. The only difference was that the school cafeteria version tended to be overcooked and dry. Goodwood offers tots in their highest and best form. The only problem was the amount of tots, which as the photo above indicates was overwhelming. I could only eat about a third of them, which left me guilt-ridden from a Clean Plate Club standpoint. If anyone from Goodwood reads this, I make a heartfelt plea: dial back a bit on tot volume.
But an overabundance of tater tots isn’t a disabling problem, obviously. I give Goodwood a thumb’s up. We didn’t try any of the brewed offerings, but the food options suggest that the beers and ales would be well worth sampling as well. When the Blue Jackets’ season starts, Goodwood would be worth a pre-game and post-victory visit.
U.S. parents make it into the top 10 in assigning importance to developing other attributes in their kids, however. American parents tend to value imagination, tolerance and respect for others, hard work, and independence more than parents in other countries. (The last result will no doubt come as a surprise for anyone who have read about or seen evidence of helicopteritis in the current crop of American crop of American parents.)
It’s interesting that parental focus on drilling their children on the importance of good manners has declined over the years. It was a point of emphasis in our house when I grew up, with Mom insisting that we addressed adults as “sir” and “ma’am,” opened doors for our elders, kept our elbows off the table, didn’t interrupt, tried to keep the noise level down to a dull roar, and followed countless other rules of etiquette, courtesy, and interpersonal behavior and conduct. We even had a great book called Manners Can Be Fun by Munro Leaf, two pages of which are pictured above, that taught manners lessons using funny drawings and that had a big impact on how we acted around adults and other kids.
I find it hard to believe that current American parents think good manners are unimportant; my guess is that the rankings were affected because other qualities, like imagination, have become more of a priority than they used to be. And any parent who values tolerance and respect for others, as the survey indicates American parents do, is teaching attributes that are part and parcel of having good manners in my book. But to the extent some parents out there are giving politeness short shrift, I would encourage them to reconsider: there are very few jobs or careers out there where personal conduct and proper behavior aren’t the subject of evaluation on personnel forms, because no one wants to work with a boorish jerk.
The Cleveland Browns’ season came back down to earth with a thud last night. Playing in Pittsburgh, a venue where the Browns continue to set new records for ineptitude and futility, the Browns handed the Steelers two touchdowns on turnovers, racked up a huge number of untimely penalties, and laid an egg on national TV. The modest yet ever-elusive goal of starting a season 2-0 remains out of reach until next year–if, in fact, it can ever be accomplished again by this snake-bitten franchise.
This game was an especially hard one to watch for Browns fans, who are used to disaster and embarrassment. The game started with a first-play interception that the Steelers turned into a touchdown, then saw the great Nick Chubb, who was gashing the Steelers’ defense, go down with an apparently serious injury at the start of the second quarter. After that, the Browns’ defense kept the team in the game, while the the Browns’ offense melted down.
The chief meltee was the multi-million-dollar man, quarterback Deshaun Watson, who seemed to totally lose his cool. In the history of the league, has any other NFL quarterback ever been flagged for two personal foul penalties in one game? Both of those penalties put the Browns into deep holes that the Chubbless offense could not overcome. But even when he wasn’t wrestling with the facemasks of Pittsburgh defenders, Watson–who is supposed to be a seasoned quarterback ready to move back into elite status–seemed overwhelmed and bewildered by the Steelers’ pass rush. He was inaccurate on many of his throws and unable to do anything positive when he pulled the ball down and tried to run. In my view, Watson has yet to show that he is worth even a fraction of what he is being paid.
Watson wasn’t the only one who contributed to the Browns’ sad exhibition of dumb football. The Pittsburgh defense mauled the Browns’ offensive line, producing sacks, pressures, stops behind the line of scrimmage–and lots of holding and false start penalties. Donovan Peoples-Jones failed to field punts, causing terrible field position that pinned the Browns’ offense back and contributed to one of Pittsburgh’s defensive scores. And the Browns’ offensive coaches didn’t seem to be able to find plays–like screen passes or draws–that could slow down the Steelers’ rush. Nor did they recognize that it wasn’t the offense’s night, and the prudent course would be to stop trying to pass, run the ball, play the field position game, and let the defense try to win the game for you. All of this is especially frustrating for Browns fans, because the defense was terrific and easily played well enough to win.
So, once again, the Browns somehow managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and lost a road game against a divisional opponent that they should have won. Playoff-caliber teams don’t do that. To be sure, the NFL season is a long one, and there is plenty of time for the Browns to right the ship–but in the meantime last night’s sorry spectacle demonstrated that there are still a lot of questions to be answered about Deshaun Watson and his ability to perform under pressure, the offensive line, and an offense that can’t depend on rock-solid Nick Chubb.
When I was kid, I was pretty much a cereal addict. I ate large mixing bowls of every different kind of cereal, and reveled in the classic ’60s kid experience of camping out in front of the TV on Saturday mornings for hours of cartoons as I spooned down my Frosted Flakes or Apple Jacks or Wheaties or Cocoa Puffs. I like cereal so much that I really enjoyed a trip that UJ and I took with our grandparents that featured a visit to the Kellogg’s factory in Battle Creek, Michigan, where we goggled at the cereal making and packing machinery and topped off our visit with a Froot Loops sundae. In college, I shifted to a somewhat more adult cereal product: Frosted Mini-Wheats, moistened by milk to just the right combination of sogginess and crunchiness..
The linked article describes cereal sales as being in a “secular decline.” As a result, Kellogg’s has decided to split into two separate entities: WK Kellogg, which will sell cereal, and Kellanova, which will focus on snack foods like Pringle’s, Pop-Tarts, and Cheez-Its that have accounted for most of the company’s revenues in recent years. The outlook for WK Kellogg isn’t great. The company is hoping to achieve flat sales over the next few years as it tries to figure out how to spur cereal sales again. (In my humble opinion, getting the networks to broadcast Saturday morning cartoons again would help.)
Breakfast tastes have changed over the years. Cereal was a revolutionary development, and it was dominant during my youth, when the Kellogg’s brand, with its colorful rooster logo, seemed to roll out new cereal concoctions on a monthly basis. Now the morning meal of choice has changed again. But the unanswered question for me is: what do kids have for breakfast these days? A Pop-Tart, a handful of Cheez-Its, and a pumpkin spice latte?
Raise your hand if you know someone who plays pickleball (and, frankly, won’t shut up about it). Okay, now keep them raised if you know someone who has experienced a significant injury playing pickleball. My hand is raised–how about yours?
I was talking to my doctor recently about the importance of making sure that you get exercise as you get older–but doing it the right way. Our discussion naturally turned to pickleball, and he quickly rattled off about five examples of people, all of them in the senior age group, who tore muscles, wrecked knees, and experienced other injuries on the pickleball court. His theory is that players become obsessed with the game, and instead of treating it as a pleasant recreational activity and a fun way to spend time with friends, they quickly become hypercompetitive and simply push themselves beyond their capacity.
I’m not sure if I’ll ever play pickleball, but if I do I am going to try to be rational about it. My days of athletic studliness–to the extent they ever existed–are long behind me. Winning pickleball matches just isn’t worth going under the knife.
Webner House 