forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread: Stories, Tales, Lies, and Exaggerations

Advertisement
A Critical Examination of Sri Lankan Wood Apple: The Worst Fruit on the Planet

Introduction

Fruits, in their myriad forms, are often celebrated for their nutritional value, flavor, and versatility within culinary traditions. However, within this diverse category, some fruits attract less favorable attention due to their taste, texture, and olfactory characteristics. Sri Lankan wood apple (Feronia limonia), an indigenous fruit of the Indian subcontinent, has been often placed at the bottom of popularity charts. While this classification may be subjective, a critical analysis reveals why wood apple might be considered the worst fruit on the planet by certain criteria, including taste, accessibility, and culinary applications.

Taste and Feedback

First and foremost, the flavor profile of the Sri Lankan wood apple is a contentious subject. The taste, often described as a combination of sour, sweet, and somewhat astringent notes, fails to appeal to many palates. Unlike widely embraced fruits like mangoes or apples, the wood apple’s flavor can be challenging to appreciate. Its pulp, surrounded by a hard, wooden shell, presents a texture that can be off-putting. While some cultures utilize it in savory dishes or beverages, many people find the unprocessed fruit overly fibrous and gritty. Additionally, its strong, unpleasant smell—often compared to rotten cheese or gym socks—does little to help its reputation. Such sensory characteristics may drive even the most adventurous eaters away, pushing this fruit into obscurity.

Accessibility and Popularity

The accessibility of the wood apple also contributes to its negative standing. Unlike more common fruits that thrive in various regions across the globe, the wood apple is primarily found in South Asia and some parts of Africa. Its limited growing regions and specific climate requirements mean it is not easily available to a global audience. This niche positioning diminishes its ability to gain popularity, and hence, few people outside its native regions have a chance to experience it. Furthermore, the fruit's thick outer shell requires effort to open, and extracting the pulp can be a labor-intensive process, making it less appealing in a fast-paced world where convenience is often prioritized over exotic options.

Culinary Applications and Misconceptions

Culinary applications are another critical factor that places the wood apple at a disadvantage. While it is used in some traditional recipes, its popularity is overshadowed by more versatile fruits that can be easily integrated into a wide range of dishes. In the culinary world, the wood apple is often relegated to a niche status, utilized mostly in chutneys or local beverages. Given the world’s growing interest in fruit-based dishes, the limited creativity associated with wood apple recipes fails to captivate a broader audience. This lack of versatility may reinforce the perception that wood apples are unworthy of culinary exploration.

Conclusion

In summary, while the characterization of any fruit as the "worst" is ultimately subjective, the Sri Lankan wood apple presents compelling arguments for such a classification. Its off-putting taste and aroma, combined with accessibility challenges and limited culinary applications, significantly contribute to its polemic status. Though it may hold cultural significance in Sri Lanka and surrounding areas, the wood apple’s disfavor in the broader global landscape raises questions about appreciation for diversity in fruit. Its hard exterior and potent scent make it a symbol of the complexities surrounding food acceptance and enjoyment, reminding us that every fruit, however dismissed, has a place within the tapestry of culinary experiences.
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
A Critical Examination of Sri Lankan Wood Apple: The Worst Fruit on the Planet

Introduction

Fruits, in their myriad forms, are often celebrated for their nutritional value, flavor, and versatility within culinary traditions. However, within this diverse category, some fruits attract less favorable attention due to their taste, texture, and olfactory characteristics. Sri Lankan wood apple (Feronia limonia), an indigenous fruit of the Indian subcontinent, has been often placed at the bottom of popularity charts. While this classification may be subjective, a critical analysis reveals why wood apple might be considered the worst fruit on the planet by certain criteria, including taste, accessibility, and culinary applications.

Taste and Feedback

First and foremost, the flavor profile of the Sri Lankan wood apple is a contentious subject. The taste, often described as a combination of sour, sweet, and somewhat astringent notes, fails to appeal to many palates. Unlike widely embraced fruits like mangoes or apples, the wood apple’s flavor can be challenging to appreciate. Its pulp, surrounded by a hard, wooden shell, presents a texture that can be off-putting. While some cultures utilize it in savory dishes or beverages, many people find the unprocessed fruit overly fibrous and gritty. Additionally, its strong, unpleasant smell—often compared to rotten cheese or gym socks—does little to help its reputation. Such sensory characteristics may drive even the most adventurous eaters away, pushing this fruit into obscurity.

Accessibility and Popularity

The accessibility of the wood apple also contributes to its negative standing. Unlike more common fruits that thrive in various regions across the globe, the wood apple is primarily found in South Asia and some parts of Africa. Its limited growing regions and specific climate requirements mean it is not easily available to a global audience. This niche positioning diminishes its ability to gain popularity, and hence, few people outside its native regions have a chance to experience it. Furthermore, the fruit's thick outer shell requires effort to open, and extracting the pulp can be a labor-intensive process, making it less appealing in a fast-paced world where convenience is often prioritized over exotic options.

Culinary Applications and Misconceptions

Culinary applications are another critical factor that places the wood apple at a disadvantage. While it is used in some traditional recipes, its popularity is overshadowed by more versatile fruits that can be easily integrated into a wide range of dishes. In the culinary world, the wood apple is often relegated to a niche status, utilized mostly in chutneys or local beverages. Given the world’s growing interest in fruit-based dishes, the limited creativity associated with wood apple recipes fails to captivate a broader audience. This lack of versatility may reinforce the perception that wood apples are unworthy of culinary exploration.

Conclusion

In summary, while the characterization of any fruit as the "worst" is ultimately subjective, the Sri Lankan wood apple presents compelling arguments for such a classification. Its off-putting taste and aroma, combined with accessibility challenges and limited culinary applications, significantly contribute to its polemic status. Though it may hold cultural significance in Sri Lanka and surrounding areas, the wood apple’s disfavor in the broader global landscape raises questions about appreciation for diversity in fruit. Its hard exterior and potent scent make it a symbol of the complexities surrounding food acceptance and enjoyment, reminding us that every fruit, however dismissed, has a place within the tapestry of culinary experiences.
Click to expand...
I found this insightful and well written. A-
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
A Critical Examination of Sri Lankan Wood Apple: The Worst Fruit on the Planet

Introduction

Fruits, in their myriad forms, are often celebrated for their nutritional value, flavor, and versatility within culinary traditions. However, within this diverse category, some fruits attract less favorable attention due to their taste, texture, and olfactory characteristics. Sri Lankan wood apple (Feronia limonia), an indigenous fruit of the Indian subcontinent, has been often placed at the bottom of popularity charts. While this classification may be subjective, a critical analysis reveals why wood apple might be considered the worst fruit on the planet by certain criteria, including taste, accessibility, and culinary applications.

Taste and Feedback

First and foremost, the flavor profile of the Sri Lankan wood apple is a contentious subject. The taste, often described as a combination of sour, sweet, and somewhat astringent notes, fails to appeal to many palates. Unlike widely embraced fruits like mangoes or apples, the wood apple’s flavor can be challenging to appreciate. Its pulp, surrounded by a hard, wooden shell, presents a texture that can be off-putting. While some cultures utilize it in savory dishes or beverages, many people find the unprocessed fruit overly fibrous and gritty. Additionally, its strong, unpleasant smell—often compared to rotten cheese or gym socks—does little to help its reputation. Such sensory characteristics may drive even the most adventurous eaters away, pushing this fruit into obscurity.

Accessibility and Popularity

The accessibility of the wood apple also contributes to its negative standing. Unlike more common fruits that thrive in various regions across the globe, the wood apple is primarily found in South Asia and some parts of Africa. Its limited growing regions and specific climate requirements mean it is not easily available to a global audience. This niche positioning diminishes its ability to gain popularity, and hence, few people outside its native regions have a chance to experience it. Furthermore, the fruit's thick outer shell requires effort to open, and extracting the pulp can be a labor-intensive process, making it less appealing in a fast-paced world where convenience is often prioritized over exotic options.

Culinary Applications and Misconceptions

Culinary applications are another critical factor that places the wood apple at a disadvantage. While it is used in some traditional recipes, its popularity is overshadowed by more versatile fruits that can be easily integrated into a wide range of dishes. In the culinary world, the wood apple is often relegated to a niche status, utilized mostly in chutneys or local beverages. Given the world’s growing interest in fruit-based dishes, the limited creativity associated with wood apple recipes fails to captivate a broader audience. This lack of versatility may reinforce the perception that wood apples are unworthy of culinary exploration.

Conclusion

In summary, while the characterization of any fruit as the "worst" is ultimately subjective, the Sri Lankan wood apple presents compelling arguments for such a classification. Its off-putting taste and aroma, combined with accessibility challenges and limited culinary applications, significantly contribute to its polemic status. Though it may hold cultural significance in Sri Lanka and surrounding areas, the wood apple’s disfavor in the broader global landscape raises questions about appreciation for diversity in fruit. Its hard exterior and potent scent make it a symbol of the complexities surrounding food acceptance and enjoyment, reminding us that every fruit, however dismissed, has a place within the tapestry of culinary experiences.
Click to expand...
Good to finally learn something in this thread.
 
Advertisement
I have some questions for those psychotic and masochistic guys on here that are following this **** show closely:

* What is the likelihood the whole conference system for football is about ready to implode?
* Are there any legs to the idea being floated of creating a 60-to-80+ team super-conference that's a separate entity from the NCAA for football?
* And if that's a real possibility, then is staying in the ACC for now the financially prudent approach?

Extra Credit: Do FSU and UF even deserve to make the super conference if/when it is formed? Especially FSU. If they're not in the ACC, they aren't technically part of the P4 anymore.
 
bobbydigius said:
I’m mean… that’s the wrong way of seeing it. If we take care of business, we are setup to get as much extra money if not more as FSU and Clemson.
Click to expand...
Only if Canes games are televised on the major networks where they have the opportunity to get the viewership. Won't happen on ACCN (or wont' be as easy) or the streaming channels...

Watching ACCN now and they are discussing. They describe it as a "reality check" for FSU and Clemson and the league. They don't seem to believe it will be settled quickly.

Also affecting the "viewership" metric is what other games are on at the same time as the ACC teams. It was also noted that NC State plays the most games on the ACCN - should they get a bigger share of that pot?

Lots of questions for sure
 
Advertisement
Hoyacane1620 said:
Only if Canes games are televised on the major networks where they have the opportunity to get the viewership. Won't happen on ACCN (or wont' be as easy) or the streaming channels...

Watching ACCN now and they are discussing. They describe it as a "reality check" for FSU and Clemson and the league. They don't seem to believe it will be settled quickly.

Also affecting the "viewership" metric is what other games are on at the same time as the ACC teams. It was also noted that NC State plays the most games on the ACCN - should they get a bigger share of that pot?

Lots of questions for sure
Click to expand...
Of course but if Miami keeps winning, we will get play on major networks regularly.
 
Hoyacane1620 said:
Click to expand...

Just watched Cover 3 and Bud elliot basically said this:

5% chance FSU and clemson get out of the GOR scott free with no fee
60% chance FSU and Clemson leave due to a settlement. Puts payout at around 125 million if they do settle for their rights.
35 % ACC wins outright and FSU and CLemson are stuck

Bud says that as of right now he doesnt believe that FSU gets a full share from the B1G

New Proposal is interesting as it allows teams to get out of the GOR in 2030 which is when the realignment and all TV contracts basically end.

Suggested that if the lesser teams think logically lose 20% of what they make now and give it to the big boys so the conference doesnt implode is not a bad deal at all compared to their other options.

If the most likely scenario is FSU leaves in 2026 with paying a 125 million dollar fee and a half share of the B1G 10

125m/5years= 25 million per year loss
B1G 10 half share would be around 45 million
45m-25m=20m for FSU per year which is 25m less than they would make in the regular ACC revenue as of today


Seems to me like Bud is not against FSU accepting this model if it is offered to them.
 
bobbydigius said:
I’m mean… that’s the wrong way of seeing it. If we take care of business, we are setup to get as much extra money if not more as FSU and Clemson.
Click to expand...

It has NOTHING to do with performance and everything to do with VIEWS

We are FANTASIZING to think fsu and Clemson settle the case based on ONFIELD performance

Why risk on your terrible football team when you take the sure thing VIEWERSHIP

That’s all Clemson or fsu will settle for. VIEWS which is their biggest leverage
 
bobbydigius said:
I’m mean… that’s the wrong way of seeing it. If we take care of business, we are setup to get as much extra money if not more as FSU and Clemson.
Click to expand...
FSU’s horrific season won’t affect them with realignment at all. They are good.

Besides, their TV ratings are still good with everyone enjoying the collapse.
 
Advertisement
TheOGCane said:
It has NOTHING to do with performance and everything to do with VIEWS

We are FANTASIZING to think fsu and Clemson settle the case based on ONFIELD performance

Why risk on your terrible football team when you take the sure thing VIEWERSHIP

That’s all Clemson or fsu will settle for. VIEWS which is their biggest leverage
Click to expand...
Performance will lead to views, and is separate from the fact that Clemson and FSU will get views regardless because of their base.
 
Hoyacane1620 said:
Click to expand...

Pretty sure this is the same idea that was floated a while back to appease FSU, Clemson, UNC and Miami. Those 4 schools account for a disapportionate amount of the TV viewers like over 50% or something like that. Basically if not for those 4 no one would really watch ACC football. If it is the same idea then it wouldn't just be FSU/Clemson getting a bigger piece of the pie Miami and UNC would as well. If FSU and Clemson win Miami wins without having to do anything. Any settlement or lawsuit victory that FSU/Clemson get all of the other ACC schools would qualify for as well since they were injured in the same way. That is why Miami is acting appropriately as they get to reap the benefits without having to spend the resources and they get to do it without coming off like a bunch of toddlers throwing a fit that this whole thing has made FSU look like.
 
Advertisement
SaiyaMan305 said:
Just watched Cover 3 and Bud elliot basically said this:

5% chance FSU and clemson get out of the GOR scott free with no fee
60% chance FSU and Clemson leave due to a settlement. Puts payout at around 125 million if they do settle for their rights.
35 % ACC wins outright and FSU and CLemson are stuck

Bud says that as of right now he doesnt believe that FSU gets a full share from the B1G

New Proposal is interesting as it allows teams to get out of the GOR in 2030 which is when the realignment and all TV contracts basically end.

Suggested that if the lesser teams think logically lose 20% of what they make now and give it to the big boys so the conference doesnt implode is not a bad deal at all compared to their other options.

If the most likely scenario is FSU leaves in 2026 with paying a 125 million dollar fee and a half share of the B1G 10

125m/5years= 25 million per year loss
B1G 10 half share would be around 45 million
45m-25m=20m for FSU per year which is 25m less than they would make in the regular ACC revenue as of today


Seems to me like Bud is not against FSU accepting this model if it is offered to them.
Click to expand...
I know this is more about bringing viewers to B1G or SEC football. But not sure it would be a great look for either to bring on a FSU team that has looked like horse**** this season and may be lucky to win 3 games this season.
 
Ultimately I just don't see how the B1G wouldn't be going all out for Notre Dame, Miami, and FSU. And really the only risk is not getting FSU who would likely choose the SEC if they could.
 
wnycanesfan said:
Pretty sure this is the same idea that was floated a while back to appease FSU, Clemson, UNC and Miami. Those 4 schools account for a disapportionate amount of the TV viewers like over 50% or something like that. Basically if not for those 4 no one would really watch ACC football. If it is the same idea then it wouldn't just be FSU/Clemson getting a bigger piece of the pie Miami and UNC would as well. If FSU and Clemson win Miami wins without having to do anything. Any settlement or lawsuit victory that FSU/Clemson get all of the other ACC schools would qualify for as well since they were injured in the same way. That is why Miami is acting appropriately as they get to reap the benefits without having to spend the resources and they get to do it without coming off like a bunch of toddlers throwing a fit that this whole thing has made FSU look like.
Click to expand...
It is basically the same thing, likely sweetened by Clemson and FSU to try to get negotiations going. Like any other offer, the ACC will consider it. This particular proposal has slightly better than zero chance of being accepted, but they will wait some time before politely declining or extending a counter-offer that is slightly better than whatever FSU and Clemson claim the ACC is demanding to exit ($540 million? $525 million?).
 
grover said:
I have some questions for those psychotic and masochistic guys on here that are following this **** show closely:

* What is the likelihood the whole conference system for football is about ready to implode?
* Are there any legs to the idea being floated of creating a 60-to-80+ team super-conference that's a separate entity from the NCAA for football?
* And if that's a real possibility, then is staying in the ACC for now the financially prudent approach?

Extra Credit: Do FSU and UF even deserve to make the super conference if/when it is formed? Especially FSU. If they're not in the ACC, they aren't technically part of the P4 anymore.
Click to expand...
All my opinion, some of which is more educated than other parts, but wtf, I'll try and bet I can do at least as well as the twitter/x "experts."
1. Anything is possible. But doubtful, the SEC and B1G don't want to give up power. Unless some entity is willing to guarantee every school and absurd amount of money to leave their conferences, and the conferences can't compete with that offer, I just don't see it.
2. If the news is leaking, it has "legs." May be a midget's legs, may be a super model, but this is something everyone in the major conferences and NCAA want. How many are involved is the question. 32-40 would get boring pretty quickly IMO, this isn't the NFL and fans like some variety more than the same thing every year.
3. Yes, for now. We don't have a guaranteed landing spot, for what it's worth I don't think anyone else does either. Stewart Mandel had a great point today- is all the money from the SEC worth it to Oklahoma to finish 8th every year? That made me thing, has it been worth it for Arkansas, who hasn't been a factor since joining the SEC? The money obviously doesn't suck, but they haven't even won their conference, once in 30 years. Now if Mario continues to build the powerhouse that we think we will have, someone is going to want us to enhance their ratings, and we can likely be more of a factor in one of the richer conferences than Arkansas. For now, though, it's wise to build and bide our time,
4. **** no, they both suck! Seriously, though, they will be a part of whatever the future is, unless FSU can't figure a way out of their implosion in the next few years.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top