Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

So I have a question


dardarroarroar

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Captain Obvious said:

If you don't say your mom's or grandma's fried chicken is the best ever and all these others are competing for 2nd place then you are probably doing it wrong.

That poo's on a whole other level.  Deep fried chicken is one thing, but pan fried chicken, in a well seasoned iron skillet....

0w5UAMX.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I typically only eat fried chicken that I make at home, or when we run offshore we will grab big things of Bo's or Hardee's.

 

Hardee's stays crispier longer on the boat, but Bo's usually tastes better.  It's the spicy that I like, then add some Texas Pete, and hopefully a Mahi on the line right after you throw the bone overboard and get all the grease off your hands so you can reel.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, csx said:

Fried chicken is exceptionally easy to make well if you are making in small batches. Soak, season, and clean oil at the correct temp. It's trying to make a lot of it quickly where skimping becomes obviously. 

Yup, people don't know how to cook anymore. Temp is the key. Gotta cook the bones without burning the skin or oil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, csx said:

Fried chicken is exceptionally easy to make well if you are making in small batches. Soak, season, and clean oil at the correct temp. It's trying to make a lot of it quickly where skimping becomes obviously. 

It's usually 1,000x better than anything you can buy to.  

 

Thanks you all you fugers, I'm going to eat fried chicken for lunch!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No really, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jangler said:

Yup, people don't know how to cook anymore. Temp is the key. Gotta cook the bones without burning the skin or oil.

Also all about the brine....I brine mine for at least a day before breading and frying.

 

Also, if you let the chicken get a little closer to room temp before frying it assists in the skin staying light brown, and the meat being "done" to the bone.

 

P.S. if any of you are going to start cooking your own (I have little faith) don't cook the white pieces with the dark.  Just an FYI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nick_81 said:

It's usually 1,000x better than anything you can buy to.  

 

Thanks you all you fugers, I'm going to eat fried chicken for lunch!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No really, thanks!

I once made fried chicken for a deep sea fishing trip. I just searched online and found some things I liked and combined them. Buttermilk soak and seasoned properly and properly applied breading and rednecks were saying I was a chicken genius! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Captain Obvious said:

I'm almost 50 but I begged my mom to come pan fry me some chicken for my birthday. Best chicken I had all year.

Man, my Grandmother made best fried chicken! She used an old, I mean old,..fry pan temperature cooker. I miss that chicken and the gravy that came with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't say your mom's or grandma's fried chicken is the best ever and all these others are competing for 2nd place then you are probably doing it wrong.


My mom was a health nut she didn't cook fried foods like that my grandma wasn't really much of a fried food person, but she makes delicious fried fish. However my stepmom she makes some really really really really good fried chicken it's always on point but we were talking about fast food or restaurants


Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...