Wednesday, April 13, 2011
No More Texas Wheat
A few days ago on twitter, someone mentioned seeing a new Saint Arnold label approved for Weedwacker ale, and that this beer was going to replace Texas Wheat. Well today the Chronicle's Ronnie Crocker posted confirmation, that yes Texas Wheat is gone and Weedwacker will replace it. For those that remember, Weedwacker was the first release of Saint Arnold's moveable yeast series. To brew the beer, Saint Arnold took their Kolsch style beer Lawnmower and changed the yeast to a Hefewiezen yeast. I have some pretty strong opinions on this move, and it has nothing to do with eliminating Texas Wheat. Frankly it was my least favorite of all Saint Arnold beers. I'm not a huge fan of American Wheat beers, and I never could get into this beer. Having said that I don't really get replacing it with Weedwacker. I know in Mr. Crocker's post he quoted Brock as saying "Everybody loves it", but most of the folks I talked to didn't really like the beer. Oh sure they appreciated the educational experience of seeing how yeast changes the flavor of beer, but no one I'm aware every said "Gee, I'd love this to be available year round." I'm a staunch defender of Saint Arnold, and have never understood why some "Beer Nerds" talk bad about them. They make a solid range of regular beers, very good seasonals, the Divine Reserve series is extremely good, and the moveable yeast series is one of two being done in the world as far as I know. All in all Saint Arnolds is a great award winning brewery. But (you just knew there would be one), I really don't get this move. If your going to add a new beer to the line up to replace TX Wheat, why not go one of two routes: 1) I get the desire to have a ligther beer in the lineup, and yes weedwacker does that, but why not produce a wit, something that I think would go great in TX. The only other brewery in TX that brews one is (512) but they don't bottle it, so Saint Arnold would be the first bottled offering by a TX brewery. 2) Why not go big? They just finished brewing a very good double IPA in Divine Reserve 11, why not turn that into a year round offering. The first and only year round DIPA by a Texas Brewery. Offer it in Louisiana where Saint Arnold's is just expanding and really make some in roads into that market. I would bet good money that a well made DIPA sold year round would sell more than TX Wheat did and Weedwacker will. I know its my two cents, and Saint Arnold will do what they want, but that's the beauty of a blog, a place to write down my opinions. What do you think? Did Saint Arnold make the right decision?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think St. Arnold made a fine decision. Texas Wheat was not a big seller - I'm sure Weedwacker will do better. I never had a chance to try WW. While there are only 7 reviews on Beer Advocate, the average is an A-, and 3 of the 7 specifically wish it would come back in wider distribution.
I agree that I'd love SA to bring a bigger beer like DR11 out full-time, but WW is surely a step in the right direction.
Imagine if you will, Weedwacker in a can floating down the river...
I loved Weedwacker and am stoked about this move. Texas Wheat as you said is pretty meh. I'd love a regular Texas DIPA as well, but Weedwacker is a beer that you might be able to use as a gateway beer for the BMC crowd. DIPA? Not so much! It's also a very fast turn on the brewing side. When my buddies and I brew our Bavarian Hefe, it's drinkable in as little as 3 weeks. This may help make more room in their fermentation schedule for all the cool beers that us Beer Nerds are clamoring for.
I'm with you. I think everybody liked the fun of the Moveable Yeast series more than they like Weedwacker. I've always thought that Lawnmower and Texas Wheat were their two weakest offerings and now they just replaced one with the cousin of the other.
Texas wheat was a solid beer. Not the best of the style, but far from the worst. That's about where all St. A's beers fall for me. St. A's was my gateway brewery so I love them, but they just don't hold up to some of the other breweries out there. Sure, taking the wheat out made good economic sense, but I don't think replacing it with WW is a great economic move either. Making a bigger stout would. Distributing out of state more would. Making a beer that has limited input, and mostly is only favorable from his inner circle? I think there are better ways to go about increasing production--assuming limited sales really was the motivation.
But, like Brock said in the article, he never really liked Texas Wheat and it wasn't a beer he really wanted to make. So, being the sole owner, he gets to pull the plug on that one, and the trigger on a questionable one. Whether it's a smart move or not.
His track record is pretty good though, so I'm sure he'll do fine with it. I would just personally like to see them brew more bigger beers than lighter ones.
I'm completely with you on the need for a solid year-round DIPA offering. How hard can it be? It's not like we are asking them to commit to a barrel aging program, or to an expensive venture like making a sour. They should kill Elissa, and only make their DIPA year round.
From what I have heard, WW is selling really well.
Post a Comment