(06-04-2020 03:49 PM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 07:45 AM)skylinecat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 05:57 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]No..the clifton economy rides on the back of something called "tuition" and "state taxes" as well as the endowment. UC wouldn't close if FB became FCS, and the Clifton economy would still thrive because of the significant student body that enrolls annually at UC and NEVER attends FB games (but donates to the AD with their tuition $$$ to the tune of 45% of their annual budget).
I’m surprised you didn’t fall over with how fast his joke went over your head. But to your ridiculous point that the downtown economy would somehow collapse without 10 Sunday’s worth of Bengals games every year, pre-covid downtown (away from PBS) was flourishing. You just had the new GE building built, the massive great American building was built, people are actually starting to live downtown again, and the restaurants have been pushing from OTR into downtown proper because the demand is there. None of which has anything to do with the 2-14 Bengals.
Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Antonio--NBA Spurs
Columbus--NHL Blue Jackets--it's also a state capital...most state capitals are large due to the presence of state government in those cities.
Sacremento--NBA Kings
Asheville, Portalnd ME aren't major metropolitan areas..they are mid-size urban areas, but smaller than Cleveland, Chicago, NYC, NO, LA, SF, SD, Atlanta etc...
I hope you could use context clues to realize you're literally geographically the furthest you possibly could be from being right.
(06-04-2020 04:14 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 07:45 AM)skylinecat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 05:57 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]No..the clifton economy rides on the back of something called "tuition" and "state taxes" as well as the endowment. UC wouldn't close if FB became FCS, and the Clifton economy would still thrive because of the significant student body that enrolls annually at UC and NEVER attends FB games (but donates to the AD with their tuition $$$ to the tune of 45% of their annual budget).
I’m surprised you didn’t fall over with how fast his joke went over your head. But to your ridiculous point that the downtown economy would somehow collapse without 10 Sunday’s worth of Bengals games every year, pre-covid downtown (away from PBS) was flourishing. You just had the new GE building built, the massive great American building was built, people are actually starting to live downtown again, and the restaurants have been pushing from OTR into downtown proper because the demand is there. None of which has anything to do with the 2-14 Bengals.
Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Diego has only the perennially last-place Padres in a metro of 3.3 million. They're doing just fine.
The Chargers' old stadium sits on land that is easily worth over $1 billion. Now that the Chargers left, the land is being given to SDSU. They're turning it into a satellite campus and hotel/conference center that will create 7,800 permanent full-time onsite export jobs and educate thousands of students. It will also have a riverfront park and a smaller multipurpose outdoor stadium that will be much more extensively used than the old NFL stadium. Way better for local economic development than a few hundred full-time NFL jobs and a behemoth stadium that's used for less than 100 hours a year.
When Cincinnati was considering subsidizing FCC, some of the outside experts were saying that a pro sports stadium has less economic impact than a grocery store.
Bolded, I've come to believe the same. Cincinnati would still have major league baseball and major league soccer. When the MLS announcement was made, Cincinnati became the 19th city with at least three major league franchises, which is really quite remarkable. Most of my life, it's been just two.
After walking the Ohio River Trail at Smale Park and dining at The Banks once again last Saturday, I was gazing at PBS and thinking what a colossal mistake it was for a city our size, in this climate,
not to have a retractable dome (all thanks to Mike Brown's unchecked demands). The Tri-state has likely missed a billion dollars or more in economic value while being passed over for Final Fours, political conventions and large international exhibitions.
So re-purpose that land mass as the new convention hub and the ROI would far exceed what the Bengals deliver. The setting--on the water in a riverfront park with bars, restaurants and modern hotels (which would be developed) would be unique in all of America. Many choices within walking distance, including baseball. Conventioneers would be close to the streetcar line for short rides to downtown
and OTR for those seeking still more dining, drinking and entertainment options. Could Indy or Columbus offer such a setting for out of town visitors? Not even close. Yet both cities get conventions and concerts that pass on our city and it's smaller, antiquated convention center (and riverfront arena).
Properly developed and managed in this way, Cincinnati could do even better financially without the Bengals. As it stands today, we have a substandard convention facility for a city this size, and a convention "hub" hotel that was such an embarrassment it is awaiting demolition.
We need city/county leadership willing to re-imagine development and invest in revenue generators so that taxes actually stimulate more money flowing into the area, rather than providing corporate welfare for a family of millionaires running a competitively unsuccessful NFL franchise.
I've lived on the Banks for over 2 years and I can say growing up in this city I never thought I'd say that. A big reason why the Banks project ever came to fruition is because of the two major stadiums. We'd probably do fine without the Bengals, but it would still be a significant economic loss that we'd have to jump through hoops to compensate for.
My statement that started this whole thing wasn't about trying to drive the Bengals out of the city, it was about the very real possibility that Mike Brown takes his ball and goes home with it once the stadium deal expires. That would present a huge football vacuum that UC could fill right around the same time the Big 12 could theoretically expand.
Converrl completely mischaracterized my sentiment.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
(06-04-2020 08:27 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:49 PM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 07:45 AM)skylinecat Wrote: [ -> ]I’m surprised you didn’t fall over with how fast his joke went over your head. But to your ridiculous point that the downtown economy would somehow collapse without 10 Sunday’s worth of Bengals games every year, pre-covid downtown (away from PBS) was flourishing. You just had the new GE building built, the massive great American building was built, people are actually starting to live downtown again, and the restaurants have been pushing from OTR into downtown proper because the demand is there. None of which has anything to do with the 2-14 Bengals.
Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Antonio--NBA Spurs
Columbus--NHL Blue Jackets--it's also a state capital...most state capitals are large due to the presence of state government in those cities.
Sacremento--NBA Kings
Asheville, Portalnd ME aren't major metropolitan areas..they are mid-size urban areas, but smaller than Cleveland, Chicago, NYC, NO, LA, SF, SD, Atlanta etc...
I hope you could use context clues to realize you're literally geographically the furthest you possibly could be from being right.
When did Portland outgrow NYC, LA, SF and Chicago...hell...I'll throw in Houston, Dallas, Atlanta and Cleveland for good measure...
(06-05-2020 08:42 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 08:27 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:49 PM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Antonio--NBA Spurs
Columbus--NHL Blue Jackets--it's also a state capital...most state capitals are large due to the presence of state government in those cities.
Sacremento--NBA Kings
Asheville, Portalnd ME aren't major metropolitan areas..they are mid-size urban areas, but smaller than Cleveland, Chicago, NYC, NO, LA, SF, SD, Atlanta etc...
I hope you could use context clues to realize you're literally geographically the furthest you possibly could be from being right.
When did Portland outgrow NYC, LA, SF and Chicago...hell...I'll throw in Houston, Dallas, Atlanta and Cleveland for good measure...
You said Portland, ME on that last message, he is referring to Portland, OR as being the example to follow in comparison to Cincinnati, he threw in the other Portland as an example of a smaller city with a strong core, of which there are many more examples.
Also, Portland's CSA is larger than the city you're arguing would crumble to dust if it didn't have the Bengals (by about a million people)...and they don't have an NFL team...
(06-04-2020 08:26 PM)dubcat14 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 04:14 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 07:45 AM)skylinecat Wrote: [ -> ]I’m surprised you didn’t fall over with how fast his joke went over your head. But to your ridiculous point that the downtown economy would somehow collapse without 10 Sunday’s worth of Bengals games every year, pre-covid downtown (away from PBS) was flourishing. You just had the new GE building built, the massive great American building was built, people are actually starting to live downtown again, and the restaurants have been pushing from OTR into downtown proper because the demand is there. None of which has anything to do with the 2-14 Bengals.
Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Diego has only the perennially last-place Padres in a metro of 3.3 million. They're doing just fine.
The Chargers' old stadium sits on land that is easily worth over $1 billion. Now that the Chargers left, the land is being given to SDSU. They're turning it into a satellite campus and hotel/conference center that will create 7,800 permanent full-time onsite export jobs and educate thousands of students. It will also have a riverfront park and a smaller multipurpose outdoor stadium that will be much more extensively used than the old NFL stadium. Way better for local economic development than a few hundred full-time NFL jobs and a behemoth stadium that's used for less than 100 hours a year.
When Cincinnati was considering subsidizing FCC, some of the outside experts were saying that a pro sports stadium has less economic impact than a grocery store.
Austin, TX has a population of 1m people and is just now getting an MLS team.. there are people who claim it's one of the top cities in the US. I'm not going to argue about how pro-sports impact the city. I'd prefer the Bengals to stay and show a bit more grandeur within the city and not be an embarrassment, but I also wish the stadium was done up differently and we'd have something like Ford Field or Lucas Oil. I also think it's possible to be a fan of both teams. If the Cats can have another impressive top 15 season they'll grab more fans and momentum will continue to shift.
Edit: There's also Orlando, Oklahoma City, Jacksonville, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Columbus, and Memphis with just one pro sports team.... Cincinnati would survive without the Bengals.
Double-check that...don't you have hockey in some of those locales?
Would Cincinnati survive without the Bengals? Of course! That's not my argument...the city would see a drop in economic activity as a result--Baltimore suffered when they lost the Colts...Cleveland suffered when they lost the Browns...Seattle suffered when they lost the Sonics...Houston suffered when they lost the Oilers...while Nashville saw an uptick by snagging that franchise.
Pro sports are a draw, and if you have a team, the city should make every effort to keep it...even the Bengals.
What a lot of people are forgetting is the enthusiasm and excitement around the franchise while Paul Brown was still alive...those games saw robust attendance, and the franchise was competitive...and a significant draw. The Mike Brown years have been an abject disaster, but again, he'll be dead soon and the franchise will be under new ownership. Success stories like these are replete in pro sports...they happen all the time, and a winning team has a significant impact on a city's economy...that is inarguable.
Don't turn Cincinnati into Dayton...please...
(06-05-2020 08:58 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 08:26 PM)dubcat14 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 04:14 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Diego has only the perennially last-place Padres in a metro of 3.3 million. They're doing just fine.
The Chargers' old stadium sits on land that is easily worth over $1 billion. Now that the Chargers left, the land is being given to SDSU. They're turning it into a satellite campus and hotel/conference center that will create 7,800 permanent full-time onsite export jobs and educate thousands of students. It will also have a riverfront park and a smaller multipurpose outdoor stadium that will be much more extensively used than the old NFL stadium. Way better for local economic development than a few hundred full-time NFL jobs and a behemoth stadium that's used for less than 100 hours a year.
When Cincinnati was considering subsidizing FCC, some of the outside experts were saying that a pro sports stadium has less economic impact than a grocery store.
Austin, TX has a population of 1m people and is just now getting an MLS team.. there are people who claim it's one of the top cities in the US. I'm not going to argue about how pro-sports impact the city. I'd prefer the Bengals to stay and show a bit more grandeur within the city and not be an embarrassment, but I also wish the stadium was done up differently and we'd have something like Ford Field or Lucas Oil. I also think it's possible to be a fan of both teams. If the Cats can have another impressive top 15 season they'll grab more fans and momentum will continue to shift.
Edit: There's also Orlando, Oklahoma City, Jacksonville, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Columbus, and Memphis with just one pro sports team.... Cincinnati would survive without the Bengals.
Double-check that...don't you have hockey in some of those locales?
Would Cincinnati survive without the Bengals? Of course! That's not my argument...the city would see a drop in economic activity as a result--Baltimore suffered when they lost the Colts...Cleveland suffered when they lost the Browns...Seattle suffered when they lost the Sonics...Houston suffered when they lost the Oilers...while Nashville saw an uptick by snagging that franchise.
Pro sports are a draw, and if you have a team, the city should make every effort to keep it...even the Bengals.
What a lot of people are forgetting is the enthusiasm and excitement around the franchise while Paul Brown was still alive...those games saw robust attendance, and the franchise was competitive...and a significant draw. The Mike Brown years have been an abject disaster, but again, he'll be dead soon and the franchise will be under new ownership. Success stories like these are replete in pro sports...they happen all the time, and a winning team has a significant impact on a city's economy...that is inarguable.
Don't turn Cincinnati into Dayton...please...
Katie's been running the day to day for several years now.
(06-05-2020 09:05 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ] (06-05-2020 08:58 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 08:26 PM)dubcat14 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 04:14 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ]The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Diego has only the perennially last-place Padres in a metro of 3.3 million. They're doing just fine.
The Chargers' old stadium sits on land that is easily worth over $1 billion. Now that the Chargers left, the land is being given to SDSU. They're turning it into a satellite campus and hotel/conference center that will create 7,800 permanent full-time onsite export jobs and educate thousands of students. It will also have a riverfront park and a smaller multipurpose outdoor stadium that will be much more extensively used than the old NFL stadium. Way better for local economic development than a few hundred full-time NFL jobs and a behemoth stadium that's used for less than 100 hours a year.
When Cincinnati was considering subsidizing FCC, some of the outside experts were saying that a pro sports stadium has less economic impact than a grocery store.
Austin, TX has a population of 1m people and is just now getting an MLS team.. there are people who claim it's one of the top cities in the US. I'm not going to argue about how pro-sports impact the city. I'd prefer the Bengals to stay and show a bit more grandeur within the city and not be an embarrassment, but I also wish the stadium was done up differently and we'd have something like Ford Field or Lucas Oil. I also think it's possible to be a fan of both teams. If the Cats can have another impressive top 15 season they'll grab more fans and momentum will continue to shift.
Edit: There's also Orlando, Oklahoma City, Jacksonville, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Columbus, and Memphis with just one pro sports team.... Cincinnati would survive without the Bengals.
Double-check that...don't you have hockey in some of those locales?
Would Cincinnati survive without the Bengals? Of course! That's not my argument...the city would see a drop in economic activity as a result--Baltimore suffered when they lost the Colts...Cleveland suffered when they lost the Browns...Seattle suffered when they lost the Sonics...Houston suffered when they lost the Oilers...while Nashville saw an uptick by snagging that franchise.
Pro sports are a draw, and if you have a team, the city should make every effort to keep it...even the Bengals.
What a lot of people are forgetting is the enthusiasm and excitement around the franchise while Paul Brown was still alive...those games saw robust attendance, and the franchise was competitive...and a significant draw. The Mike Brown years have been an abject disaster, but again, he'll be dead soon and the franchise will be under new ownership. Success stories like these are replete in pro sports...they happen all the time, and a winning team has a significant impact on a city's economy...that is inarguable.
Don't turn Cincinnati into Dayton...please...
Katie's been running the day to day for several years now.
There is no getting through to an individual who thinks Cincinnati and Dayton are only an NFL team apart.
(06-05-2020 08:58 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 08:26 PM)dubcat14 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 04:14 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 03:31 PM)geef Wrote: [ -> ] (06-04-2020 11:55 AM)converrl Wrote: [ -> ]Your are hilarious! Does the development on either side of the Riverfront get built without a major league presence? No. Do you lose millennials and young professionals without major league presence? Yes. Does that cut into the downtown economy? Yes.
Find me a major metropolitan area without a major league presence...they are few and far between. The fact that a franchise is not successful does not mean that it will remain so...ask the New Orleans Saints or the Philadelphia Eagles or Denver Broncos...all of which were perennial doormats at one time...hell...throw in the Cubs and Braves if you want an example from MLB.
I know you hate MB and the Bengals, but MB will be dead soon and new ownership will take over...at that point, anything can happen. Major league sports are a DRAW, plain and simple. They aren't the sum total of the economy, but they certainly contribute.
Like I said, I don't want to turn Cincinnati into Dayton.
The city that I live in, Portland, has one of the most thriving, livable urban cores of any North American city. We don't have pro football or baseball. Columbus is another example. And Sacramento. And San Antonio. Plenty of smaller cities - Asheville, Portland (Maine), etc - have great cores without baseball and football.
San Diego has only the perennially last-place Padres in a metro of 3.3 million. They're doing just fine.
The Chargers' old stadium sits on land that is easily worth over $1 billion. Now that the Chargers left, the land is being given to SDSU. They're turning it into a satellite campus and hotel/conference center that will create 7,800 permanent full-time onsite export jobs and educate thousands of students. It will also have a riverfront park and a smaller multipurpose outdoor stadium that will be much more extensively used than the old NFL stadium. Way better for local economic development than a few hundred full-time NFL jobs and a behemoth stadium that's used for less than 100 hours a year.
When Cincinnati was considering subsidizing FCC, some of the outside experts were saying that a pro sports stadium has less economic impact than a grocery store.
Austin, TX has a population of 1m people and is just now getting an MLS team.. there are people who claim it's one of the top cities in the US. I'm not going to argue about how pro-sports impact the city. I'd prefer the Bengals to stay and show a bit more grandeur within the city and not be an embarrassment, but I also wish the stadium was done up differently and we'd have something like Ford Field or Lucas Oil. I also think it's possible to be a fan of both teams. If the Cats can have another impressive top 15 season they'll grab more fans and momentum will continue to shift.
Edit: There's also Orlando, Oklahoma City, Jacksonville, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Columbus, and Memphis with just one pro sports team.... Cincinnati would survive without the Bengals.
Double-check that...don't you have hockey in some of those locales?
Would Cincinnati survive without the Bengals? Of course! That's not my argument...the city would see a drop in economic activity as a result--Baltimore suffered when they lost the Colts...Cleveland suffered when they lost the Browns...Seattle suffered when they lost the Sonics...Houston suffered when they lost the Oilers...while Nashville saw an uptick by snagging that franchise.
Pro sports are a draw, and if you have a team, the city should make every effort to keep it...even the Bengals.
What a lot of people are forgetting is the enthusiasm and excitement around the franchise while Paul Brown was still alive...those games saw robust attendance, and the franchise was competitive...and a significant draw. The Mike Brown years have been an abject disaster, but again, he'll be dead soon and the franchise will be under new ownership. Success stories like these are replete in pro sports...they happen all the time, and a winning team has a significant impact on a city's economy...that is inarguable.
Don't turn Cincinnati into Dayton...please...
Sure Columbus, and we'd still have the Reds. If you consider soccer a high level pro sport some markets would have two teams and so would Cincy. I don't want to see the Bengals go but I also don't want to see another terrible tax deal.
(06-05-2020 09:39 AM)MickMack Wrote: [ -> ]It should be interesting to see how this develops: https://thehill.com/homenews/news/501302...oronavirus
It will be interesting to monitor.
But I would think in this age group and general health profile, the vast majority of infections will be asymptomatic, or, three days with flu-like symptoms.
Most important thing will be ensuring that every team has the testing capacity to isolate these individuals immeadietly, and then test the rest of the team to ensure they're good before returning to play. A season can't occur if entire teams are forced into Quarantine every time someone tests positive
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
It's going to be fun to see how conferences address positive tests and how they would affect competition. Imagine there are 12 players who test positive and are not allowed to play...if it was passed around the QB room, you kind of can't play the game anymore, right? Is that a forfeit, a no contest, is the game moved to another date?
(06-05-2020 10:15 AM)BearcatMan Wrote: [ -> ]It's going to be fun to see how conferences address positive tests and how they would affect competition. Imagine there are 12 players who test positive and are not allowed to play...if it was passed around the QB room, you kind of can't play the game anymore, right? Is that a forfeit, a no contest, is the game moved to another date?
Yeah, that was what immediately came to mind. And it's not an implausible scenario. Your position group is the group of most frequent contact. I will agree with others that this age and health group is pretty low risk. But what happens if a kid gets seriously ill or, God forbid, dies? It will be interesting to see how the program and college sports overall responds.
We run with Cam Jones at QB?
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
(06-05-2020 10:40 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]We run with Cam Jones at QB?
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Per the roster on gobearcats.com he has been moved over to tight end.
(06-05-2020 10:13 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Most important thing will be ensuring that every team has the testing capacity to isolate these individuals immeadietly, and then test the rest of the team to ensure they're good before returning to play. A season can't occur if entire teams are forced into Quarantine every time someone tests positive
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Over the course of a season, I think that might be a fools errand. Classes, walking around campus, Howevwr many people the staff encounters, those through out stadiums... Having said that, I think given that these are college athletes, we'll likely be okay.
Perhaps, but it's my understanding programs are trying to do nearly daily testing of athletes just over the summer return period.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
(06-05-2020 11:43 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps, but it's my understanding programs are trying to do nearly daily testing of athletes just over the summer return period.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Couldn't hurt. I imagine not only the damage to player morale that would follow a serious case, but also the liability that would come with such a thing getting out: both in the legal and social media sense, offers the university incentive to be extra cautious.
(06-05-2020 11:43 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps, but it's my understanding programs are trying to do nearly daily testing of athletes just over the summer return period.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Daily tests?! Jesus Christ...their noses are going to be more ****** than a 90's Wall Street Banker's