U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-22-2012, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,837,249 times
Reputation: 924

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
I dunno ... Katie thinks quite highly of herself.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-22-2012, 07:52 PM
 
1,072 posts, read 1,115,303 times
Reputation: 2151
Quote:
Originally Posted by unusualfire View Post
Can the county sue the NFL and Bengals for the cost of the stadium if the Bengals goto LA?

Can we sue the Bengals for impersonating an NFL football team..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2012, 08:56 PM
 
Location: OH
688 posts, read 865,656 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by 23145tp View Post
Lets face it, nothing will change until Mike Brown is no longer in charge of the bengals. He refuses to have football people running the football side of the business (player development, scouting dept, drafting of players, general mgr and director of football operations). The only way the paying public can force a change is to boycott games. You have to hit management in the wallet for this franchise to do anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abr7rmj View Post
That's not really true. The public essentially did boycott the games last year with thousands of empty seats and countless canceled season tickets. What did that bring about? A two-year extension for the worst coach in football.

Until Mike Brown releases his grip on this franchise and hires a competent football GM who is then free to hire his own coach, nothing will change. This team has plenty of talent and should, by all rights, be 6-1 or 5-2 right now. It's the uninspired leadership of Marvin Lewis that has resulted in what we have instead.

How old is Mike Brown anyway and does he have any health concerns? (Yea, I'm hoping)
Quote:
Originally Posted by abr7rmj View Post
His dad lived to 82, though had long since passed off control of the team to Mike by 1991 when he died. Hopefully Mike passes the torch to Katie sooner rather than later. Katie will surely have to hire a GM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
I dunno ... Katie thinks quite highly of herself. Not to mention that she might hire her husband.
Good discussion here and it seems like many of you understand the issue is ownership. After 20 years of underperformance as a franchise I guess the good folks of Cincinnati are starting to get it.

For any subscribers of the Cincinnati Enquirer you may recall Cincinnati sportswriter Paul Daugherty wrote, "In the socialist NFL, it is almost impossible to do what the Bengals have done for 17-plus seasons. It takes a willful arrogance and a willing fan base. The arrogance remains." [September 2008]

While my understanding is last year or perhaps the year before attendance was down more than just a tad, however, in order to avoid TV blackouts there were repeated instances where corporate partners (Kroger for one) came in and bought the minimally required block of seats to lift the blackout. That's money in Mike 'the clown' Brown's pocket and complicitly supporting the incompitance and nepotism that is systemic within the Bengals' organization.

And yes, I don't doubt for one second that Katie, currently executive vice president, hires her husband to run the organization the day she inherits the franchise. After all, Troy Blackburn is already #3 on the payroll, behind only Mike and Katie herself, as Bengals director of business development.

In conclusion, I am in the camp that believes hitting them in the pocket book is the only way to make a change. In fact, I have been boycotting the Bengals since 2008 and will continue to do so until control is handed over to a general manager and the nepotism is erradicated. This includes not only not attending any games, whether by purchasing tickets or willingly receiving complimentary tickets from business associates, but also includes not purchasing any Bengals apparel, memorabilia, or paraphanalia of any sort as the licensing agreements mean purchasing Bengals 'gear' is sending dollars to the Brown family. I have instructed my family and friends to not buy any Bengals items for me as gifts for my birthday or Christmas as well. It's not that I loathe the Bengals; I don't, I grew up attending games and watching them on TV and have met Boomer, Collinsorth, and Munoz in person as a youth and wish the team success, but this is the only way I feel I can influence the situation and change the cycle of disfunction.

In the last 5 years my football entertainment dollars have been diverted to the UC Bearcats who are much more deserving of my support than the Brown family. I believe with four 10-win seasons in the last 5 years and multiple bowl game wins all while operating under the smallest athletic budget in the Big East Conference I see the Bearcats as having done more with less than any other program in the nation. In my mind that's worthy of my support and I have not only supported them via ticket sales and apparel sales but also by becoming a booster in a small capacity.

As Wildman Walker might say, Bearcats forever, Mike Brown never!

Take a look under the section titled Lack of on-the-field success for the record setting incompetence of Mike Brown's "leadership"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Br...all_team_owner)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2012, 11:59 PM
 
2,492 posts, read 3,660,798 times
Reputation: 1385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen_master View Post
Good discussion here and it seems like many of you understand the issue is ownership. After 20 years of underperformance as a franchise I guess the good folks of Cincinnati are starting to get it.

For any subscribers of the Cincinnati Enquirer you may recall Cincinnati sportswriter Paul Daugherty wrote, "In the socialist NFL, it is almost impossible to do what the Bengals have done for 17-plus seasons. It takes a willful arrogance and a willing fan base. The arrogance remains." [September 2008]

While my understanding is last year or perhaps the year before attendance was down more than just a tad, however, in order to avoid TV blackouts there were repeated instances where corporate partners (Kroger for one) came in and bought the minimally required block of seats to lift the blackout. That's money in Mike 'the clown' Brown's pocket and complicitly supporting the incompitance and nepotism that is systemic within the Bengals' organization.

And yes, I don't doubt for one second that Katie, currently executive vice president, hires her husband to run the organization the day she inherits the franchise. After all, Troy Blackburn is already #3 on the payroll, behind only Mike and Katie herself, as Bengals director of business development.

In conclusion, I am in the camp that believes hitting them in the pocket book is the only way to make a change. In fact, I have been boycotting the Bengals since 2008 and will continue to do so until control is handed over to a general manager and the nepotism is erradicated. This includes not only not attending any games, whether by purchasing tickets or willingly receiving complimentary tickets from business associates, but also includes not purchasing any Bengals apparel, memorabilia, or paraphanalia of any sort as the licensing agreements mean purchasing Bengals 'gear' is sending dollars to the Brown family. I have instructed my family and friends to not buy any Bengals items for me as gifts for my birthday or Christmas as well. It's not that I loathe the Bengals; I don't, I grew up attending games and watching them on TV and have met Boomer, Collinsorth, and Munoz in person as a youth and wish the team success, but this is the only way I feel I can influence the situation and change the cycle of disfunction.

In the last 5 years my football entertainment dollars have been diverted to the UC Bearcats who are much more deserving of my support than the Brown family. I believe with four 10-win seasons in the last 5 years and multiple bowl game wins all while operating under the smallest athletic budget in the Big East Conference I see the Bearcats as having done more with less than any other program in the nation. In my mind that's worthy of my support and I have not only supported them via ticket sales and apparel sales but also by becoming a booster in a small capacity.

As Wildman Walker might say, Bearcats forever, Mike Brown never!

Take a look under the section titled Lack of on-the-field success for the record setting incompetence of Mike Brown's "leadership"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Br...all_team_owner)
There's absolutely zero evidence to back that claim up, other than your speculation. Katie is on record as saying she wants this franchise to be what the Steelers are and I don't doubt that. There have been reports of her confronting her stuck-in-the-1920s father on many issues. I think it's obvious that she's far more competitive than Mikey and the losses bother her more than they do her brain-dead dad. Further, let's say you're right and Katie tries to anoint her husband as GM ... I highly doubt the NFL would allow it.

So let's see how it plays out when that time comes. Hopefully we're not waiting too much longer.

And as far as pouring your dollars into UC football, are you satisfied with seeing mega-powers like Delaware State, Miami, Akron and Fordham (Fordham opened this season against Lock Haven, who's 0-8 and has lost to the likes of East Stroudsburg, Shippensburg, Clarion and Mercyhurst)? And losing non-televised road games in Toledo? Because if you are accepting of that mediocrity, I'm sure the UC athletic department is stifling giggles in between their sighs of relief.

Last edited by abr7rmj; 10-23-2012 at 12:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2012, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Harrison, OH
910 posts, read 1,389,560 times
Reputation: 369
The Bearcats loss to Toledo really irked me. It also doesn't give me much hope for beating Louisville this coming weekend, who are still undefeated, 7-0.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2012, 11:55 AM
 
2,492 posts, read 3,660,798 times
Reputation: 1385
Quote:
Originally Posted by jon1987 View Post
The Bearcats loss to Toledo really irked me. It also doesn't give me much hope for beating Louisville this coming weekend, who are still undefeated, 7-0.
The biggest problem with that game, other than the loss, was the lack of TV. There's no way a program can expect to grow its fan base when it plays road games with no TV coverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2012, 12:44 PM
 
1,072 posts, read 1,115,303 times
Reputation: 2151
Quote:
Originally Posted by abr7rmj View Post
The biggest problem with that game, other than the loss, was the lack of TV. There's no way a program can expect to grow its fan base when it plays road games with no TV coverage.
abr7rmj: The game was on cable ESPN3, TWC-Ch#315. Watched the entire game and it looked like the Bearcats did not want to be there. They were completely flat, I still say it was trap game--looking ahead to Louisville. Nothing against Toledo-they earned that 6-0 record. I still say when UC puts it's A game on the field, Toledo would not beat them. Very simply, Toledo wanted the game more than UC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2012, 11:26 PM
 
Location: OH
688 posts, read 865,656 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by abr7rmj View Post
There's absolutely zero evidence to back that claim up, other than your speculation. Katie is on record as saying she wants this franchise to be what the Steelers are and I don't doubt that. There have been reports of her confronting her stuck-in-the-1920s father on many issues. I think it's obvious that she's far more competitive than Mikey and the losses bother her more than they do her brain-dead dad. Further, let's say you're right and Katie tries to anoint her husband as GM ... I highly doubt the NFL would allow it.

So let's see how it plays out when that time comes. Hopefully we're not waiting too much longer.

And as far as pouring your dollars into UC football, are you satisfied with seeing mega-powers like Delaware State, Miami, Akron and Fordham (Fordham opened this season against Lock Haven, who's 0-8 and has lost to the likes of East Stroudsburg, Shippensburg, Clarion and Mercyhurst)? And losing non-televised road games in Toledo? Because if you are accepting of that mediocrity, I'm sure the UC athletic department is stifling giggles in between their sighs of relief.
Ah, I see I struck a nerve with one of the complicit bunch Daugherty wrote about. Feel free to keep supporting a 20-year loser in the Bungles franchise. I've stated my case above. I was on board through all of the '90s and even into the early and mid-2000s. But after a decade and a half of lining The Clown's pockets I have eschewed the Bungles and will continue to do so until I see cold, hard evidence of a change at the top. Not hope. Not a nine-and-seven season or two. Not empty promises or a coaching carousel. Not lip service from Mrs. Blackburn. Not wishful thinking through rose colored glasses but actual change in the form of an external GM to run the franchise.

As for the Bearcats, again, in the last 5 seasons there are only a small handful of programs with 10 wins 4 out of the last 5 years and even fewer programs with 10 wins in 5 of the last 5 seasons. They are as follows:







10 Wins in 5 of the last 5 seasons:
  • Virginia Tech
  • Boise State
10 Wins in 4 of the last 5 seasons:
  • UC
  • Ohio State
  • Oklahoma
  • BYU
  • TCU
  • Alabama
  • Oregon
Add to it UC has been Big East Conference champions 3Xs in that span and taken trips to two BCS bowl games and I would say the Bearcats are in elite company. If you take a longer-term perspective than just the last game and realize that losses happen from time to time I'd say they're doing pretty darn well. Add to it their doing it with an athletic budget that is literally 1/2 to 1/3 that of inter and intra conference competition and I would say they are deserving of more fan support than they are getting. At least they've shown a commitment to winning which is more than I can say for the Bungles.

Here's an idea of the mountain UC has had to climb with respect to athletic budgets:


» Highest Athletic Department Net Income: Big East

» Top 50 Most Profitable FBS Football and Men’s Basketball Programs

As for this season's schedule, Ohio State was on the schedule and bought out the game. The Buckeyes have been dodging UC for years and I don't blame them. The Buckeyes have nothing to gain by playing the Bearcats and everything to lose most of all intrastate recruiting bragging rights. So that is one hole in the schedule UC had to fill. The second one was West Virginia who suddenly moved to the Big 12 Conference leaving UC with another hole in the schedule to fill. When you're left with two slots on your schedule to fill less than half a season before the first game you are forced to take what you can get and that is Delaware State type programs. All the big boys like Alabama and USC are booked for lucrative primetime TV games.

Man, some people only see the negative in everything. Yep, sounds like a Cincinnati sports fan to me. The sky is falling at the sign of first loss. Sheesh, over the last 5 years the Bearcats have a better track record than your beloved Bengals. If only some day they could earn such unwavering support from fans such as yourself. Imagine what they could do with more funding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2012, 12:54 AM
 
2,492 posts, read 3,660,798 times
Reputation: 1385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen_master View Post
Ah, I see I struck a nerve with one of the complicit bunch Daugherty wrote about. Feel free to keep supporting a 20-year loser in the Bungles franchise. I've stated my case above. I was on board through all of the '90s and even into the early and mid-2000s. But after a decade and a half of lining The Clown's pockets I have eschewed the Bungles and will continue to do so until I see cold, hard evidence of a change at the top. Not hope. Not a nine-and-seven season or two. Not empty promises or a coaching carousel. Not lip service from Mrs. Blackburn. Not wishful thinking through rose colored glasses but actual change in the form of an external GM to run the franchise.

As for the Bearcats, again, in the last 5 seasons there are only a small handful of programs with 10 wins 4 out of the last 5 years and even fewer programs with 10 wins in 5 of the last 5 seasons. They are as follows:







10 Wins in 5 of the last 5 seasons:
  • Virginia Tech
  • Boise State
10 Wins in 4 of the last 5 seasons:
  • UC
  • Ohio State
  • Oklahoma
  • BYU
  • TCU
  • Alabama
  • Oregon
Add to it UC has been Big East Conference champions 3Xs in that span and taken trips to two BCS bowl games and I would say the Bearcats are in elite company. If you take a longer-term perspective than just the last game and realize that losses happen from time to time I'd say they're doing pretty darn well. Add to it their doing it with an athletic budget that is literally 1/2 to 1/3 that of inter and intra conference competition and I would say they are deserving of more fan support than they are getting. At least they've shown a commitment to winning which is more than I can say for the Bungles.

Here's an idea of the mountain UC has had to climb with respect to athletic budgets:


» Highest Athletic Department Net Income: Big East

» Top 50 Most Profitable FBS Football and Men’s Basketball Programs

As for this season's schedule, Ohio State was on the schedule and bought out the game. The Buckeyes have been dodging UC for years and I don't blame them. The Buckeyes have nothing to gain by playing the Bearcats and everything to lose most of all intrastate recruiting bragging rights. So that is one hole in the schedule UC had to fill. The second one was West Virginia who suddenly moved to the Big 12 Conference leaving UC with another hole in the schedule to fill. When you're left with two slots on your schedule to fill less than half a season before the first game you are forced to take what you can get and that is Delaware State type programs. All the big boys like Alabama and USC are booked for lucrative primetime TV games.

Man, some people only see the negative in everything. Yep, sounds like a Cincinnati sports fan to me. The sky is falling at the sign of first loss. Sheesh, over the last 5 years the Bearcats have a better track record than your beloved Bengals. If only some day they could earn such unwavering support from fans such as yourself. Imagine what they could do with more funding.
You have no idea who or what I support. I like the Bengals just fine but after five years of living in the Denver area it wasn't hard to adopt another team. (If you go into Hyde Park or Clifton B-dubs this season and see a white Bailey jersey, it's probably me.) Your ridiculous assertion as to what I do and don't support is hollow. I don't buy jerseys, T-shirts, tickets or anything else from Mike Brown, nor do I go to games in which I pay for tickets. If someone offers me a ticket, yea, I'll probably go. But until the franchise reaches the level I want I won't actively support it with my cash. Period. I'm as disappointed as anyone. Will I root for them (in games other than against the Broncos)? Yes. Will I go to B-dubs with buddies on Sundays, drink myself silly and root like crazy? Yup. Will I buy tickets or anything else? Nope. Not until MB steps down or hires a GM.

The last game I paid for, incidentally, was the 2009 playoff game vs. the Jets, when I flew back into town for the game.

Oh, and your assertion that Ohio State is "dodging" UC is so hilariously absurd that it's almost criminal. Ohio State has home/home series with the following teams over the next decade: Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, Texas, Cal, Oregon, TCU, Navy and North Carolina. And it plays UC multiple times also. Any questions?

Even the thought that OSU is somehow afraid of UC, which just lost to Toledo, is laughable. OSU won't - repeat: won't - play at Nippert Stadium because, frankly, OSU doesn't play in stadiums that small. And, apparently, OSU isn't alone is avoiding dinky Nippert like the plague, as evidenced by UC home games this year against the likes of Fordham and Delaware State. No big-time schools are going to play there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2012, 11:40 AM
 
Location: OH
688 posts, read 865,656 times
Reputation: 364
^^^
A little emotonal are we? In several instances you say my assertions are "absurd" yet you give no evidence to the contrary. I offer up two canceled games for your consideration. In 2008 Ohio State bought out the UC game that was going to be played at Paul Brown Stadium in 2010 for $1,000,000 and requested it be moved to Columbus and pushed back to 2012. I'll leave it to your own interpretation if this was to nullify the homefield advantage the Bearcats would have or if it was a purely profit motivated move. Problem is, the 2012 game was also canceled. And yes, the Buckeyes have the Bearcats tentatively scheduled for 2014 and 2018 (both conveniently in Columbus) and one of these games is a reschedule of the 2012 matchup (which was originally the 2010 game). Many fans are still waiting to see if these games will be played or if there will be some event that causes them to be canceled or postponed yet again to a date well off into the future.

It sounds as though you may not be aware of the history between these two programs. That history is limited but in 2002, the same year the Buckeyes won the national title, the Bearcats nearly upset the Buckeyes. A catch instead of a dropped pass in the endzone in the final seconds would have lifted the Bearcats to victory and derailed that national champion season.

Now back to the present and near future, I'm not saying UC would definitely beat OSU. At the upper levels of college football the parity is striking so only a fool would declare victory in advance. What I am saying, and what I think is painfully obvious in the fact these two D-1 teams only 100 miles apart hardly ever play eachother, is that the stakes are too high for Ohio State and the risk is there that an upset might occur. The repercussions of an Ohio State loss to UC are significant and could possibly be the catalyst for a shift in the balance of power in the state particularly with respect to recruiting and maybe fan support ($$$). This is the same reason no "traditional power" program wants to play Boise State. A few years back Boise State had an open slot on their 2011 schedule and went around to all of the D-1 schools with an open slot the date in the same season and they had no takers (coincidentally Ohio State was one of the open dates). Why? Because these programs have everything to lose and nothing to gain by playing Boise State. It's the same situation for Ohio State. Ohio State has way more at risk that UC should the two teams ever meet on the field. Does that sound like good business sense? Probably. Does it sound like they are scared? Sure does, to UC fans at least though I suspect any honest Buckeyes fan will admit it quietly to themselves if not in public.

Here's a snippet of some of the history:

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs...nclick_check=1

Brian Kelly Wants a Rivalry With Jim Tressel and the Ohio State Buckeyes | Bleacher Report

And sadly this lack of a rivalry extends to basketball too:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/2...A%20Tournament
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top