Would you publicly fund another stadium or let the franchise leave Cincinnati?

[*Awful Llama*]

(01-14-2017, 06:28 PM)jason Wrote: I agree... When they do replace PBS, they should at least copy the design of Seattle's stadium. Cover most of the seats, but leave the playing field exposed to the elements. I hear some fans suggest a dome. I'd just hate to be the first AFC North team to ***** out and play indoors.

I don't see it as pussying out.  It's getting the most functional facility for the dollars.  It's an entertainment venue, it should shelter its customers from the elements and be usable 365 days per year.  And, what are we worried about anyway, losing the "respect" of Steeler fans because we play in a dome?  If we want respect we need to knock the shit out of other teams, not worry about if our stadium has a roof.  

(01-14-2017, 09:03 PM)PDub80 Wrote: I think the better version of the questions is from the other side of this table: What other F'ing moronic fanbase would be willing to pony up money to get the Bengals to actually move there? Like, who would we as a fan base be actually competing against in this imaginary bidding war?

Freaking NOBODY. That's who. No need for the city of Cincinnati to bid against itself!

Remember the Bengals of the '90s?  Yeah, they sucked ass.  Just a horrible, pathetic team, front office and moronic owner to boot.  Still, Baltimore courted them.  

Lose your football team, a few years go by, and you'll be desperate to get another one.  Give St. Louis and San Diego a few years and they too will be desperate and will start looking around for a team to pilfer and will come calling with a deal full of goodies for an owner willing to make the move.   Not saying it's a lock, just food for thought.  Cities that get screwed over start looking for other cities to screw over.