On Wednesday, the City Council unanimously approved the indoor practice facility!

I know we all assumed that it would get done, but it still just doesn't seem real to me and I'm excited about what this could do for our organization.

On top of improving health and play in the winter (I know we used UC's bubble and other places), I'm just excited that potential free agents will look at how our team is improving and then that we're also building this and just think "that's a team that's doing what it needs to do to win!"

Quote:CINCINNATI (WXIX) - Without one vote against, the Cincinnati City Council approved the Bengals’ plans for an indoor practice facility.

The bubble facility will be placed at 621 W. Mehring Way, which is between the Brent Spence Bridge and the Clay Wade Baily Bridge.

The practice bubble will be removable in case the Ohio River floods.

In a presentation, the Bengals said the property has a drainage system and is designed for flood debris not to build up along the structures. They said everything can be removed besides a short 4-foot concrete wall.

The ordinance will last five years.

The Bengals will continue their search for land on the Hilltop Concrete where they can build a permanent indoor facility.

I also like how it states that we're not settling for that being good enough and that we plan on eventually building something better and more permanent.

There seems to be no correlation between team success and having indoor practice facilities, since most other teams have one. Which means it won't enhance the ability to attract free agents either.

(04-29-2022, 03:22 AM)ElkValleyBengal Wrote: There seems to be no correlation between team success and having indoor practice facilities, since most other teams have one.  Which means it won't enhance the ability to attract free agents either.

If most other teams have one, then how could you conclusion that it doesn't help a team be successful?

The same goes with attracting free agents.

In fact, doesn't the fact that we have never been a top pick for most free agents make it possible that the lack of an indoor practice facility could be a factor in their decisions?

Also, it's about the image of the franchise being professional.

If you show up to a job interview and it's an old, beat-down building, you think you're going to choose that over a business that has a modern building with modern amenities?

(04-29-2022, 02:34 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: If most other teams have one, then how could you conclusion that it doesn't help a team be successful?

The same goes with attracting free agents.

In order for a correlation to exist, there has to be direct evidence of a relationship. For instance, if teams with a practice bubble won more games than teams without a practice bubble, then that would be a correlation. If teams with a practice bubble attracted more free agents, then that would be a correlation. 

Since we still have teams without practice bubbles (Bengals, 49ers, Rams, Chargers), you can look at average win rate over a period of time between practice bubbles and non-practice bubbles to figure out if it has any meaningful effect. Even better, you could try to gather data from a period in NFL history where bubble vs. non-bubble was fairly evenly split. The correlation will either be non-existent or incredibly minor would be my guess. I don't think his statement is off base. It would not surprise me to it helping in attracting FAs, but it would probably be minor again. Money is king. 

(04-29-2022, 02:34 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: If most other teams have one, then how could you conclusion that it doesn't help a team be successful?

The same goes with attracting free agents.

In fact, doesn't the fact that we have never been a top pick for most free agents make it possible that the lack of an indoor practice facility could be a factor in their decisions?

Also, it's about the image of the franchise being professional.

If you show up to a job interview and it's an old, beat-down building, you think you're going to choose that over a business that has a modern building with modern amenities?

Because a number of organizations who have one aren't successful.  Rosters and coaching- and occasionally luck- distinguish the winners and losers, not nice amenities.

If most everyone else has an indoor facility, what makes having one yourself a selling point?  I would argue the last three seasons have demonstrated free agents will sign given the money - indoor facility or no.  

As for work, I'll go with the highest bidder most of the time- especially for the same job description.  

I'm indifferent on the whole thing to be honest.  It just seems there is more emphasis placed on the impact it will have than is warranted.  

(04-29-2022, 02:42 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: In order for a correlation to exist, there has to be direct evidence of a relationship. For instance, if teams with a practice bubble won more games than teams without a practice bubble, then that would be a correlation. If teams with a practice bubble attracted more free agents, then that would be a correlation. 

Since we still have teams without practice bubbles (Bengals, 49ers, Rams, Chargers), you can look at average win rate over a period of time between practice bubbles and non-practice bubbles to figure out if it has any meaningful effect. Even better, you could try to gather data from a period in NFL history where bubble vs. non-bubble was fairly evenly split. The correlation will either be non-existent or incredibly minor would be my guess. I don't think his statement is off base. It would not surprise me to it helping in attracting FAs, but it would probably be minor again. Money is king. 

All three of those teams are located in California, which all have warm weather and none rain much. In order for it to be a proper evaluation, you'd need to evaluate a team with a similar climate.

Money is king, but most good players aren't going to come to a franchise that doesn't have respectable facilities when a similar team does and offers a similar contract.

(04-29-2022, 02:58 PM)ElkValleyBengal Wrote: Because a number of organizations who have one aren't successful.  Rosters and coaching- and occasionally luck- distinguish the winners and losers, not nice amenities.

If most everyone else has an indoor facility, what makes having one yourself a selling point?  I would argue the last three seasons have demonstrated free agents will sign given the money - indoor facility or no.  

As for work, I'll go with the highest bidder most of the time- especially for the same job description.  

I'm indifferent on the whole thing to be honest.  It just seems there is more emphasis placed on the impact it will have than is warranted.  

How much more unsuccessful would those organizations be if they didn't have an indoor practice facility?

It doesn't make it a selling point unless you DON'T have one, which we don't currently, but we should soon.

(04-29-2022, 03:19 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: All three of those teams are located in California, which all have warm weather and none rain much. In order for it to be a proper evaluation, you'd need to evaluate a team with a similar climate.

Money is king, but most good players aren't going to come to a franchise that doesn't have respectable facilities when a similar team does and offers a similar contract.

Yeah, that’s why I mentioned having to go back in time in order to do some kind of study on this.

Good news. It can only be a benefit when a team gets some meaningful practise in on an otherwise totally crap day.

(04-29-2022, 06:59 PM)wanga Wrote: Good news. It can only be a benefit when a team gets some meaningful practise in on an otherwise totally crap day.

My thoughts exactly Wanga. Not going to get into the practice bubble debate. Good news.

DJ Reader approves

The #Bengals are back in the building to start their off-season program today.

Looks like @Djread98 is one of the first back in the building ? pic.twitter.com/PvFEBPRQBG

— Willie Lutz (@willie_lutz) May 2, 2022

I can't find any updates on this or the temporary practice bubble.

Does anyone have any updates?

(06-01-2022, 03:28 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I can't find any updates on this or the temporary practice bubble.

Does anyone have any updates?

I drive by it twice every day. Construction is ongoing. If i get a chance, i can snap a pic.

(04-29-2022, 03:19 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: All three of those teams are located in California, which all have warm weather and none rain much. In order for it to be a proper evaluation, you'd need to evaluate a team with a similar climate.

Money is king, but most good players aren't going to come to a franchise that doesn't have respectable facilities when a similar team does and offers a similar contract.

How much more unsuccessful would those organizations be if they didn't have an indoor practice facility?

It doesn't make it a selling point unless you DON'T have one, which we don't currently, but we should soon.

SF gets plenty of rain and is definitely not "warm" all the time.
Cincinnati actually is warmer than SF pretty much from May through September.
SF is just more temperate, so it doesn't get as cold in the winter.

In terms of precipitation, SF averages more precipitation than Cincy Dec through Feb.
Close to the same precip in Nov and March.

https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/557~15856/Comparison-of-the-Average-Weather-in-San-Francisco-and-Cincinnati

Has a team ever won a Super Bowl without one? Obviously, tracing only as far back as such things existed.

(04-29-2022, 03:22 AM)ElkValleyBengal Wrote: There seems to be no correlation between team success and having indoor practice facilities, since most other teams have one.  Which means it won't enhance the ability to attract free agents either.

It may not attract any free agents, as an indoor facility is pretty much a "standard feature" with NFL teams, however not having one sure has worked as an effective deterrent to some free agents choosing the Bengals in the past.  So, there is that.

(06-01-2022, 04:36 PM)ochocincos Wrote: SF gets plenty of rain and is definitely not "warm" all the time.
Cincinnati actually is warmer than SF pretty much from May through September.
SF is just more temperate, so it doesn't get as cold in the winter.

In terms of precipitation, SF averages more precipitation than Cincy Dec through Feb.
Close to the same precip in Nov and March.

https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/557~15856/Comparison-of-the-Average-Weather-in-San-Francisco-and-Cincinnati

I lived in SF for 4 years in the Navy and I can assure you it's not a "warm" climate.

As far as the practice bubble great 

It's not letting me quote people today for some reason but, faulk, can we get the pictures?! I'm anxious about this! Going to Chicken Salad Chicken in a few minutes in the Crestview Hills Town Center and I might get my friend to drive down to Cinci to see how it's coming along!

I doubt he'll want to since I live in Crestview Hills and he's not a football guy.

(06-02-2022, 02:21 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It's not letting me quote people today for some reason but, faulk, can we get the pictures?! I'm anxious about this! Going to Chicken Salad Chicken in a few minutes in the Crestview Hills Town Center and I might get my friend to drive down to Cinci to see how it's coming along!

I doubt he'll want to since I live in Crestview Hills and he's not a football guy.

It's not worth a drive yet, but i'll post a pic tonight after i get home from the gym. 

(06-02-2022, 02:41 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: It's not worth a drive yet, but i'll post a pic tonight after i get home from the gym. 

Much appreciated.

(06-01-2022, 04:50 PM)RunKijanaRun Wrote: Has a team ever won a Super Bowl without one? Obviously, tracing only as far back as such things existed.

 You need to use that...