(06-05-2017, 01:11 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I'm quite sure that sealing off the ability for the feet to breath would likely result in wet feet from perspiration due to the more strenuous nature of football, and it could still cause an issue.  

You really need to read up on modern day waterproofing. It does not seal off anything, it wicks one way.....perspiration away from the skin and does not allow moisture in.....

(06-05-2017, 12:42 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Patriots play in a division that also does not have any indoor stadium, so they also have at least 11 games outside. However, they have had an indoor practice facility for quite a number of years now and have won many Super Bowls. If the goal is to emulate the Patriots...

You can't compare anything the Patriots do to other teams because of Tom Brady and Bill Belichek. If they had the same practice facility, but did not have Brady or Belicheat, how many SB's do you really think they would have won. Conversely, if they had Brady and Belicheat, but no bubble, how many Championships do you think they would have won?

(06-05-2017, 02:22 PM)Sled21 Wrote: You can't compare anything the Patriots do to other teams because of Tom Brady and Bill Belichek. If they had the same practice facility, but did not have Brady or Belicheat, how many SB's do you really think they would have won. Conversely, if they had Brady and Belicheat, but no bubble, how many Championships do you think they would have won?

Fine, point to the Steelers then, who have won multiple Super Bowls too. They share an indoor practice facility with the Pitt Panthers college football team. However, unlike the Bengals having to rent/borrow a facility that isn't theirs, the Steelers own (at least partially) the indoor practice facility that they use.

The point is that most teams (especially the successful ones) have an indoor practice facility that is theirs to use as often or little as desired. The Bengals are one of the very few teams that don't have their own facility. IIRC, any other team that doesn't have one doesn't get snow or below freezing temperatures. As Racer already indicated, if it can help the players from getting sick less often or even just making Cincinnati a more desirable destination for NFL players, I'm all for it.

(06-05-2017, 02:33 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Fine, point to the Steelers then, who have won multiple Super Bowls too. They share an indoor practice facility with the Pitt Panthers college football team. However, unlike the Bengals having to rent/borrow a facility that isn't theirs, the Steelers own (at least partially) the indoor practice facility that they use.

The point is that most teams (especially the successful ones) have an indoor practice facility that is theirs to use as often or little as desired. The Bengals are one of the very few teams that don't have their own facility. IIRC, any other team that doesn't have one doesn't get snow or below freezing temperatures. As Racer already indicated, if it can help the players from getting sick less often or even just making Cincinnati a more desirable destination for NFL players, I'm all for it.

Well, since you mention it, the Stoolers have an elite rapist Quarterback of their own.... and a lot of help from the refs. As I said, I'm not opposed to building an indoor facility, I just don't think it matters....

(06-05-2017, 12:58 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: https://m.bengals.com/news/article-1/Notes-Playing-to-win-Changes-bubble-Nugent-full-go-Geno-loses-sack/04419efd-e5c2-4b02-bcce-4a070e2384d0




Now you've heard players complaining. 

(06-05-2017, 02:39 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Well, since you mention it, the Stoolers have an elite rapist Quarterback of their own.... and a lot of help from the refs. As I said, I'm not opposed to building an indoor facility, I just don't think it matters....

Well the Bengals have had a tendency (at least in the PBS era) to play much better early in the season compared to the end. So if anything can be identified as a possible way to help alleviate that downfall toward the end of a season, they should see how feasible it is to pursue. Sure, maybe adding a practice facility won't immediately result in a Super Bowl. But it can help eliminate one potential variable.

(06-05-2017, 02:39 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Well, since you mention it, the Stoolers have an elite rapist Quarterback of their own.... and a lot of help from the refs. As I said, I'm not opposed to building an indoor facility, I just don't think it matters....

Right, because the other 28 owners did it to just waste money? It does matter. Who knows how much, but to say it's over blown or doesn't matter is silly. In a game of inches, all little things like this matter. 

(06-05-2017, 12:42 PM)ochocincos Wrote: The Patriots play in a division that also does not have any indoor stadium, so they also have at least 11 games outside. However, they have had an indoor practice facility for quite a number of years now and have won many Super Bowls. If the goal is to emulate the Patriots...

The Patriots use practice to get their players on the same page with their game plan, etc.

A Key to this is Communication.

It is a lot harder to communicate when 53 players plus Coaches are all shivering their Nads off in 22 degree weather while wind is whistling in their ears forcing people to yell at the top of their lungs only to maybe be heard. Hard to concentrate.

It would be best to have both an Indoor and Outdoor practice facility and use which ever one you felt would serve the team best on a day by day basis.

May want to practice in the Snow right before a Snow weather game or not practice in 50 mile per hour winds before a calm wind weather game.

Case by case usage of either facility at any time.

(06-05-2017, 02:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Well the Bengals have had a tendency (at least in the PBS era) to play much better early in the season compared to the end. So if anything can be identified as a possible way to help alleviate that downfall toward the end of a season, they should see how feasible it is to pursue. Sure, maybe adding a practice facility won't immediately result in a Super Bowl. But it can help eliminate one potential variable.

Seriously? You think it is a great use of initial investment of 35 to 50 million with on going costs of over a million a year because it may help. As a businessman, your statement alone makes me cringe to spend that kind of money on a facility you may use 10 to 15 times a year.

Like I have stated, the Steelers share a facility and no expert of city maps of Pittsburgh, but my guess is the normal practice field is not by the indoor practice field. So just like using UC for a limited amount of practices what exactly is the big deal again.

(06-05-2017, 09:57 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Yes, but their home games are played outside. I'm not against an indoor practice facility, but I don't think it's the be all end all people make it out to be. You can practice in the elements and then play inside, but practicing inside then trying to play in the elements does not translate as well. In other words, it's overblown....

Meh, hard to say.  According to Mike Brown an NFL team having an actual GM is an overblown and unnecessary luxury, too.  As I said, I don't think the bubble is the end-all solution to our woes, rather it's just another reminder that Mike Brown does things his way and his way hasn't added up to a meaningful win in 26 years.

The cheapo training camp stories, the lack of free shampoo/gatorade, no practice bubble when my small liberal arts college has one for pete's sake, the stories about player meeting at Wendy's...it all adds up.

(06-05-2017, 11:19 AM)CageTheBengal Wrote: I'd agree with that but I think there are bigger fish to fry than an indoor facility. If he'd change the Mike Brown way a bit and fire Marvin that'd be a huge help

Granted, there ARE bigger fish to fry like Marvin and Paul Alexander having no accountability as well as Mike Brown being the worst GM to ever hold the seat for 25+ years.

The thing is................

Mike Brown hain't gonna fry any big fish so we are annoyed that he won't even keep up with other NFL teams, soccer teams, and certain colleges and high schools in regards to a practice facility.  I think it's more reasonable to be annoyed when small things aren't addressed because it's clear we've given up on many of the big things he just doesn't give a damn about fixing.

(06-05-2017, 02:19 PM)Sled21 Wrote: You really need to read up on modern day waterproofing. It does not seal off anything, it wicks one way.....perspiration away from the skin and does not allow moisture in.....

I guess all those NFL practices you have participated in told you all you needed to know about wicking and perspiration.  I would still imagine that playing in the elements leads to the challenges I described earlier.  If you believe otherwise, great.  

(06-05-2017, 03:05 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Right, because the other 28 owners did it to just waste money? It does matter. Who knows how much, but to say it's over blown or doesn't matter is silly. In a game of inches, all little things like this matter. 

Mikey will do it if the County tax payers pay for it.

(06-05-2017, 05:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Seriously? You think it is a great use of initial investment of 35 to 50 million with on going costs of over a million a year because it may help. As a businessman, your statement alone makes me cringe to spend that kind of money on a facility you may use 10 to 15 times a year.

Like I have stated, the Steelers share a facility and no expert of city maps of Pittsburgh, but my guess is the normal practice field is not by the indoor practice field. So just like using UC for a limited amount of practices what exactly is the big deal again.

To the highlighted and to everyone else saying things similar about how not every team has an indoor practice facility, but they still have one they can at least partially call their own, and, much, much, much more importantly, they also have much, much, much better things like weight rooms, medical facilities, medical staffs, etc..

(06-05-2017, 05:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: but my guess is the normal practice field is not by the indoor practice field. 

Perhaps your guess is wrong:


http://old.post-gazette.com/steelers/20001006steeleside8.asp

Quote:The indoor complex is located across the parking lot from their offices and outside practice fields at the $30 million South Side facility.

When the Steelers were housed and practiced at Three Rivers Stadium, they would have to bus to Pitt's Cost Center or the indoor bubble at Duquesne University when the weather was bad.

Now they merely walk across the parking lot

(06-05-2017, 10:13 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: I guess all those NFL practices you have participated in told you all you needed to know about wicking and perspiration.  I would still imagine that playing in the elements leads to the challenges I described earlier.  If you believe otherwise, great.  

Nope, no NFL practices, but my work boots, shirts, my hunting clothes, my golf clothes, heck, just about everything I wear nowadays has moisture wicking technology.....

At the risk of disrupting a good indoor facility debate, can someone point me a quote that states FC Cincinnati is building an indoor facility? Cincyjungle seems to be the ones to have started this indoor talk, but the talk from Jeff Berding they use as reference says nothing about an indoor facility. The talk is of a "practice complex," but those tend to be outdoor facilities in soccer.

Quote:Also Friday, Berding said the club has plans to build a $25 million suburban training facility. The site has not been chosen, but the club has talked to government officials in Clermont, Warren and other surrounding counties. Wherever the club chooses to build a practice complex, FC Cincinnati wants the local government to play a part in investing around the facility. That investment could include a hotel and restaurants, Berding said.

Also, and just to diffuse a touch of the rhetoric, the planned facility would be for an MLS FC Cincinnati. The USL version of FC Cincinnati isn't building anything. It's not a huge deal, but I think some have been extra mad that the Bengals are more bush league than even a "minor league" soccer team.

(06-05-2017, 05:09 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Seriously? You think it is a great use of initial investment of 35 to 50 million with on going costs of over a million a year because it may help. As a businessman, your statement alone makes me cringe to spend that kind of money on a facility you may use 10 to 15 times a year.

Like I have stated, the Steelers share a facility and no expert of city maps of Pittsburgh, but my guess is the normal practice field is not by the indoor practice field. So just like using UC for a limited amount of practices what exactly is the big deal again.

I get where you are coming from. I even mentioned the Steelers too about how they share a facility with the Pitt Panthers. However, the difference is the Steelers name is on the side and they own (part of) the facility. Whereas the Bengals are borrowing someone else's facility. It's about perception. The Bengals are perceived as being cheap because they don't own at least a share of an indoor practice facility.

Perhaps the Bengals should pounce at this opportunity to partner with FC Cincinnati and share the costs. That way, it looks like the Bengals are both not being as cheap as before and also looking to assist a new up-and-coming professional sports team in succeeding in Cincinnati.

ZZzzzz.... Somebody wake me when training camp starts. Lol

(06-05-2017, 01:20 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: And most know better than to complain.  

The bottom line is:  Would it make your players happy?  I bet it would.  I want my players happy and healthy.  

You could sell naming rights to it since you never did for PBS.  It could cover one of the outdoor practice fields adjacent to PBS.  I bet a decent facility could be built for $5 million.  

It wouldn't have to be a Ferrari, just a chevy of a high ceiling bubble, stable for the elements, and heated.  

$5 million? That would would probably pay for breaking the ground and getting utilities buried. The field itself would cost that much. Not picking on you SHRacerX. You're looking at probably closer to $35-$40 million.
 
 Has UC said we can't use their bubble anymore? Did the Bengals not clean up after themselves and were asked not to comeback?