(07-11-2025, 08:57 AM)jj22 Wrote: I'm going to try to sneak this in Jungle noise with good intentions so hear me out.

With the factory of sadness closing down and the Browns leaving Cleveland I was expecting there to be some push back specifically with the move to a domed stadium. What I found when I spied their board is that fans believe the open air stadiums are outdated and the generation that loved weathered football games are long gone.

Their arguments.

1. People know now the dangers of sitting in cold / extreme weather and the risk is no longer worth the bragging rights.
2. The new generation fans prefers comfort.
3. The new generation players prefer to play in domed stadiums.
4. More women, children, families are watching football along with the elderly (the old generation that was used to these freeze bowl games). These populations are at risk of health hazards in these extreme weather environments.
5. As the league moves to 18 game regular seasons, deeper into February. Open roof stadiums will become extinct in the next 10 years.
6. Fans choosing not to attend bad weather games doesn't depend on team record. Even if the team is good, the generation that would sit through these games are slowly dying off.

So my question to you is would you support Cincinnati eventually closing up Paycor? Do you hold onto the "extreme weather is home field advantage" narrative? Are those days gone forever?

(07-11-2025, 11:12 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: The Browns are leaving Cleveland?

(07-11-2025, 11:06 AM)BengalsBong Wrote: Yes, for a dome. You left out the best reason is Joe Burrow and how much we throw the ball the wind can affect the ball when thrown.

As well as rain and a wet ball or snow.

Field goal tries.

Being able to use the dome for other events in Cincy making the team and county/city more money.

As a New Yorker, I say build the biggest, greatest dome stadium in the world and foot the bill with the local communities.  

(07-11-2025, 11:35 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I was a bit unsure what you meant by "it never mattered" but I voted that since the debate of dome stadium in Cincy is "it never mattered" since the two parties  county and bengals  had decided no dome. I also question that attendance is lacking in the NFL because of weather, weather does not drive attendance, winning does and loyal fan bases.  Look at Pittsburgh they have not won a playoff game since 2017 and only one league champ since then and have great attendance.  The Bengals last two years no playoffs and have had great attendance. Finally the trend of weather in states has been trending warmer winters, 21st century is becoming better weather to play football not worse.

(07-11-2025, 12:02 PM)jj22 Wrote: I may be old but I do like games played in the elements. Snow games, seeing the heat from the breathing Olineman pre snap. Hoping that a domed team or Florida team struggles when they play in below 30 degree temps.

It just seems like how football is played. But as Browns fans are saying, maybe that is outdated. I thought they'd care because of the tough elements (that haven't really helped them). That may not be a thing for the younger generation.

Teams used to not be able to kick FG's at Steelers stadium. So there was benefits to not having a domed stadium. Or maybe there wasn't and it was all a myth. 

(07-11-2025, 11:06 AM)BengalsBong Wrote: Yes, for a dome. You left out the best reason is Joe Burrow and how much we throw the ball the wind can affect the ball when thrown.

As well as rain and a wet ball or snow.

Field goal tries.

Being able to use the dome for other events in Cincy making the team and county/city more money.

(07-11-2025, 03:20 PM)J24 Wrote: Personally, I would like to keep the elements a factor in Football but from an economic standpoint it makes much more sense to have a dome stadium. Especially, if it is paid with tax payer money.

(07-11-2025, 01:31 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I think the Bengals, county and city missed the boat and should have waited to renovate and agreed to put the money towards a brand new domed stadium or better yet one with a retractibe roof. The roof would still allow some games to use the elements while giving many more uses for the stadium year round.

I do not know if hey have land needed to build a new stadium without getting rid of Paycor first. If they did, to me a grea plan would be to buiild the new retaractible roof stadium. Once it is completed, build a 40 story hotel where Paycoe sits right now.This additional hotel space would help us attract more events like a Super Bowl game, final fours and concerts to help the city. county and team to recoup their investment. They could own the hotel and hire a management company to operate it. If not own, that land is expensive and I am sure there would be a hotel that would love to build an iconic hotel right by the new stadium, and very close to US bank, GABP and the west side new soccer fcility.

The 40 story hotel be equipmed with 8 to 10 restaurants and multple bars, even shopping. The parking could be undeground and help with game or event day parking as well.

It won't happen, but that woud be my desired outcome.