I would love both but love to see the Reds do it again while my dad is healthy!

Yes it does, despite the fact that you had to discredit the 1990 World Series Champions to try and help your argument.

 

Since 1994 the Bengals are 100-155 for a winning percentage of .392, and they have had 2 winning seasons.

 

 

Since 1994 the Reds are 1232-1295 for a winning percentage of .488, and they have had 4 winning seasons.

 

 

I think it's pretty clear which team has had the most success.

 

So being just being above .500 in some years in baseball equals success and fans were happy with it and really excited about it? I know I sure don't remember seeing people get all excited during those years, especially since they really weren't to close to making the playoffs in a couple of those years even though they were above .500. The Bengals though have 2 playoff appearances in that span since 1994 and two more seasons where they just barely missed it. So during that span, I think the Bengals definitely offered a lot more to be excited about for the fans during those seasons...

So being just being above .500 in some years in baseball equals success and fans were happy with it and really excited about it? I know I sure don't remember seeing people get all excited during those years, especially since they really weren't to close to making the playoffs in a couple of those years even though they were above .500. The Bengals though have 2 playoff appearances in that span since 1994 and two more seasons where they just barely missed it. So during that span, I think the Bengals definitely offered a lot more to be excited about for the fans during those seasons...

 

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh::ohbrother:I have laid the facts in front of you, but you still can't admit you're wrong.

Reds..........

Reds, although I'd take either.

I really like the Bengals, but I LOVE the Reds. I take the World Series.

 

I have been to World Series games and to Bengals playoff games. They both are a lot of fun. I'm a Reds fan more :thumb:

:laugh::laugh::laugh::ohbrother:I have laid the facts in front of you, but you still can't admit you're wrong.

 

 

You might as well give up. I have a co-worker who is the same way. You can give him all the facts, but he'll still argue with you. He'll argue that black is white. The whole office knows how he is. We just look at each other after one of his dumb arguments, and show our heads and say "You can't fix stupid." :lol:

I have not read the LRCW vs FutureCoach argument, but I do think there is something there with the "younger" vs "older" generation. Has nothing to do with success really but more to do with the popularity of the NFL compared to MLB.

American pastime...

We will see what kind of city this is because imo, the Reds are a couple of years away from really competing year in year out for the Central.

I have not read the LRCW vs FutureCoach argument, but I do think there is something there with the "younger" vs "older" generation. Has nothing to do with success really but more to do with the popularity of the NFL compared to MLB.

 

 

I'm not arguing which is more popular among the younger generation.

As to the question of the post...I'd take the Bengals. I've been already been fortunate enough to watch the Reds win the World Series. And while I'd love to see them do it again...if I had to choose, I'd like to see something that hasn't happened yet.

 

As to my take on the "baseball town" versus "football town" argument, I'll toss in my two cents. I believe that Cincinnati WAS a baseball town (before the Bengals arrived). And there are a LOT of people who were around then, who are still around now. So, in their minds, things have not changed. The Reds are still the #1 game in town.

 

However, for that "younger generation", who have always had BOTH the Reds and Bengals to choose from...I think they are leaning towards the Bengals. Even when the Bengals are bad, the stadium will continue to be near sell-out capacity. Now granted, there's a shorter season (8 home games vs. 81)...but ticket prices were usually higher too. So, in my mind thats somewhat of a tradeoff. The Reds, even if they have a first place team, very rarely come close to selling out. Only when their opponents bring a large crowd do they come close to that.

 

IMO, it just comes down to visibility. The older crowd who might make Cincy a baseball town, just aren't as visible as the younger crowd that push it towards football. Yes, there'd be a parade and celebration if the Reds won the World Series. But, if the Bengals won the Super Bowl, it'd be craziness! That, to me, makes Cincy a football town.

I love both sports and both teams, and hold season tickets for each. Along with my some of my fellow BGP /AARP members (over 25) , I chose the Reds for the sake of this discussion. I respect the way that the Reds go about their business more than the Bengals. The Reds are 'fan first', while the Bengals have a more antagonistic relationship with their fan base. With the parity in scheduling and drafting, revenue-sharing, and free-agent restrictions in football, it is also more difficult for a small market baseball team to win it all as opposed to a small market football team. I've lowered my expectations to being happy if either just reaches the playoffs, though. The follow up question

should be, "who will be the first to win a championship?"

Since the Reds have won it all and the Bengals haven't, I picked Bengals.

Simply based on how each sport is set up, I'd go with the Reds. It would be much more impressive.