CincySportsFan

Only went to Gameworks a couple of times over the years. Most of the time we went to either Mitchell's Fish Market or Shadowbox when they were there.

About 2 decades ago, I was with a high school team playing down in Miami, and they were being given a tour of that area of town (on school bus) and we drove by a fantastic looking baseball field and an amazing press box. It actually looked like it could've been a minor league field. The guy giving the tour said it was a high school's (don't remember if it was theirs or not), but that it was going to have to be torn down. The reason? A donor had given a massive contribution to the baseball boosters, but the school didn't have the same amount of money to put towards a girls' program. So, to make things "equal", they had to "take away" from the boys.

Is that when Vrabel left and took the Texans job?

Waaaay too many songs that I like to try and pick my favorites, although just about anything sung by Bing Crosby, Nat King Cole, Johnny Mathis, Andy Williams or Amy Grant gets turned up just a little louder. Two songs that I have come to HATE, though, are easy... Baby It's Cold Outside...sung by anyone. Waaay over-played. My Favorite Things. IT.IS.NOT.A.CHRISTMAS.SONG!!!

In all honesty, other than the games in which they play each other (and there HAS to be a winner), I'm not too sure about anyone else in the division winning those other two games. The Ravens against the Packers and Rams? Could easily be 2 losses. The Browns you would think be favored against the Raiders this Saturday, but are dealing with Covid issues. And then they have to play Aaron Rodgers in Lambeau. No thank you. Heck, I think if the Steelers were to beat the Browns and Ravens to end the year, they might be the ones sitting in the catbird's seat, and that stinkin' tie up in Detroit could actually come into play.

YES!!!

With our offense, I'm not concerned about someone being a true threat to return one. What I want...scratch that...need...is someone to recognize the situation. Is it a line drive kick? Is it a hanger? Did he boom one? Where are you set up at to begin with? We need a smart decision maker. On kickoffs, it seems like we've brought kicks out and barely make it to the 15. Given that we don't have a Devon Hester back there, you need to be sure you're going to get to the 25. No need to force something that isn't there. And then add in the factor of a flag possibly being thrown on a return. I'm fine with downing every kickoff and taking it at the 25. And on punting, the decision making has seemed iffy as well. It seems like far too often we've had punts fair caught not only inside the 10, but at the 5. Fair caught! Why?!? It's one thing if you're going to return it...but, to do a fair catch? I just don't understand it. Now is this on the player, or Simmons, or even Taylor? I don't know. But, the player is the only one that touches the ball, so even the best coaching in the world can't actually make the play. The Bengals return team needs to have the same mantra as doctors have...do no harm. Yesterday that was magnified by the muffs, but it's not something that's come out of nowhere this season.

Same here!

Don't hold your breath. Unfortunately this happens all the time. I mean, good grief, how many fans (including many on here) were actively "campaigning" during the season to keep teams like Oklahoma and Notre Dame out of the playoffs, simply based upon how they've performed in it over the years? I believe the catch-phrase that is used the most, is "fraud". A lot of people like to use history to justify their thinking about current teams, when in fact there's not a lot that should be taken from year-to-year.

I can see this happening more with basketball and baseball, where gameday loses some of its luster, just due to the quantity played. It'd be much easier to get into a Groundhog Day mentality where you're just going thru the motions. Rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat. But with football, when you've looked forward the entire week to where you can actually go play, I'd think it'd be different. Now, if you knew going into the game that you were prohibitive underdogs, maybe you're not looking forward to it and just want to put in your time and get out of there. But, even at the other end of the spectrum, if you were the favorite, I'd think you'd still want to (for lack of a better term) "show off".

Burrow seemed ticked at Taylor the way the end of the half ended.

What the h-e- double toothpicks was that? Do we have no one on the sideline who can watch a clock?

Don't forget, though, that Michigan beat the #2 team just last week. I know that's what got them to the #2 spot, but may still be fresh in committee's mind. Doesn't really matter in the long run, as the only difference will be where they rank Georgia and UC. Matches are already set, they'll just use rankings to justify them.

The committee will do whatever they can to avoid having them meet in the semis.

And herein lies the problem. Nobody can/will say at the beginning of the season what the definition of "deserving" is. * Win all your games? Teams have done that, and never gotten a sniff of the playoffs, so that's not it. * Do you have to come from a Power 5 conference? You can't even say that, given that the current playoff setup only allows for 4 teams...so, somebody was always guaranteed of getting left out. (Yes, this could/would be addressed if expansion happens.) * How about they win by a certain amount? Well, what is that number...10...14...20...25...30+? And is that an average, or do you have to go game-by-game? I mean, Alabama has outscored their opponents in their wins by 277 points, an average of about 25 points per game. UC, on the other hand, is at 285 points, or around 24 per game. Yet, UC gets marked down on having one score games against a 3-8 team (7 point win) and a 6-6 team (8 point victory)...but Bama barely moves in the rankings by having games with margins of 2, 2, 6, and 7 points against teams that went 6-6, 6-6, 6-6 and 8-4. * What about their out-of-conference schedule? Sure, sounds good, right? But, UC gets nicked because Indiana wasn't that good this year...but, Alabama has gotten a yearly pass for scheduling FCS teams like Western Carolina, Mercer, The Citadel, Chattanooga and Charleston Southern. Look, all I am saying is that there is nothing but a bunch of gray areas in which people decide what they deem to be important, and thus, what team is deserving. There are many aspects that teams just have little to no control over....like how your opponents do in the the rest of their games. So, why are we holding that against them? At the end of the day, there is literally only one item that matters...did you win or not? That's it. So, settle the dang thing on the field. I know you said you don't want to see the likes of a Mountain West team get slaughtered by an SEC team. But just for giggles, San Diego State beat Utah, who knocked off Oregon, who beat Ohio State, who defeated Penn State, who beat Auburn, who just lost to the mighty Alabama by 2, in overtime. Now I know you can't do that, to predict how a team will do. But, to utterly dismiss them and say they'd have absolutely no chance is just as ridiculous. So let in the 10 conference champions, and I'll give you 6 more "wild-card" teams to help balance any "irregularities" (scheduling/injuries/conference strength/tie-breakers/etc.) that occurred during the regular season. Sure, there may be a blowout when an undefeated 1-seed plays a 4-loss 16-seed. But, hey, we just saw that a couple of weeks ago when OSU blew the doors off what people deemed the #2 team in the country (MSU). It can happen. It has happened. And it will happen again. That's football. Some teams just match up better against others.

We literally have auto-bids in every other major sport. We don't have the hate and angst against it there, do we? Every team is told at the beginning of the year what they need to do in order to not only make the playoffs, but also be considered the champion. College football is the only one that can't/won't do that. I just don't see how you can penalize a team for how their opponents faired (whether in or out of conference), especially considering that schedules are done years in advance. If you want a committee to decide who the "best" teams are, then you might as well go back to the old bowl system setup, and just have everybody vote at the end of that.

Wait, so he's saying there's a second shooter? This has all the makings of a Maury Povich special..."The ballistics results are in, and you, Alec Baldwin...are definitely the shooter!"

Or possibly, won't even know in the first place. The dancing and string-pulling going on behind the curtain may be mind-boggling.

We often don't see eye to eye on everything, but I'm right there with you on this. Move the NSD to mid/late January, and make it a no-tampering period until that team's bowl game/CFP is done.

Can you imagine batting practice with two of their pitchers participating?

The fact that he's able to play in ANY tournament at all, is really good news. Heck, if the only thing he could do was to play in the Masters for the next 10 years, as a fan, I'd take it.

Was hearing this argument on the radio coming to work this morning. Here's the counter to that...if you truly think that this is THE guy you believe is the best fit for your program/situation...then why wouldn't you wait? I mean if Nick Saban said he'd take the job...you going to turn him down, if he said he wanted to finish out the season? By sticking to your firm start date, I think you are potentially throwing the baby out with the bath water, in getting the best guy. For a guy that you believe/want to be the head of your program for the next 10 years, waiting a month is a small price to pay. Taking the next guy in line is just settling, imo.

It's like listening to Chris Berman do a whole ballgame. What's good for highlights isn't the same for a full four quarters.

Couldn't disagree more. Can't stand him calling games.

This has to be guilty, right?