TBideon

Guys, let's not kid ourselves. No one is going to call us the Forest City; the name is obselete and completely disconnected from what Cleveland is in the present. It does have a nice ring to it, granted, and I get that it used to be our nickname. 150 years ago. I mean, that's like calling the Indians the Cleveland Naps. People would just be scratching their heads.

^^YAWNNNNN. Same old drivel, different day.

..

I disagree. I think a resurging city, which the Comeback City name implies, is a great identity to have. People want to support the underdog and a city that is improving, evolving. The name both reflects where we were/are (let's not kid ourselves about our present issues - they're astronomical) and where we can/will be: it fits. Most importantly, the name already exists. We have a history with it. People recognize and identify it with Cleveland. It seems foolish to start over and force another name that won't take. No matter how many ad campaigns or Positively Cleveland youtube videos, we're either the Mistake on the Lake or the Comeback City. Those are our nicknames, for better or worse, so let's focus on the good one.

We could only be so lucky to have thousands if not tens (hundreds?) of thousands of refugees coming here, helping rebuild, redevelop and remoralize our cities neighborhoods. It's a no-brainer, win-win situation. Immigrants already made this city something special once; residents then clobbered all that progress in so so so many areas; so let's get back on the cycle and do it again.

Yeah, it was a crappy movie. I don't have any background in marketing outside, not really, but I suspect that the best nicknames, the ones that really stick, have to happen organically. Cleveland's a Plum, Rock and Roll City, and Best Location in the Nation seem kind of forced to me. I'm sure we can all argree the Plum one is just stupid - lord knows what the marketing teams were thinking then. The Rock and Roll stuff is also silly; despite us having the Hall of Fame, I personally don't identify Cleveland with music other than classical. That's a whole other issue but my point is Drew Carey's theme song and the Hall just don't give me the sense that this is a rock and roll town. Look at all the bands that skip over the city; look at the majority of the induction ceremonies being held in NY; look at how you identify Detroit and Chicago and New York and Seattle and Memphis with various music genres and tell me we're on that level??? It just feels...forced. And with the Best Location in Town, doesn't every city feel that way about itself to some degree. There's nothing unique about that phrase (no offense to those who like it, of course), and I can't imagine someone from whereeversville hearing that phrase and idenifying it with Cleveland. No matter how much marketing and advertising the city pushes. The one nickname that best embodies in the city, the one that came about organically, the one that people might still remember about Cleveland, the one that really should be the focus of marketing...is the Comeback City. During the 80s and especially 90s, when Cleveland was the darling of the country on some level, this name took! I don't know its origins exactly - I am sure that Drew Carey Show, the movie Major League, the Indians, the newly built R&RHOF, and the Flats helped considerably - but this name stuck, much like the Mistake on the Lake, but only good. The Comeback City name got lost in the lousy 2000s, but since there is this momentum downtown and in a few neighborhoods, it should be the focus of these marketing/ad campaigns.

I feel bad for that big kid was got stomped. That could really cause some damage. Why some of these criminals weren't arrested is beyond me.

^wasnt there an article about agents steering players away from the browns as well? I think the article was from a few years ago.

Another thing I like about the guy is the anticipation of the inevitable cleveland.com announcent where he/his group finally take Tower City away from FC entirely and redevelop it to something we can be proud of. You know that announcement is coming.

A round of applause for Dan Gilbert for his statement on the Chris Paul situation!!! Good to see someone with balls in our town. One thing I don't get it is people criticizing him, saying now free agents won't want to play for the Cavs. Funny thing is I don't remember any FA coming out here to begin with. With the casino and investments Gilbert has made, he really seems to believe in the town. Unlike that Forest City family that seems to invest everywhere but here (bad feelings about Tower City's decline?), but I digress.

Didn't he say he was pointing to god?

You and I are just disagreeing on the amount of pressure; obviously the union and agents want a high cut, but to scapegoat them as being the main reason why players choose one team or another is just silly. It's just a boogyman tactic players and fans use to justify the unending selfish behavior of our sports "heroes." And no I have not yet discussed this with Albert. I'll let you know what he says when I do. Edit: So you would believe this part of the article: "Tony LaRussa called out the MLB Players Association on Tuesday, insinuating that the players’ union has been pressuring Cardinals first baseman Albert Pujols into demanding a record-breaking contract." And I would look at this: "La Russa said he had no direct evidence of union influence, but instead was making a guaranteed assumption...director Michael Weiner told Yahoo! Sports that the players’ association has “had no conversations with Albert or [his agent] Dan Lozano.” Still at an impasse

I'm supposed to disprove a negative here? Well, I'll do my best. 1. Common sense. There isn't a smoky room where the player's union heads are Dr. Claw and Sonny Carleone planning the next move. How do you think the conversation goes? Some Jimmy Hoffa-wannabee calls Pujols and tells him who he's to sign with, or else. 2. Inconsistency. Players have taken less money from one team than others for various reasons, and I still haven't heard about their cars blowing up or knees being broken. 3. Lack of anecodes. If Canseco is going to talk about steroids, then someone - ball player, a ex-union guy, some executive - by now would have brought it up openly and clearly. 4. Lack of media coverage. If this were a legit truth, even a half truth, you can bet various media outlets would be all over the story. It would be epic, not some urban legend floating around. How come ESPN never talkes about this? The PD? The National Enquire doesn't even touch it. 5. With all the Congressional focus on steroids on baseball, you'd think that something tangentially related like these unions essentially manipulating the game would have been discussed. In a legit forum. 6. Easy scapegoat. By pretending the union prevents players from signing with teams, then players now have a boogyman to blame when they betray their hometeams. Think CC. I don't know what else to tell you.

Oh that's completely ridiculous. The player's union isn't the Teamsters, and all this overblown conjecture that they force players to accept the highest paid contracts is just silly. And in that Thome quote, he was referring to his wife who wanted to leave Barrington/Cleveland, not the union.

I really don't have a huge problem with players going to other teams, as it's not like teams are loyal to players in turn. And fans will boo an underperforming player in a heartbeat - look how Clevelanders behave with Grady. Ridiculous. But this whole delaying the inevitable, not being a man about wanting to leave, being the center of bidding wars and attention, and then the lame statements about doing this for one's family.....all of that conduct bothers me a lot. LBJ took it to an inane level with that ESPN program, but Pujols isn't much better. At least guys like Reyes and Fielder are open about not wanting to stay on their teams; at least they're honest to themselves, their teams, and their fans rather than the crap you see with Pujols here. Also, while this shouldn't matter, it does bother me a little that Pujols -- who by all accounts is a good family man, someone who gets off elevators when it's just him and a lady (to avoid even the hint of inapprorpiate behavior), gives a$$loads in cash to charities, and is overall likeable -- pulled this. Him in particular. Athletes aren't heroes, not really, and quite a few of them aren't the most pleasant outside the game. But Pujols always semeed better than that, and now we see a different side. Just another athlete sullying his reputation and goodwill for an extra fraction of a percent of salary, and I don't want to see St. Louis fans going through the hurt we Clevelanders did. It just makes us even more cynical and bitter overall, and who needs that.

Not that the Tribe was going to get him in a million years, but Pujols is going to the Angels for 10 years at 250-260 million. What a selfish piece of sh!t. Not much better than LBJ.

Same twrrible reasons that Obama didn't investigate bush and his administration. We have to move on, they are too big too fail/fall, and parasitic dependency are all factors.

I don't quite understand the obese/scumbag argument. How is that any different from someone wealthy being able to afford life-saving medication that is completely unaffordable to others. I mean, at the end of the day, the only real distinction between me selling my kidney (illegal) and a pharmaceutical company selling Elaprase (legal) is that I probably need the money a whole lot more. Not to mention that getting my compensated for marrow and child surrogacy is perfectly legal; are those two things really that different in principle than my selling a piece of my liver or kidney so I can pay my bills?

Guess now isn't the best time to buy after all.

If you go to East 4th, you have to walk through the Arcade nearby, even if for only 15 or 20 minutes. It's frankly the most beautiful building in the state, with Severance Hall a close second. The architecture is second to none, and with the fairly recent restorations, it is a treasure.

^Well, I think you're being a little hard there. If a restaurant is in danger of going out of business should its parking lot no longer be accessible, then I don't object to its maintaining the lot. Foot traffic is probably not enough for some of these places, especially on weekends when the city is vastly more pedestrian-free, and suburbanites probably don't want to go through the hassle of a long bus or train ride just for a restaurant, not when they have other options. Its just the restaurants dealing with economic realities.

I think it is ludicrious to criminalize selling one's organs. The New York Times touches on it in this article. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/06/opinion/why-selling-kidneys-should-be-legal.html?ref=opinion Why Selling Kidneys Should Be Legal "On Thursday, I will donate one of my kidneys to someone I’ve never met. Most people think this sounds like an over-the-top personal sacrifice. But the procedure is safe and relatively painless. I will spend three days in the hospital and return to work within a month. I am 21, but even for someone decades older, the risk of death during surgery is about 1 in 3,000. My remaining kidney will grow to take up the slack of the one that has been removed, so I’ll be able do everything I can do now. And I’ll have given someone, on average, 10 more years of life, years free of the painful and debilitating burden of dialysis...." To me it seems like a TON more lives would be saved, both sides win (the seller gets some much needed cash for his/herself and family, and the buyer gets to live a longer, more productive life), and whose business is it what I do with my body anyhow. Plus it seems you can make some pro-choice arguments supporting it. Think about how many lives would be improved if selling organs were legal. Sure there are drawbacks with the poor not necessarily getting their share, but think about how many more people would donate, thereby saving even more lives, if compensation were permitted. Thoughts?

Boyce Avenue has some very good stuff. Like this

It is a pretty shocking picture.

Good lord, that would be something else.