jam40jeff

Or for gottaplan's family of 6, if he goes 4 times in a year, it's actually downright cheap. How many other places could you take your family of 6 for $32.50?

His point wasn't whether you find the price to be a problem or not, but the fact that you're talking about value when others are talking about price.

Why is everyone wearing a white shirt?

Thanks, KJP. Regardless of what clvnldr's comment insinuates, some of us here are just realistic and realize that there are good transit centers and bad ones. I think a new transit center would be great, it's just that I can understand that people want to make sure the type/design/location of the center is good and not a "whatever we can get we'll take" approach.

I don't doubt that this project *could* have a positive effect. I'm just pointing out that not all fixed transit centers have positive effects, so it's disingenuous to try to say something necessarily will have a positive effect just because it is a fixed transit center. It needs to have some other merits to attract development.

Ever since companies became "too big to fail," I'm not sure that applies anymore. Most large companies are so diverse in their offerings (and monopolizing) these days that they can fail in one area, but make enough profit in others to stay afloat (or fail in one area but still maintain it because they have squashed out competition through practices which would have been deemed illegal before the anti-trust laws were relaxed in the 1980s).

Then how do you answer Pugu's valid point about the lack of investment around the Greyhound bus station? I think there is a point to be made about developers feeling certain transit is more desirable than others (right or wrong, or even being an opinion that can change over time).

Great set as always, MayDay! I believe the photo below is St. Elizabeth.

You mean Penn State, right? Penn is quite a different school than Penn State.

I have never had Angelo's, but my friend at work who lives in Lakewood thinks it's often greasy as well. ERocc, have you had Valentino's. That is IMO the best pizza in Cleveland (both red and white).

Euclid Creek Park?

Sell your Brownstones!

But transit changes DO mold behavior. The interstates are a prime example.

Whoa, easy there. Many of us don't hate on South Euclid. I actually just had a conversation where I was defending the city a couple weeks ago. But that doesn't change the fact that these two new developments are a disgrace to the inner ring (and yes, Lakewood does those things sometimes as well, although there's nothing in Lakewood anything like what Oakwood Commons will be, and the plaza in downtown Lakewood is a disgrace as well). I'm equally hard on any city that develops crap. I believe I've hammered University Heights on here for replacing a strip of multiple stores built up to the street with a McDonald's surrounded by a parking lot. And one of the previous posters that thinks these new developments are crap as well is a resident of SE.

Maybe he can resurrect the golf machines! (I know, I know...that's not going to happen.)

:roll: So stereotyping heterosexuals is OK?

I agree. I love Balaton, but it seems that it's rarely busy. Also, RE: Crop, I felt exactly the same way when I ate there. The food was very good. The space was cool, but not a very welcoming feeling for a restaurant.

I'm usually very impressed with their play. I don't just mean by their talent either. They usually play very hard and pretty well-disciplined and they look crisp on both sides of the ball. Sure, they make some mistakes here and there, but most high school teams do. However, the only game I saw them play this year was against Ignatius, and they didn't look like the Glenville of old. Sure, they still had a good amount of talent, but not like they traditionally have had, and their offense seemed really sloppy and one-dimensional.

It did, but I ran the numbers and they would have finished 9th (0.1 points behind 8th place) even with the Rhodes victory. It was a combination of unfortunate Senate scheduling and not winning the independent games this year that caused them not to make the playoffs. I know they played a tough independent scheduled, but they were down this year. All they had to do was win 1 of their 3 non-league games to get in (they were 0-3).

The computer system isn't perfect, but I normally feel that allowing 8 teams in makes up for it. The idea is that you may not end up with the truly 8 best teams, but the chance that a potential state qualifier (the #1 team in the region) doesn't end up at least in the top 8 in computer points is pretty slim. This may be the closest I have seen to where a team you would say could have a realistic chance of winning the region didn't even make the playoffs, but after seeing Glenville play, I'm not so sure. Although they were still a good team, they definitely weren't the same Glenville of the last 5-10 years and I think they would have been a long shot to come out of Region 1 this year.

I'm glad I asked. You reminded me that I need to get up to Sweetie Fry. Also, have you been to Myxx? It looks nearly empty every time I go by there, even on weekend nights. Luna is great. I am there constantly. I don't know anything about Rockefeller's or Belly Backers other than what I've read online.

Details? (Not that I disagree, just wondering what prompted that.)

Actually, CH will have to play St. Eds since St. Ignatius passed them up to take the 2nd spot (and will play Boardman). Willoughby South will play Solon. I'd really like to see CH fare well, but I just don't see that happening.

Here's my rendering of what that will look like 40 years down the road. http://tinyurl.com/3kgzu9v

I'll have to wait and see what he does next year, but it looks like he very well may be.