2018 Football

I'll start with the suggestion of buying land on the old Crest Hills Country Club in Amberley Village... There is a better chance that Moeller builds a new stadium on The Banks than on that site. That site has been vacant for over a decade and that's exactly what the owner (The Village of Amberley) wants. They have blocked proposal after proposal to build more upscale home developments on the grounds. At least the homes would increase the tax base. A high school football stadium would literally bring nothing to Amberley. There's zero chance of this.

In terms of a partnership with MND to build an athletic complex, why in the heck would MND sink money into a project like that? They only have a few teams (soccer, field hockey, lacrosse) that play outdoors and the small field next to the school is more than serviceable to accommodate those sports' games. Why would MND invest in a 7k-8k seat stadium when in reality, they probably don't draw 8k people to all of the aforementioned sports combined over an ENTIRE season? Nonsensical.
 
Thanks to everyone for the responses.

That A/C is way over do and fantastic news to know they’re growing the endowment and paying down debt.

As for stadium ideas, we have to fix that relationship with Sycamore. I don’t see any other strategic relationship more important then this. Whether it’s upgradng and playing at their current stadium or the possibility of a stadium at the Blue Ash Sports Complex, something has gotta give.

Anyone really know what the likelihood of a stadium in Blue Ash is? Where in the world would they put it? I was under the idea the complex was landlocked?
 
moeprep21 said:
I'll start with the suggestion of buying land on the old Crest Hills Country Club in Amberley Village... There is a better chance that Moeller builds a new stadium on The Banks than on that site. That site has been vacant for over a decade and that's exactly what the owner (The Village of Amberley) wants. They have blocked proposal after proposal to build more upscale home developments on the grounds. At least the homes would increase the tax base. A high school football stadium would literally bring nothing to Amberley. There's zero chance of this.

In terms of a partnership with MND to build an athletic complex, why in the heck would MND sink money into a project like that? They only have a few teams (soccer, field hockey, lacrosse) that play outdoors and the small field next to the school is more than serviceable to accommodate those sports' games. Why would MND invest in a 7k-8k seat stadium when in reality, they probably don't draw 8k people to all of the aforementioned sports combined over an ENTIRE season? Nonsensical.
Click to expand...

Ha- chill, just throwing stuff out there. What do you suggest?
 
bluengoldblinders said:
Thanks to everyone for the responses.

That A/C is way over do and fantastic news to know they’re growing the endowment and paying down debt.

As for stadium ideas, we have to fix that relationship with Sycamore. I don’t see any other strategic relationship more important then this. Whether it’s upgradng and playing at their current stadium or the possibility of a stadium at the Blue Ash Sports Complex, something has gotta give.

Anyone really know what the likelihood of a stadium in Blue Ash is? Where in the world would they put it? I was under the idea the complex was landlocked?
Click to expand...

This is a very common misconception. The relationship between Moeller and Sycamore schools is amicable. The "bad blood" was over 15 years ago and both sides have long moved on. The issue with having a partnership with Sycamore to play at their stadium is very simple. There's only one stadium, and there would be way too many teams to accommodate. Think about it, just in the Fall you would have Sycamore football, boys' soccer, girls' soccer, & girls' field hockey. Moeller has football and soccer. That's six teams utilizing one facility to play home games and some of those teams practice there as well, and that's just the Varsity teams. Sycamore has JV teams that use that field as well. It's a logistical nightmare and nearly a scheduling impossibility. That's the reason it won't work with Sycamore. It has nothing do to with some acrimony from a decade and a half ago. Sure, maybe we'd find three of four open Friday nights to play a varsity football game there, but that's the exact situation we're in with Lockland now and Lockland is significantly cheaper.
 
Kballer said:
I'm sure this too is far fetched and Nonsensical but Landmarks property for a stadium?
Click to expand...

I have no idea about that parcel or its viability for a stadium. One must remember, just having the physical space to erect a stadium doesn't necessarily make it a viable option. Who currently owns the parcel? Does that owner have the motivation to sell? Does that owner think selling/converting the property into a stadium is the most profitable avenue to pursue? Even if it is a willing seller, is that land zoned properly to build an athletic facility? Does the site make sense for Moeller logistically and financially? All of those boxes need to be checked, amongst others, in order for a site to even be considered. It's just not as simple as; "Hey, there is some open land. Let's go buy it and build a stadium on it."
 
moeprep21 said:
This is a very common misconception. The relationship between Moeller and Sycamore schools is amicable. The "bad blood" was over 15 years ago and both sides have long moved on. The issue with having a partnership with Sycamore to play at their stadium is very simple. There's only one stadium, and there would be way too many teams to accommodate. Think about it, just in the Fall you would have Sycamore football, boys' soccer, girls' soccer, & girls' field hockey. Moeller has football and soccer. That's six teams utilizing one facility to play home games and some of those teams practice there as well, and that's just the Varsity teams. Sycamore has JV teams that use that field as well. It's a logistical nightmare and nearly a scheduling impossibility. That's the reason it won't work with Sycamore. It has nothing do to with some acrimony from a decade and a half ago. Sure, maybe we'd find three of four open Friday nights to play a varsity football game there, but that's the exact situation we're in with Lockland now and Lockland is significantly cheaper.
Click to expand...

Very helpful, I remember the skyline incident well, those guys were two years younger then me.

I recognize the logistical issues with all the other sports, I was more thinking about just primarily varsity football games, but makes sense if it’s that much more then Lockland, but locker room and amenities situation at Lockland are below anyone’s standards. Don’t get me wrong, I think the aesthetics of the place is great and a fun atmosphere, but the previously mentioned issues are soooo bad. Place hasn’t aged well in the past decade.

I just really don’t see a feasible alternative, sadly. Are there really any legitimate options? Considering attendance across the high school landscape, I think a 5 to 6k stadium is what we should look for.
 
Very glad to hear that Moeller is doing well financially and the Sycamore relationship has gotten better.

Sycamore schools has done a lot for Moeller over the years. I know we would get some of our books from them and I believe some of the support educators were Sycamore employees when I was there.

With everything else about shot down, Princeton? Sycamore just for varsity football?
 
Any discussion of upgrading Locklands facilities in exchange for cutting rent? There's plenty of room for improvements to be made. Could add a locker room at the grassy area on the north end. Expand the bathrooms into where the current locker rooms are and add a permanent concessions stand in that grassy patch just to the left of where the trailer sits now. Parking would still be an issue but I have yet to go to a game at any school where that is not a challenge for large games.
 
LEONARD said:
Very glad to hear that Moeller is doing well financially and the Sycamore relationship has gotten better.

Sycamore schools has done a lot for Moeller over the years. I know we would get some of our books from them and I believe some of the support educators were Sycamore employees when I was there.

With everything else about shot down, Princeton? Sycamore just for varsity football?
Click to expand...

There is simply no reason to try to scratch and claw to find 3 or 4 Friday or Saturday nights and pay a higher premium at Princeton or Sycamore, only to still have to rent out a second facility to play night games in your other sports. If Moeller tried that approach, why would Lockland even bother leasing their facility to Moeller for just a few lightly attended (relative to football) soccer and lacrosse games?
 
Kballer said:
Any discussion of upgrading Locklands facilities in exchange for cutting rent? There's plenty of room for improvements to be made. Could add a locker room at the grassy area on the north end. Expand the bathrooms into where the current locker rooms are and add a permanent concessions stand in that grassy patch just to the left of where the trailer sits now. Parking would still be an issue but I have yet to go to a game at any school where that is not a challenge for large games.
Click to expand...

About six months ago, I had heard that Lockland City Schools was in such dire financial position that they were considering the possibility of selling the stadium outright. I also heard that there's a possibility of the school district dissolving all together and being absorbed into neighboring districts due to possible insolvency issues. If that were to occur, obviously the stadium would be sold at that point as well.

Allow me to state, I have ZERO idea how close any of that is to being reality any time soon. However, I would surmise that Moeller is monitoring that and the option would be on the table if/when Lockland were forced to sell. Until then, there is no way Moeller is going to heavily invest in renovating a structure that it doesn't own and is not the primary tenant. If Moeller were able to negotiate a long term lease (25-30 years) where it was the primary tenant, then sure, I could see investing in renovations. Unfortunately, until the financial situation of the current owner of the stadium (Lockland) comes to some sort of resolution, none of that will happen.
 
Last edited:
moeprep21 said:
About six months ago, I had heard that Lockland City Schools was in such dire financial position that they were considering the possibility of selling the stadium outright. I also heard that there's a possibility of the school district dissolving all together and being absorbed into neighboring districts due to possible insolvency issues. If that were to occur, obviously the stadium would be sold at that point as well.

Allow me to state, I have ZERO idea how close any of that is to being reality any time soon. However, I would surmise that Moeller is monitoring that and the option would be on the table if/when Lockland were forced to sell. Until then, there is no way Moeller is going to heavily invest in renovating a structure that it doesn't own and is not the primary tenant. If Moeller were able to negotiate a long term lease (25-30 years) where it was the primary tenant, then sure, I could see investing in renovations. Unfortunately, until the financial situation of the current owner of the stadium (Lockland) comes to some sort of resolution, none of that will happen.
Click to expand...

Being newer to the area I am very unfamiliar with the surrounding schools and areas- just feels like there has to be a viable option. Am assuming the empty space just off RR highway and Montgomery has been looked at and wouldn't work or is no longer available?
 
Kballer said:
Being newer to the area I am very unfamiliar with the surrounding schools and areas- just feels like there has to be a viable option. Am assuming the empty space just off RR highway and Montgomery has been looked at and wouldn't work or is no longer available?
Click to expand...

I know the plot to which you're referring and I have no clue whether or not it's still for sale or lease. What I do know is that it is essentially downtown Montgomery which is pretty prime real estate and I can virtually guarantee that the property ultimately will end up as some sort of retail or higher-end residential property, not a high school athletic complex.
 
Last edited:
McBride

How is the young man doing? I never did hear the nature of his football injury. Broken foot, ankle, dislocation? It has been 5 full months and not sure how rehab is going. Would love to see him come back in the fall but with a full ride (presumably) to WV he would be putting a lot on the line. He had one heck of a 4 game run throwing 16 or 17 TD passes including one in the opening quarter of the X game. GBM
 
Kballer said:
Being newer to the area I am very unfamiliar with the surrounding schools and areas- just feels like there has to be a viable option. Am assuming the empty space just off RR highway and Montgomery has been looked at and wouldn't work or is no longer available?
Click to expand...

The land I believe you are referring to (just north of RR and Montgomery on the right side) has been approved for a major development including retail, office and possibly more.
 
Makes sense, just sat for so long wondered if there was an issue with it. Obviously very valuable but you never know. Maybr Coach Rosfeld would give up his yard and talk his neighbors into a stadium with lights at the Gerry...?!
 
I've heard rumors that Moeller is looking into the possibility of making a long term deal with FC Cincinnati. Whether this happens or not probably depends on where they decide to build the stadium.
 
Julian and Ricky said:
I've heard rumors that Moeller is looking into the possibility of making a long term deal with FC Cincinnati. Whether this happens or not probably depends on where they decide to build the stadium.
Click to expand...

not a bad idea rickyy.. Get two birds st*ned at once... Maybe bubbles can help.
 
I think Naumann would be OK at DC, he was OC when I was there (if my memory serves me correct) so I think he would be competent but if he is anything like he was back in the day, I think he may be too emotional to call the defense on every down.

But cant really think of someone else who might be better. I could only think of maybe letting Rosfeld call O and Majors D? Also never meet Jones the LB coach who played at MSU buy maybe he could call the defense?? Also not sure if schemes he learned in East Lansing are realistic/teachable for high school kids to learn in run in one off season. Also cant help but think that our defense in 2018 might be based off of what is being ran by Fickells staff in clifton right now. Obviously doug has been exposed to it previously im sure is still pretty close with the UC program/ staff. Maybe he takes that UC scheme and grooms a younger DC? :stirthepot::stirthepot:



None the less, I'm sure doug will make a sold choice and I don't think its much of an accident that no one knows who our DC is right now or what we will be doing on the defensive side of the ball come august.
 
LEONARD said:
I think Naumann would be OK at DC, he was OC when I was there (if my memory serves me correct) so I think he would be competent but if he is anything like he was back in the day, I think he may be too emotional to call the defense on every down.

But cant really think of someone else who might be better. I could only think of maybe letting Rosfeld call O and Majors D? Also never meet Jones the LB coach who played at MSU buy maybe he could call the defense?? Also not sure if schemes he learned in East Lansing are realistic/teachable for high school kids to learn in run in one off season. Also cant help but think that our defense in 2018 might be based off of what is being ran by Fickells staff in clifton right now. Obviously doug has been exposed to it previously im sure is still pretty close with the UC program/ staff. Maybe he takes that UC scheme and grooms a younger DC? :stirthepot::stirthepot:



None the less, I'm sure doug will make a sold choice and I don't think its much of an accident that no one knows who our DC is right now or what we will be doing on the defensive side of the ball come august.
Click to expand...

I'm going to be curious to see how long Shane will stay around, but for good reasons.

For those not aware, Shane's older brother was a well decorated player himself at Moeller and then Pittsburgh.

http://pittsburghpanthers.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1900

Since his playing days, I know he's coached at the NCAA and NFL levels and is currently coaching at FIU.

http://www.fiusports.com/coaches.aspx?rc=372&path=football

In other news, the upcoming schedule and the amount of home games is a marked improvement from last year.
 
bluengoldblinders said:
I'm going to be curious to see how long Shane will stay around, but for good reasons.

For those not aware, Shane's older brother was a well decorated player himself at Moeller and then Pittsburgh.

http://pittsburghpanthers.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1900

Since his playing days, I know he's coached at the NCAA and NFL levels and is currently coaching at FIU.

http://www.fiusports.com/coaches.aspx?rc=372&path=football

In other news, the upcoming schedule and the amount of home games is a marked improvement from last year.
Click to expand...

Time will tell with Coach Jones, like i said i have never meet him. Im sure doug wouldnt put him on the staff if he wasn't capable but as we all know just cuz you were a good player dosent mean your gonna be a great coach, if that was true Crable would still be there. But im sure his brother down at FIU can pass along a lot of good stuff. ( i had no idea they were related)

Agreed, schedule is better. My april GBM prediction for 2018 is a 6-4 regular season with us getting in the playoffs pulling off an upset on the road, first round ..:cool::cool:
 
When Coach Rosfeld was hired and doing interviews, I remember him saying on a couple of occasions that he will be implementing a defense from the college ranks that people haven't seen around here. I have no idea about the coaches except he said he would be coaching the o-line. Hopefully, he's able to get a good core group that will bring stability to the program and not have it be a revolving door. I am confident he gets this thing turned around.
 
The Game said:
When Coach Rosfeld was hired and doing interviews, I remember him saying on a couple of occasions that he will be implementing a defense from the college ranks that people haven't seen around here. I have no idea about the coaches except he said he would be coaching the o-line. Hopefully, he's able to get a good core group that will bring stability to the program and not have it be a revolving door. I am confident he gets this thing turned around.
Click to expand...

I believe Blum and Alex Gall are coaching the oline.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top