A Cold Weather Super Bowl!

[LittleHurt05]

Unfortunately, when they remodeled Soldier Field they made it the smallest stadium in the league (61,000), so no chance for a Super Bowl in Chicago. I think the minimum capacity is 70,000 or so.

[JuiceCruz16]

BOO! I don't like the decision at all. The Super Bowl does not go to a team who has earned home field, so I'm for giving the most chance of a warm climate to have the last standing teams do battle for the title.

[witesoxfan]

This is dumb. The two best teams should have the best field available so they can showcase their skills. The more random luck/shoddy field conditions involved, the worse it is for everyone.

 

Watching a game in snow is cool for about a minute, then you realize it's a terribly played game and it's just garbage football. I want a football game to have the athletes running, jumping, hitting, and cutting to the best of their abilities in the most important game of the year.

 

I agree completely with this. In fact, I would have no problem with the Super Bowl being held in a dome every single year. Playing football in extreme conditions is cool and entertaining not because you see these players playing to the best of their abilities, but because it's a spectacle. It's like going to the circus.

[T R U]

I don't think it should be in New York either, not because it'll be cold or snowy but for the fact that it can create an unfair advantage..

 

For instance, if the super bowl ends up to be a cold weather team vs a team who has played all of their games in warm weather outside of maybe 1 or 2..

 

That warm weather team has to play the most important game of their year in a possible snow storm? or maybe freezing temperatures? You don't think a team like Green Bay or New England would have an advantage over a Houston or Tampa Bay?

 

At least when its in the same few places every year its almost always ideal conditions for a game of this magnitude.. I just think its going to happen that a warm weather team is going to play a cold weather team in the super bowl that year and itll be a bad game..

 

 

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

Unfortunately, when they remodeled Soldier Field they made it the smallest stadium in the league (61,000), so no chance for a Super Bowl in Chicago. I think the minimum capacity is 70,000 or so.

 

Just one more example of why Soldier Field sucks. It's a shame they couldn't have built a better stadium, there's no doubt Chicago would be in the running for future Super Bowls.

 

 

 

[T R U]

Just one more example of why Soldier Field sucks. It's a shame they couldn't have built a better stadium, there's no doubt Chicago would be in the running for future Super Bowls.

 

I doubt it

 

All its going to take is a 10-3 or 14-7 game in a snow storm to pretty much nix this cold weather super bowl stuff..

[Balta1701]

All its going to take is a 10-3 or 14-7 game in a snow storm to pretty much nix this cold weather super bowl stuff..

Until the ratings come in.

[T R U]

Until the ratings come in.

 

I agree the TV ratings would prolly go up too, how much more? I dunno, does a casual fan really care about the weather that much to influence whether they will watch the super bowl or not?

 

Also, what about the actual game itself? You don't think there could be a dip in attendance there? Who wants to sit for 4+ hours in that weather?

[NorthSideSox72]

It's a winter sport? It's played in the fall. And the whole reason the randomness was taken out of the weather (or at least an attempt) for all these years was to provide the best playing conditions to optimize performance and game quality.

 

Had the Colts/Saints game been in a snow storm, it would have sucked, end of story. The only people who like the snow are the 10 year olds looking out the window.

 

Think about the Soldier Field turf. Why isn't everyone just saying that's part of the game, too? Why make a big deal out of that? You can't have it both ways.

Who is having it both ways? I see it one way - its a winter sport (Sept-Feb), played outdoors most of the time, and weather is part of the game. Call me a traditionalist, but that's the way I see it.

 

[Balta1701]

I agree the TV ratings would prolly go up too, how much more? I dunno, does a casual fan really care about the weather that much to influence whether they will watch the super bowl or not?

 

Also, what about the actual game itself? You don't think there could be a dip in attendance there? Who wants to sit for 4+ hours in that weather?

A dip in attendance at the super bowl...in New York City?

 

You know the super-storm that killed everything in its path from the movie "The Day After Tomorrow"? Yeah, that storm would wind up freezing a packed stadium to death. And even if it did...every ticket would be sold anyway.

 

The reason why the Ratings would be noticeable is that the ratings always skyrocket in the market where the game is played. NYC ratings would go through the roof, and the effect could well last years afterwards too.

[T R U]

A dip in attendance at the super bowl...in New York City?

 

You know the super-storm that killed everything in its path from the movie "The Day After Tomorrow"? Yeah, that storm would wind up freezing a packed stadium to death. And even if it did...every ticket would be sold anyway.

 

The reason why the Ratings would be noticeable is that the ratings always skyrocket in the market where the game is played. NYC ratings would go through the roof, and the effect could well last years afterwards too.

 

And what if the Super Bowl that year is like San Francisco vs Tampa Bay?

 

You think NY gives a crap about that game..

[IlliniKrush]

Who is having it both ways? I see it one way - its a winter sport (Sept-Feb), played outdoors most of the time, and weather is part of the game. Call me a traditionalist, but that's the way I see it.

I don't know who's having it both ways, but there's a ton of people that are upset with the turf at Soldier Field - for exactly the same reason some of us don't like the SB being in possible bad weather.

 

BTW, winter doesn't start in September.

[Balta1701]

And what if the Super Bowl that year is like San Francisco vs Tampa Bay?

 

You think NY gives a crap about that game..

Yes.

[DukeNukeEm]

It's a winter sport? It's played in the fall. And the whole reason the randomness was taken out of the weather (or at least an attempt) for all these years was to provide the best playing conditions to optimize performance and game quality.

 

Had the Colts/Saints game been in a snow storm, it would have sucked, end of story. The only people who like the snow are the 10 year olds looking out the window.

 

Think about the Soldier Field turf. Why isn't everyone just saying that's part of the game, too? Why make a big deal out of that? You can't have it both ways.

Clarification please:

 

Its not fair if dome teams cant play in a dome, because they built their team with that expectation.

---BUT---

It is fair to make outdoor/northern teams play in a dome, even though they build their teams to cope with the elements.

 

Is that what you're trying to say?

 

You say "best playing conditions" like it means the same thing for every team. Optimal conditions are relative, the Green Bay Packers would much rather play with the New Orleans Saints in a snowstorm than in a dome.

Edited May 27, 2010 by DukeNukeEm

[Soxbadger]

I like snow, Im not 10.

 

I also like soldier fields grass and think it wouldnt be the same with field turf.

 

/shrug

 

 

[T R U]

Its not fair if dome teams cant play in a dome, because they built their team with that expectation.

---BUT---

It is fair to make outdoor/northern teams play in a dome, even though they build their teams to cope with the elements.

 

Is that what you're trying to say?

 

You say "best playing conditions" like it means the same thing for every team. Optimal conditions are relative, the Green Bay Packers would much rather play with the New Orleans Saints in a snowstorm than in a dome.

 

lol

 

im sorry but no team builds their teams for weather conditions.. it takes the same kind of players to have a dominant running game in the north as it does in the south..

 

I will give you that having a wide open offense on a turf IS something you can definitely build your team around.. but not weather conditions.. teams in Florida don't look at a FA and say, well hes a very good running back but its prolly too hot for him to play here..

 

Your example pretty much sums up why it isn't fair.. why should a team like Green Bay get to play a super bowl in a snowstorm or freezing weather against a team who almost never has to play in those conditions? It is much more balanced for them to be in the "optimal" conditions, even if it is a dome, than that.. And its not like going to a dome is going to all of the sudden make them slower on turf.. the difference between Green Bay in a dome and New Orleans in a snow storm is huge..

 

[IlliniKrush]

Clarification please:

 

Its not fair if dome teams cant play in a dome, because they built their team with that expectation.

---BUT---

It is fair to make outdoor/northern teams play in a dome, even though they build their teams to cope with the elements.

 

Is that what you're trying to say?

 

You say "best playing conditions" like it means the same thing for every team. Optimal conditions are relative, the Green Bay Packers would much rather play with the New Orleans Saints in a snowstorm than in a dome.

Already said, but no one builds teams to win snow games. They build the best football team possible. Did the Bears get Cutler because he's a cold weather QB or something? No, they got him because they think it gives them a better chance to win football games.

 

In a neutral site game, the conditions should be optimal.

 

I like snow, Im not 10.

 

I also like soldier fields grass and think it wouldnt be the same with field turf.

 

/shrug

If you like soldier field's completely unacceptable turf where players fall all over the place, I really don't know what to say. Plenty of teams have field turf, seems to be working out fine. What wouldn't be the same? Please don't be one of the BEAR WEATHER meatballs.

[southsider2k5]

lol

 

im sorry but no team builds their teams for weather conditions.. it takes the same kind of players to have a dominant running game in the north as it does in the south..

 

I will give you that having a wide open offense on a turf IS something you can definitely build your team around.. but not weather conditions.. teams in Florida don't look at a FA and say, well hes a very good running back but its prolly too hot for him to play here..

 

Your example pretty much sums up why it isn't fair.. why should a team like Green Bay get to play a super bowl in a snowstorm or freezing weather against a team who almost never has to play in those conditions? It is much more balanced for them to be in the "optimal" conditions, even if it is a dome, than that.. And its not like going to a dome is going to all of the sudden make them slower on turf.. the difference between Green Bay in a dome and New Orleans in a snow storm is huge..

 

If teams don't give consideration to players that fit the type of place where they play, they are stupid.

[IlliniKrush]

If teams don't give consideration to players that fit the type of place where they play, they are stupid.

Do you draft warm weather players in Tampa? Dusty Baker is that you?

[kjshoe04]

Do you draft warm weather players in Tampa? Dusty Baker is that you?

Especially considering the amount of games they actually play in extreme conditions is probably only 2-4 games per year even for green bay.

[Soxbadger]

Wisconsin has field turf, I just like natural grass better.

 

Field conditions are part of the game, most games are played in pristine conditions, but I like to see that a team can play in all conditions.

 

Football is an outdoor sport, being able to play in the wind, rain, snow, mud, matters.

 

They have arena league football, its just not the same as being outdoors.

 

And Ive been to 2 of the coldest games in Soldier Field history, stayed for every minute. It was great.

[zenryan]

Wisconsin has field turf, I just like natural grass better.

 

Field conditions are part of the game, most games are played in pristine conditions, but I like to see that a team can play in all conditions.

 

Football is an outdoor sport, being able to play in the wind, rain, snow, mud, matters.

 

They have arena league football, its just not the same as being outdoors.

 

And Ive been to 2 of the coldest games in Soldier Field history, stayed for every minute. It was great.

 

 

Then why should the Super Bowl be any different?

 

 

[T R U]

If teams don't give consideration to players that fit the type of place where they play, they are stupid.

 

Teams don't give considerations for that.. I don't think Mark Sanchez played a single cold weather game in his college career, does that mean the Jets should have said no thanks to acquiring him because they would have some cold games later in the year? Of course not..

 

Teams are built with players they feel will work in whatever system they are trying to run, I have never once heard of a team passing on someone because they don't feel they fit in the weather of the city..

[T R U]

And Ive been to 2 of the coldest games in Soldier Field history, stayed for every minute. It was great.

 

Ive been to cold sporting events too, and I enjoy them as well..

 

however, for competitive purposes and getting the best game possible for the biggest game of the season I don't see why they wouldn't aim for having the best possible conditions..

 

a couple years ago in a total downpour the Dolphins played the Steelers in a Monday Night "Shootout" that ended 3-0.. it was the most boring game I have ever watched in my life.. i couldn't imagine having to watch a Super Bowl like that

[hogan873]

I totally agree.

 

I dont mind bad weather games during the season or playoffs because thats part of the home field advantage. Just like here in Florida where its over 100 degrees on the field. But in the championship game, I'd like to see it played it in the best conditions possible.

 

But as long as the field is dry and the wind is minimal then all should be fine. But if we have a Tuck Bowl looking game for the Super Bowl then I doubt the NFL will ever go back.

 

And is the new stadium going to have grass or Field Turf? There is no way grass will be able to hold well for the Pro Bowl and then Super Bowl in back to back weeks.

I may be mistaken, but I think the Pro Bowl is back in Hawaii next year.