A Cold Weather Super Bowl!

[Soxbadger]

Yep, cold weather teams generally try and build towards more defense and running because they are better in all elements and you dont have to change your game plan if its brutal weather.

 

Which is why it only makes sense to have a neutral site be truly neutral in that it can be in any weather condition.

[Chisoxfn]

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.

 

 

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.

Bear weather. Look at the Bucs, even when they had decent teams they were godawful in low weather games. Why, because they couldn't really play or handle the elements. The greatest show on Turf was able to be so good because they played in a dome. They wouldn't have been that if they played somewhere else. Just like Martz is going to have to adjust his offense because he isn't playing in a dome for half of his games.

[Chisoxfn]

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

I've heard many times where a QB is being thought of being drafted in a cold weather place and they will talk about how that player will fit in the elements. It is a significant question. Some guys are more apt to handle the elements. Whether it means it is more imporant to have a strong armed QB (due to high winds, etc).

[Steve9347]

If youre the best team, youre the best in all field conditions. Furthermore, all the Super Bowl ever proves is who was the "best team" that day, with those conditions.

Until Peyton Manning tears his ACL on the first play from scrimmage due to slipping in the snow.

 

All you are doing is increasing the chances of random luck effecting the Super Bowl vs superior players.

[Steve9347]

Oh, Badger.

 

Did you seriously just bring up "Bear Weather"?

[Soxbadger]

I believe the statics would show that more players get injured on turf than on snow.

 

Your not increasing the chances of random luck, because field conditions/weather arent luck. They are the conditions. If its windy and you dont have as strong of an arm as another qb, thats not luck. If you are faster and have more stamina and therefore can run into the wind better, thats not luck.

 

If you have more balance and agility and therefore dont slip, thats not luck.

 

Thats skill, and playing in bad weather is part of the skill of football.

 

If they want to make football an indoor sport like basketball, Id agree that it shouldnt be outside for the most important game. Id be against playing a NBA final outdoors.

 

But itd be like arguing that the World Series shouldnt be played in Chicago because it might be cold, so they should play all the games indoors in pristine conditions.

 

(Edit)

 

Bear weather?

 

Not sure what you mean by that.

 

What I meant was that I grew up in Chicago, watching the Bears and playing football in the snow/ bad conditions. That is what I associate football with. Players having smoke come off their heads, etc.

 

To me that is football.

 

Summer weather reminds me of football practice. There were a few games in September were we may have had some good weather, but even High School playoffs are played in November etc, where there was snow and all sorts of bad weather.

 

Edited May 28, 2010 by Soxbadger

[Steve9347]

Caller Meathead you're on the Score.

 

UMMM HI MAI NAME IS BADGER?

 

UM. BEARS.

 

I think the Bears should run the ball more. They get off the bus running. Also, why does Jay Cutler wear a turtleneck when it's -27? Dan Hampton never wore a turtleneck when it was -27.

 

Bears.

 

Ditka.

 

 

-badger

[IlliniKrush]

Bear weather. Look at the Bucs, even when they had decent teams they were godawful in low weather games. Why, because they couldn't really play or handle the elements. The greatest show on Turf was able to be so good because they played in a dome. They wouldn't have been that if they played somewhere else. Just like Martz is going to have to adjust his offense because he isn't playing in a dome for half of his games.

The Bucs don't play well when it's 0 degrees because they aren't used to it. It's not because their team isn't made for the cold, or that the Bears are. It just happens to be what they played in more often.

 

The greatest show on Turf would work anywhere there's a decent field, even if it wasn't a dome. If Martz were to adjust his offense (though he won't much at all, really) he would do so because he doesn't have the skill set anymore, nor a decent field to work with. The precise cuts and pivots that the WR's need to make are going to be slow or end up in falls because of the crappy field conditions. It's a joke how bad Soldier Field is. That's not part of the game. If it is then they should just go play the game on the beach. It has about the same footing as they do now.

[IlliniKrush]

Caller Meathead you're on the Score.

 

UMMM HI MAI NAME IS BADGER?

 

UM. BEARS.

 

I think the Bears should run the ball more. They get off the bus running. Also, why does Jay Cutler wear a turtleneck when it's -27? Dan Hampton never wore a turtleneck when it was -27.

 

Bears.

 

Ditka.

 

 

-badger

Literally laughing out loud. Wow, that was epic.

 

PS you forgot to mention something about Orton. Otherwise you nailed it.

[Soxbadger]

Steve,

 

Show me one shred of evidence to support your position.

 

Its a sign of weakness to attack the poster and not the post.

 

I dont believe that I have ever belittled you in any post, in any forum.

 

But if you seriously cant hang with me, I understand.

 

I just expected a lot more from you.

 

Brian

[IlliniKrush]

But itd be like arguing that the World Series shouldnt be played in Chicago because it might be cold, so they should play all the games indoors in pristine conditions.

No. Bad analogy. Cold is one thing, snow/rain is another.

 

What I wouldn't want is baseball played after it's rained for 10 hours, so it's just a mud pit. That's an equalizer and the game would suck. No one would be able to play to their capabilities. That's why they don't play baseball in the rain or snow. They do play it in the cold. It's also why Roger Bossard makes tons of money to make the field in the best condition possible - because it allows athletes to perform at their best, the ball bounces/rolls true, and the risk of injury is minimized. It's not just so the field looks pretty.

[Chisoxfn]

I believe the Bears have a higher winning % in the cold than in the warm.

[Soxbadger]

No. Bad analogy. Cold is one thing, snow/rain is another.

 

What I wouldn't want is baseball played after it's rained for 10 hours, so it's just a mud pit. That's an equalizer and the game would suck. No one would be able to play to their capabilities. That's why they don't play baseball in the rain or snow. They do play it in the cold. It's also why Roger Bossard makes tons of money to make the field in the best condition possible - because it allows athletes to perform at their best, the ball bounces/rolls true, and the risk of injury is minimized. It's not just so the field looks pretty.

 

No your proving my point.

 

Baseball is never played in mud etc, the game can be called for that. If it is raining to hard in the middle of a game, they will stop play.

 

Football is played in all weather for every game, except for 1.

 

That does not make any sense.

 

You dont change the rules for 1 game.

[Steve9347]

Steve,

 

Show me one shred of evidence to support your position.

 

Its a sign of weakness to attack the poster and not the post.

 

I dont believe that I have ever belittled you in any post, in any forum.

 

But if you seriously cant hang with me, I understand.

 

I just expected a lot more from you.

 

Brian

Bears.

Ditka.

Sausage.

 

You know I was just messing. I think anyone can see that slippery field conditions, frozen hands, wet balls (ew), etc just lead to sloppy play and lend themselves toward equalizing talent between f***ing amazing players and regular old NFL quality players.

 

My apologies, I thought we were Internet homies and you would know I was messing.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Steve9347

[Soxbadger]

Chisoxfn,

 

You seriously need to stop bringing logic to this argument.

 

Dont you understand that bad weather isnt part of football???

[Chisoxfn]

No. Bad analogy. Cold is one thing, snow/rain is another.

 

What I wouldn't want is baseball played after it's rained for 10 hours, so it's just a mud pit. That's an equalizer and the game would suck. No one would be able to play to their capabilities. That's why they don't play baseball in the rain or snow. They do play it in the cold. It's also why Roger Bossard makes tons of money to make the field in the best condition possible - because it allows athletes to perform at their best, the ball bounces/rolls true, and the risk of injury is minimized. It's not just so the field looks pretty.

Football is played in the snow, rain, sleet, hail, etc. So the superbowl should be played in the same way.

 

I also think everyone is making a huge deal out of this because the NFL will be going to 18 games in the next couple years and at that point the superbowl won't be until the very end of February and at that point there is a much much more minute chance of getting hammered with some huge snow-storm anyway.

 

But I don't think it is fair for a superbowl only to be in a couple select areas. In fact, I find it stupid. I want the superbowl to be able to be played at any of the major stadiums and I still think it should be played at the superbowl team with the best records stadium. That will never happen though because of the logistics.

[Chisoxfn]

And say what you guys want, but some of the most historic games in NFL history occurred in the cold. And you are damn right I think it would be amazing to see a SuperBowl at Lambeau in the frozen tundra. The history and chills a football fan could experience from something like that are epic, imo.

[Steve9347]

I'm starting to feel what Brian and Jason are saying. Keep it up boys.

[Chisoxfn]

And just one final thing to point out, clearly some of the NFL players believe in Bear weather, etc. I hear Urlacher, etc spouting about it. Sure they want to pump the fans up, etc, but you can see the confidence in there eyes when they get a warm weather team at Soldier field in the winter. And the Bears record, just as the Steelers/Packers records, tend to back up that they will play better when it is colder out (clearly because they have a competitive advantage as they are used to those elements, etc). I'd also say that part of why they are used to the elements is because they have to prepare gameplans and practice because they know they will deal with those elements pretty often (not just at Soldier field, but the Bears will have to deal with it in Green Bay as well).

 

Hell, look at college football. There is a reason why USC won't go to Notre Dame in the winter. No denying the fact that college teams are built towards the weather/elements they play in and NFL teams do the same thing. Does it happen all the time, absolutely not, but by and large you have to at least consider it.

[IlliniKrush]

Football is played in the snow, rain, sleet, hail, etc. So the superbowl should be played in the same way.

 

I also think everyone is making a huge deal out of this because the NFL will be going to 18 games in the next couple years and at that point the superbowl won't be until the very end of February and at that point there is a much much more minute chance of getting hammered with some huge snow-storm anyway.

 

But I don't think it is fair for a superbowl only to be in a couple select areas. In fact, I find it stupid. I want the superbowl to be able to be played at any of the major stadiums and I still think it should be played at the superbowl team with the best records stadium. That will never happen though because of the logistics.

It's not like every NFL game is played in that crap. If they were, it wouldn't be very popular and the games would get old quickly.

 

So if only a handful of games are played in it, why should they aim for that? It doesn't make for a better game. I want the best game possible. That's my opinion.

 

There's a reason they've had super bowls in warm weather/domes for all these years, obviously. This NY thing is a money grab more than it is about weather, no doubt.

 

The game itself is now just one any old event of the whole week, unfortunately. I wish the game was more about the game and less about stuff surrounding it.

[Chisoxfn]

It's not like every NFL game is played in that crap. If they were, it wouldn't be very popular and the games would get old quickly.

 

So if only a handful of games are played in it, why should they aim for that? It doesn't make for a better game. I want the best game possible. That's my opinion.

 

There's a reason they've had super bowls in warm weather/domes for all these years, obviously. This NY thing is a money grab more than it is about weather, no doubt.

 

The game itself is now just one any old event of the whole week, unfortunately. I wish the game was more about the game and less about stuff surrounding it.

The thing is, the decisive games at the end of the season and into the playoffs are very likely to be decided in cold winter elements. So why are we arbitarily saying oh no, the superbowl can't be decided in the elements. Late season regularl season games to determine seeding/playoff eligibility, playoff games, conference championships (all of which are likely to occurr in the winter elements across the NFL on any given week) can be determined. But the Superbowl, well that is special, we can't do that? That seems pretty freaking hypocritical given that the message is play through it any other time of the year. You can't just change that in the superbowl. If that is the way the NFL feels, than they should just say every team needs a dome. BUt until they do that, a superbowl should be able to played anywhere.

 

And the real reason it isn't played in a cold weather city has nothing to do with the game aspect and everything to do with the money aspect. THey just don't want to worry about the logistical nightmares that go with bad snow storms (i.e., airport closures, uncomforable conditions for fans, road closures, etc).

 

Bottom line, a storm isn't going to happen every year a team plays a superbowl in a cold weather city, but games should be played in the elements & dome and anywhere in the US is fine, dome, stadium, midwest, south, west...but it should rotate around).

[Soxbadger]

Its your opinion the game wouldnt be as popular in bad weather. In my opinion those are some of the most legendary games. Ice bowl, fog bowl, the game where the snow was cleared for NE to kick the field goal, the tuck game, etc.

 

Who remembers the "It was great weather game!'

 

The reason why Super Bowls were played in warm weather was because they wanted to make sure fans would come. It had nothing to do with the playing conditions (imo)

 

Also there really is no proof that its more likely to "snow"in NY than "rain" in Florida. And cold shouldnt be the reason to not have a super bowl.

[Chisoxfn]

Its your opinion the game wouldnt be as popular in bad weather. In my opinion those are some of the most legendary games. Ice bowl, fog bowl, the game where the snow was cleared for NE to kick the field goal, the tuck game, etc.

 

Who remembers the "It was great weather game!'

 

The reason why Super Bowls were played in warm weather was because they wanted to make sure fans would come. It had nothing to do with the playing conditions (imo)

 

Also there really is no proof that its more likely to "snow"in NY than "rain" in Florida. And cold shouldnt be the reason to not have a super bowl.

Exactly, it had everything to do with money.

 

IF the NFL thought it ruined the quality of the games, every team would have started playing in a dome a long long time ago.

[Steve9347]

The game itself is now just one any old event of the whole week, unfortunately. I wish the game was more about the game and less about stuff surrounding it.

The CFL isn't very popular. You could just watch that... I doubt they have a week of entertainment surrounding their Cup Bowl thingy.

[zenryan]

I just dont like the idea that a team might already have a significant advantage going into a game that has nothing to do with the actual play itself.

 

When its 70-80 degrees that's ideal for any football player and there is no advantage if the game is between the Bills and the Falcons. But if the game is being played in the 30-40 degree range between the Packers and Dolphins then there is a team getting an advantage before kickoff.

 

 

 

The thing is, the decisive games at the end of the season and into the playoffs are very likely to be decided in cold winter elements. So why are we arbitarily saying oh no, the superbowl can't be decided in the elements. Late season regularl season games to determine seeding/playoff eligibility, playoff games, conference championships (all of which are likely to occurr in the winter elements across the NFL on any given week) can be determined. But the Superbowl, well that is special, we can't do that? That seems pretty freaking hypocritical given that the message is play through it any other time of the year. You can't just change that in the superbowl. If that is the way the NFL feels, than they should just say every team needs a dome. BUt until they do that, a superbowl should be able to played anywhere

 

 

I think the NFL does its best in attempt to even home field advantages out during the regular season. This year the Dolphins play all their division rivals before Oct. 4, two of those games(Pats,Jets) are in Miami when its going to be hot and will give Miami an advantage. Then Miami plays all their division rivals in December and two of those games will be on the road where the advantage will swing to the Pats and Jets favor.