- Joined
- Apr 11, 2009
- Messages
- 48,195
- Reaction score
- 6,379
- Points
- 2,244
- Location
- Greensboro, NC
- Military Branch
- Alma Mater

With the NFL seriously considering giving New York the Super Bowl in 2014 (in their new Meadowlands stadium), lot of buzz on sports radio today regarding the pro's/cons.
Personally, I think I like the idea. Biggest argument I've heard against it is that it might 'give an advantage' to teams from cold weather cities, and spoil the inherent 'fairness' of playing in a warm climate or a domed stadium. While there might be some validity in that argument, in other ways, playing the championship game in warm weather only doesn't add up.
First of all, we're apparently only worried about 'fairness' and 'not giving an advantage' in the big championship. In the NFC and AFC championships, doesn't seem to be a concern (although technically I guess, someone has won 'home field' and maybe they deserve such an advantage). I could care less about the 'experience' argument. Fans of Super Bowl teams aren't going to care what the temp is. And the truth is, it's mostly corporate America attending the game itself, so those folks inability to lounge by the pool, or play golf all week before the game doesn't cause me to lose sleep.
Bottom line for me? Real football is played outside, in whatever nature throws at us. Tell me there's not something inherently exciting about watching an ice bowl, players slogging through the snow, or even sloshing in a torrential downpour. Beyond a purist's preference, I also think playing Super Bowl's all over the country, weather and comfort be damned, would result in better games. There's nothing like some god-awful weather to serve as the 'great equalizer'. I don't always want to see the more talented team win. I just want to see a great game.
What say you?
Personally, I think I like the idea. Biggest argument I've heard against it is that it might 'give an advantage' to teams from cold weather cities, and spoil the inherent 'fairness' of playing in a warm climate or a domed stadium. While there might be some validity in that argument, in other ways, playing the championship game in warm weather only doesn't add up.
First of all, we're apparently only worried about 'fairness' and 'not giving an advantage' in the big championship. In the NFC and AFC championships, doesn't seem to be a concern (although technically I guess, someone has won 'home field' and maybe they deserve such an advantage). I could care less about the 'experience' argument. Fans of Super Bowl teams aren't going to care what the temp is. And the truth is, it's mostly corporate America attending the game itself, so those folks inability to lounge by the pool, or play golf all week before the game doesn't cause me to lose sleep.
Bottom line for me? Real football is played outside, in whatever nature throws at us. Tell me there's not something inherently exciting about watching an ice bowl, players slogging through the snow, or even sloshing in a torrential downpour. Beyond a purist's preference, I also think playing Super Bowl's all over the country, weather and comfort be damned, would result in better games. There's nothing like some god-awful weather to serve as the 'great equalizer'. I don't always want to see the more talented team win. I just want to see a great game.
What say you?