Giants/Jets will be allowed to bid for new home to host cold-weather 2014 Superbowl

[killgod]

The Saints ran into Chicago for one reason.

Chicago was the better team in the regular season and thus had homefield advantage in the playoff game.

That's what it's there for. To have the the Super Bowl in a cold weather city defeats the purpose of having it at a neutral site in the first place.

You don't get the point. The NFC champion was decided in the cold and snow, which is okay, but the Superbowl cannot be decided that way?

Now let me ask this, did Chicago earn that homefield with zero aid from weather whatsoever? Or did they earn it by winning 13 + 1 playoff game (i think they went 13-3?) games where rain/snow/wind played zero role? So they are the best team in the NFC using those factors to get to the Superbowl, but the best team in the league cannot be decided with those very same factors? That's kind of ridiculous is it not?

Does playing in a fieldturfed dome not give an advantage to a team that plays on fieldturf rather than a team that plays on grass?

Does playing in a hot city provide a disadvantage to a team that typically plays in a cold city?

[Warner2BruceTD]

The Saints ran into Chicago for one reason.

Chicago was the better team in the regular season and thus had homefield advantage in the playoff game.

That's what it's there for. To have the the Super Bowl in a cold weather city defeats the purpose of having it at a neutral site in the first place.

Exactly.

Everyone loves the idea of having the SB in a bad weather city....until they actually do it, and we end up with a SB played in a fucking blizzard with 10 completed passes, missed FG's, 6 fumbles, everyone slipping and falling, altered gameplans, and sloppy play.

Why would anyone want to see a champion crowned that way? Stupid.

[killgod]

Exactly.

Everyone loves the idea of having the SB in a bad weather city....until they actually do it, and we end up with a SB played in a fucking blizzard with 10 completed passes, missed FG's, 6 fumbles, everyone slipping and falling, altered gameplans, and sloppy play.

Why would anyone want to see a champion crowned that way? Stupid.

But you are accepting an AFC and NFC champion that way...and that's not stupid?

[Warner2BruceTD]

But you are accepting an AFC and NFC champion that way...and that's not stupid?

Retarded logic.

Those home games are earned, and if you play in a cold weather city, chances are your team is built for the climate anyway.

Playing the SB in bad weather turns the game into a farce. Teams work hard all year to get a chance to win the title, the players and fans deserve the game to played under the fairest, most optimum playing conditions.

[Rayman]

You don't get the point. The NFC champion was decided in the cold and snow, which is okay, but the Superbowl cannot be decided that way?

Now let me ask this, did Chicago earn that homefield with zero aid from weather whatsoever? Or did they earn it by winning 13 + 1 playoff game (i think they went 13-3?) games where rain/snow/wind played zero role? So they are the best team in the NFC using those factors to get to the Superbowl, but the best team in the league cannot be decided with those very same factors? That's kind of ridiculous is it not?

Does playing in a fieldturfed dome not give an advantage to a team that plays on fieldturf rather than a team that plays on grass?

Does playing in a hot city provide a disadvantage to a team that typically plays in a cold city?

I think you're the one who doesn't get it.

The NFC Championship was decided in a cold weather city because the team that hosted the game earned the right to.

The answer to your first question is "Minimal, if any"

The answer to your second question is again "Minimal". The only possible advantage for a dome team is the element of speed and sound being enclosed in the stadium.

The answer to your third question is "Absolutely not".

The home field advantage of a southern team or a dome team is nowhere near that of the potential homefield advantage of a cold weather team in January.

It's not debatable. Especially this time of year. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that's the same as a team, no matter what their style of play is, that plays in a warmer environment coming into a 20 degree or less situation?

Again, Chicago earned it. They were the better team, so they got to be home for the NFC championship. Just like the Saints earned the right to hold the NFC Championship inside their dome this year and subsequently win.

In fact, by insinuating that New Orleans lost to Chicago simply because of the weather, you're kind of proving my point.

[killgod]

Retarded logic.

Those home games are earned, and if you play in a cold weather city, chances are your team is built for the climate anyway.

Playing the SB in bad weather turns the game into a farce. Teams work hard all year to get a chance to win the title, the players and fans deserve the game to played under the fairest, most optimum playing conditions.

It's not retarded logic.

Those home games are earned by playing a 16 game season and 2/3 rounds of playoffs in rain/snow/cold/hot temps.

The records teams have at the end of the season aren't earned by playing in "optimum fair playing conditions". Playoff games aren't always played in "optimum fair playing conditions". Football is played in whatever the day gives you.

Poor conditions are ACCEPTABLE to earn a spot in the Super Bowl but UNACCEPTABLE to win the Super Bowl itself?

[Warner2BruceTD]

It's not retarded logic.

Those home games are earned by playing a 16 game season and 2/3 rounds of playoffs in rain/snow/cold/hot temps.

The records teams have at the end of the season aren't earned by playing in "optimum fair playing conditions". Playoff games aren't always played in "optimum fair playing conditions". Football is played in whatever the day gives you.

Poor conditions are ACCEPTABLE to earn a spot in the Super Bowl but UNACCEPTABLE to win the Super Bowl itself?

Yeah, absolutely.

I'll pose the quistion again, and its rhetorical, because the answer is obvious:

Why would anyone want a SB title decided in that manner?

[Rayman]

It's not retarded logic.

Those home games are earned by playing a 16 game season and 2/3 rounds of playoffs in rain/snow/cold/hot temps.

The records teams have at the end of the season aren't earned by playing in "optimum fair playing conditions". Playoff games aren't always played in "optimum fair playing conditions". Football is played in whatever the day gives you.

Poor conditions are ACCEPTABLE to earn a spot in the Super Bowl but UNACCEPTABLE to win the Super Bowl itself?

Because IT'S HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE!

I mean, do you not understand the concept? Why have a game at a neutral site if the weather is more than likely to have an adverse effect on the game?

It doesn't make sense.

[Warner2BruceTD]

Because IT'S HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE!

I mean, do you not understand the concept? Why have a game at a neutral site if the weather is more than likely to have an adverse effect on the game?

It doesn't make sense.

Because apparently, it would be SO COOL!!11!! to see a SB played in the snow, or something.

I don't get it either. Sounds stupid and illogical to me to intentionally invite the possibilities of bad conditions.

[CrimsonGhost56]

Because apparently, it would be SO COOL!!11!! to see a SB played in the snow, or something.

I don't get it either. Sounds stupid and illogical to me to intentionally invite the possibilities of bad conditions.

i guess this is what happens when you move down south.

the whole state of jersey = @ warner

[Prodigal Son]

One step closer to having the Super Bowl in Moscow.

[dave]

It's about time for a cold weather Super Bowl. Hell, the first one should be in Green Bay.

I hate this warm weather, dome crap. I want the Super Bowl to be played in the elements.

Again, Green Bay should get the first true cold-weather Super Bowl.

[strahanfan92]

I'm getting sick of all these domes, shit 3 of the 4 teams in the championships were dome teams. If the Twins can get an outdoor stadium than the Vikes better get one aswell once they leave that shithole.

[Warner2BruceTD]

I'm getting sick of all these domes, shit 3 of the 4 teams in the championships were dome teams. If the Twins can get an outdoor stadium than the Vikes better get one aswell once they leave that shithole.

The Vikes moved into a dome partly because for some of their home games it was ridiculously cold and unbearable to the point of danger.

It's fun now & then, but it's just stupid & silly to consistantly play football in sub zero wind chill conditions. You inevitably get an inferior on field product, its uncomfortable for fans, and its dangerous for the players.

Football is a fall sport, no matter how much you guys pound your chest and say RAWR ITS A MAN's GAME, WAR COLD WEATHER, RAWR.

[strahanfan92]

^Well Green Bay does it.

I know New York isn't as cold but I always tell my dad I would prefer to go the night game in late December rather than the 60 degree game in October. IDK maybe it's because I'm younger but I just find the cold weather to be tradition and make a tailgating Sunday more enjoyable.