derringer007
"Its An Outrage"
The 2014 SB final score will be 10-7 (boring) now who really want to watch that ???
Super Bowl in New York City
- Thread starter Coachnorm
- Start date
Cerberus
In Dog We Trust
Don't like the idea of this at all. All i hear now is they are hoping for a Jets/Giants SB. UH boring. Thinking that would be one of the lowest rated SB of all times. Nobody on the west coast or midwest would give a rats ass about that game. I'm hoping it back fires and its a matchup between Miami/Tampa and 10 ft of snow, 30mph winds and -10 below. February in Jersey will not allow the best team to win.
(KFFL)Philadelphia Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie said the team would like to host a Super Bowl, but he did not sound optimistic about their chances, reports the Philadelphia Inquirer's Jeff McLane and Jonathan Tamari. Lurie said, "Hosting the Super Bowl here in Philadelphia would be a great experience for our fans across the city and region. We certainly have an outstanding combination of assets including an expansive infrastructure built to host large events and conventions. With that said, we realize that warm weather options may always have the advantage when it comes to hosting the Super Bowl. However, if the league supports more northern games, we would pursue."
efactor
Coming at you
Come on Derringer. Don't you know that real fans like Miller want to see real football played in the elements? A good old 6-3 game with players falling down and suffering hypothermia is what separates the men from the boys. This ain't tennis after all.
Seriously, I couldn't agree more. A cold weather game is fine, but playing in NJ at night in February? There is a true potential for a blizzard, and if that should happen, the ultimate game becomes a joke.
Having it in NY is great. Media center of the world and all that. If they had a dome, no problem. They don't. Problem.........
:stooges:
efactor
Coming at you
Glad all your whining about it will have no effect and we'll get the cold weather SB.
And actually just 2 yrs ago the high on Feb 2 (estimated bowl game in 14) was in the 50's.....so yeah, it can happen.
In 05 when cincy played pit in the playoffs the 4:30 kickoff in cincy in jan was 57....it's not always 5 and a blowing snow storm.
And as far as the comment that no one in the west and midwest would watch.....put the pipe down! The super bowl is global and billions will watch regardless of who plays and where it is played.
Posted via Mobile Device
And actually just 2 yrs ago the high on Feb 2 (estimated bowl game in 14) was in the 50's.....so yeah, it can happen.
In 05 when cincy played pit in the playoffs the 4:30 kickoff in cincy in jan was 57....it's not always 5 and a blowing snow storm.
And as far as the comment that no one in the west and midwest would watch.....put the pipe down! The super bowl is global and billions will watch regardless of who plays and where it is played.
Posted via Mobile Device
Out of curosity Miller is it possible to post a poll on this thread as to whether the Outlaws think this is a good idea or not?
efactor
Coming at you
Interesting you bring this up because it perfectly illistrates why a supposed neutral site game should not be played in the elements. San Diego was at a huge disadvantage because of the cold. However, because it was determined by better record, no issue because Cinci earned the home field advantage. However, because the Super Bowl isn't supposed to be an advantage, it would have been an unfair advantage when the weather is so extreme. Also, that day was clear at least..............
Had SF had to travel to Cinci and play in that weather, it would have been a huge advantage to Cinci, which again is unfair. Not that SF would have not beaten them anyway, but it would have been tougher than it was.............
SF went into Chicago in the 88 NFC Championship game and they talked about "Bear" weather because it was freezing. SF whipped their butts, but had they lost, it would have been because Chicago won more games and earned the home field advantage.Anyway, it's done now, so hopefully there won't be conditions so severe that the game is ruined...........
efactor
Coming at you
This is the high during the day. See, when the sun sets (usually around 5 in the winter), it gets colder, so what was the temperature at that time or at 8:00 pm when the 2nd half starts? Probably not in the 50s. They had some idiot weatherman on ESPN today spewing the same garbage, and thankfully both Bayless and they other guy on pointed out the fact that they were quoting high daytime temps.
People will still watch, but the quality of the game will be diminished if severe weather happens. Anyway, the NFL wants the game in NY/NJ so they are willing to roll the dice. Hope it comes up 7.................
Kingdome
FOOTBALL!
E. Rutherford, New Jersey should change its name to New York, New Jersey.
But can't you say the same about a dome team playing in a domed Super Bowl?? They are at an advantage over a non-dome team yet we have domed SB's.....the unfair advantage argument works both ways. The game is played in stadiums of all like ALL season long....rotating them among stadiums and climates of all likes for the Super Bowl is the FAIR way to do it, not the unfair as you are trying to spin it.
Interesting you bring this up because it perfectly illistrates why a supposed neutral site game should not be played in the elements. San Diego was at a huge disadvantage because of the cold. However, because it was determined by better record, no issue because Cinci earned the home field advantage. However, because the Super Bowl isn't supposed to be an advantage, it would have been an unfair advantage when the weather is so extreme. Also, that day was clear at least..............
Had SF had to travel to Cinci and play in that weather, it would have been a huge advantage to Cinci, which again is unfair. Not that SF would have not beaten them anyway, but it would have been tougher than it was.............
Anyway, it's done now, so hopefully there won't be conditions so severe that the game is ruined...........
Actually the 57 was the kickoff time and it was a never out of the 40's all evening. That said, yes it is the daytime high, but if you have a daytime high in the 50's you are going to have a nive evening weather for football....unless you are now going to cry about football being played in the 30's and 40's......
derringer007
"Its An Outrage"
Really it dont matter to me, i will be at home under climate controlled conditions in the comfort of my easy chair :funnytv: with my :fridge: near by
:cheers:
:cheers:
I will create one now, will just do it as a new thread.
efactor
Coming at you
Well, for one thing, nobody is crying, just pointing out we don't want the chance of a friggin blizzard, which can happen in NY in February.........
efactor
Coming at you
Actually, no..............
Playing in a dome is only an advantage if it happens to be a home game. New Orleans for example. That's the big advantage. Noise. I don't think it favors one team that much if it's truly a neutral site. Some teams (Greatest Show on Turf) play better in a dome, but it doesn't create a huge advantage like playing in snow does.
Whatever happens happens. I just think the risk is too high. I don't like the idea of dome games either, but that's how they justify playing outside of Florida or California. Like I said earlier. The NFL is willing to roll the dice and if it comes up snake eyes, you won't see it again........
:nannie:just bustin your balls man...kinda like you were here:
Don't go getting all sensitive on me now
On a serious note, why is the chance of a blizzard ruining the game any more of a worry to you than the chance of a severe downpour in Florida?? Should we stop playing SB's in Miami b/c SB XLI was played in a rainstorm? Both really have about the same % of happening and both would have similar effects on the game itself if that is what you are worried about. Severe weather that can impact a game can happen anywhere but a dome and IMO football is meant to be played outdoors, not in a dome.
Personally, I have watched games in about all weather. Snow, rain, sub zero wind chills.....and by far the worse is a heavy rain.....I'd rather it be zero and dry than sit or play in a down pour.
I disagree there.....BOTH teams have to play in the snow and style of play dictates who may have the advantage there more than where you happen to play. And good teams should be able to adjust to any elements. Dome teams have a similar advantage. But at the same time, good teams need to be composed to play anywhere, including indoors no matter how much I hate it. The dome teams play 1/2 their games on the turf and tend to play a faster finesse style that excels on it (makes sense, build to your strength). That is an advantage. For example, Indy playing in the Super Dome in a couple years in the Super Bowl would without a doubt be an advantage for them. Not sure how one could argue otherwise.