NY Super Bowl, still a good idea? (1 Viewer)

[Dr. Octopus]

Seriously...game is in NJ, which for someone who grew up in North NJ, is very different logistically and believe it or not, weather-wise (when it comes to snow), than NYC.

Cmon now you know your team's name isn't the NJ Jets.East Rutherford, Paterson, Paramus, Montvale or Ramsey, Suffern, Spring Valley--> all the way to NYC all this will become some sorta morphed version of Manhattan to everyone for a couple weeks. For two weeks the map will be redrawn to pretend East Rutherford is 5 min from where Letterman's show is taped and 10 min from Wall St.

Ya gotta know that will happen.

Actually it's only about 15-25 minutes from those spots with no traffic (which isn't common of course).

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Still an awesome idea!

 

[trader jake]

With the rain and snow in Dallas I hope they don't cancel the Super Bowl.

I feel bad for all those media members down there today.

 

[Andrew Garda]

Seriously...game is in NJ, which for someone who grew up in North NJ, is very different logistically and believe it or not, weather-wise (when it comes to snow), than NYC.

Cmon now you know your team's name isn't the NJ Jets.East Rutherford, Paterson, Paramus, Montvale or Ramsey, Suffern, Spring Valley--> all the way to NYC all this will become some sorta morphed version of Manhattan to everyone for a couple weeks. For two weeks the map will be redrawn to pretend East Rutherford is 5 min from where Letterman's show is taped and 10 min from Wall St.

Ya gotta know that will happen.

New Yorker's view of Americahttp://bigthink.com/ideas/21121

I don't share the view but it's true. Of course I don't think I'm a real NYr at this point LOL.As for crappy conditions in a Super Bowl - didn't I see one recently in Miami in a damned downpour?

Blizzard worries I get - complaints about cruddy weather - that can happen anywhere without a dome and even a dome city gets crap weather which will 'ruin' the overall experience I guess.

 

[Andrew Garda]

With the rain and snow in Dallas I hope they don't cancel the Super Bowl.I feel bad for all those media members down there today.

The media complaining is thicker than the ice and snow.At least Rich Eisen is laughing about it.

 

[Bri]

I would love the opportunity to attend a Superbowl in Anchorage and would love the opportunity moreso if it were in an NFL city where they relished the opportunity to finally host one.

When those old guys come on TV in commercials stating how they've been to everyone, I'm jealous. Feel like saying, "my turn." Stories of people like that totally "throw" my thoughts of fairness or an opportunity for fans of each team to enjoy.

I've come across too many people in the south that think sorta wrong about snow.(<--not sure how to word that) The idea of having fun in it is something they just couldn't relate to. Lake Placid is too far from NYC. They gotta find a hill (near East Rutherford) get some sleds and start educating some of these people, maybe throw a couple snowballs at em and then put ice skates on their feet. Those folks would probably hide in their hotel room til game time and sorta shuffle off to the airport so NYers need to think of a way to get em' into some winter fun.

 

[Bri]

The media complaining is thicker than the ice and snow.

If it weren't media day, I'd have turned off twitter to stop reading their complaints. It's past ridiculous.

 

[Reepicheep]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season. In a nutshell I think that is what I don't like about football in extreme weather or bad field conditions - there is a point at which I feel it has too much of an impact on how the game is played. Football is a game historically played outdoors, and I am fine with the usual variations in sun, wind, rain, snow, etc. But the Super Bowl in a blizzard would just be a bit much for me.

 

[munchkin]

And then there is this

Live coverage: Ice making a mess of Dallas-Fort Worth

By

Courtney Keys/Web Producer

ckeys@dallasnews.com | Bio

5:59 AM on Tue., Feb. 1, 2011 | Permalink

Rain is freezing as soon as it hits the ground, and with temperatures in the 20s and getting colder, there is no end immediately in sight. Most area school districts have closed for the day. Authorities said no one should travel unless necessary. Get more news and conditions in our live chat.

 

[Bri]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season. In a nutshell I think that is what I don't like about football in extreme weather or bad field conditions - there is a point at which I feel it has too much of an impact on how the game is played. Football is a game historically played outdoors, and I am fine with the usual variations in sun, wind, rain, snow, etc. But the Super Bowl in a blizzard would just be a bit much for me.

I'm not saying this is a characterization of you.People need to lose the notion that everyone that plays for the Bucs, Fins, Cards etc actually grew up in Tampa, Miami and Zona. It is extremely likely that these teams have players that like the snow and that they have players that think it's hot there in the summer. It is not 55 "born and bred" florida residents traveling to a foreign land like Antarctica.

 

[Black Box]

It is still not a good idea, it is still a great idea.

 

[humpback]

The playoffs are entirely different from the Super Bowl- there is a home field (and conditions) advantage built into the playoffs, it's your reward for earning the higher seed during the regular season. That isn't supposed to exist in the Super Bowl, it's supposed to be neutral. Playing in good conditions is more neutral than playing in terrible conditions.

Also, it's not just about any potential advantage to one side or the other, it's about the game itself- the NFL doesn't want the passing game (or kicking game for that matter) being severely compromised because of a blizzard. They want the teams to dictate the outcome of the game, not the conditions.

 

[Reepicheep]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season. In a nutshell I think that is what I don't like about football in extreme weather or bad field conditions - there is a point at which I feel it has too much of an impact on how the game is played. Football is a game historically played outdoors, and I am fine with the usual variations in sun, wind, rain, snow, etc. But the Super Bowl in a blizzard would just be a bit much for me.

I'm not saying this is a characterization of you.People need to lose the notion that everyone that plays for the Bucs, Fins, Cards etc actually grew up in Tampa, Miami and Zona. It is extremely likely that these teams have players that like the snow and that they have players that think it's hot there in the summer. It is not 55 "born and bred" florida residents traveling to a foreign land like Antarctica.

I completely, I agree and made a similar point about the label "cold team" and "warm team" being over-stated. I actually don't think temperature has any discernable impact on a game. I’m talking about extreme snow and/or very poor field conditions. These things are going to impact the game no matter who the teams are.

 

[Bayhawks]

I don't like the idea of weather playing a factor in the Super Bowl. It should only be played in domes or warm weather cities. Two teams player their ##### off all year to get to the big game. Let them battle it out on as level playing field as possible.

These two statements don't mesh. Say the game was scheduled to be played in Miami, and a monsoon hits. That's weather being a factor in the SB. If you realy don't wan't weather to be an impact, the game must be played in a dome.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I would love to see a SB played in extreme winter conditions. That would be epic.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season.

Pretty sure that teams have playing playing games outdoors, in the elements, all season.

 

[Reepicheep]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season.

Pretty sure that teams have playing playing games outdoors, in the elements, all season.

I know! It's how football was meant to be played! I was trying to make a distinction between playing outdoors in the elements, which is the norm for football, and playing in an extreeme blizzard, or on a field that is turned to slop. But you seemed to ignore that part of my post. :sigh: Anyways it's just my opinion - there comes a time when weather or field conditions can have such a profound impact on the game that I do not enjoy it as much. That's all I'm saying.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season.

Pretty sure that teams have playing playing games outdoors, in the elements, all season.

I know! It's how football was meant to be played! I was trying to make a distinction between playing outdoors in the elements, which is the norm for football, and playing in an extreeme blizzard, or on a field that is turned to slop. But you seemed to ignore that part of my post. :sigh: Anyways it's just my opinion - there comes a time when weather or field conditions can have such a profound impact on the game that I do not enjoy it as much. That's all I'm saying.

So you also oppose outdoor SBs in warm-weather stadiums too, right?

 

[massraider]

The “roots” of the game, back when Championships were played in ice and snow, back when “Heidi” had enough pull to pre-empt an NFL game, back when the Championship Game wouldn’t even sell out, and when it only enjoyed a regional uptick in the TV ratings….was nothing to wax rhapsodic about.

Actually, it was. And these famous games, played in bad elements, that still get talked about, 40/50 years later, are the games that proved football was a television sport.

 

[Cenobite]

The “roots” of the game, back when Championships were played in ice and snow, back when “Heidi” had enough pull to pre-empt an NFL game, back when the Championship Game wouldn’t even sell out, and when it only enjoyed a regional uptick in the TV ratings….was nothing to wax rhapsodic about.

Actually, it was. And these famous games, played in bad elements, that still get talked about, 40/50 years later, are the games that proved football was a television sport.

GB v. Giants in 2007 NFC champ. game was epic. Wish there were more of the same including the SB.

 

[Bri]

The “roots” of the game, back when Championships were played in ice and snow, back when “Heidi” had enough pull to pre-empt an NFL game, back when the Championship Game wouldn’t even sell out, and when it only enjoyed a regional uptick in the TV ratings….was nothing to wax rhapsodic about.

Actually, it was. And these famous games, played in bad elements, that still get talked about, 40/50 years later, are the games that proved football was a television sport.

I think his point was that the producers/execs thought heidi would be more well received than the NFL back then. Guessing again, then it'd be a point where the game wasn't as popular with these snowy stuff but amidst these perfect weather Supes.

 

[Reepicheep]

and why do we need to have a 'level' playing field, last I checked, BOTH teams are playing in the cold,or the ice,the snow, the blizzard...they're both equally challenged by it....

Thinking about this a bit more . . . the "both teams have to play on the same field" argument has never sat well with me. It's true enough in it's own right, but it doesn't change my feelings about disliking games played in terrible weather or on bad field conditions. If they put hills and sand traps and water hazards in the field for the Super Bowl, it would still be "fair" in the sense that both teams had to play on it, but it would not really be the same sport we had been watching all season.

Pretty sure that teams have playing playing games outdoors, in the elements, all season.

I know! It's how football was meant to be played! I was trying to make a distinction between playing outdoors in the elements, which is the norm for football, and playing in an extreeme blizzard, or on a field that is turned to slop. But you seemed to ignore that part of my post. :sigh: Anyways it's just my opinion - there comes a time when weather or field conditions can have such a profound impact on the game that I do not enjoy it as much. That's all I'm saying.

So you also oppose outdoor SBs in warm-weather stadiums too, right?

I never said I was opposed to anything! Just that I wouldn't enjoy a Super Bowl played in a blizzard or in slop, as much as one played in more typical conditions. And that to that end, my preference would be to see Super Bowls played in stadiums with a lower likelyhood of "outlier" conditions. Lucky for me, the NFL sees it pretty much the same way, so I'm a happy camper.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

The "roots" of the game, back when Championships were played in ice and snow, back when "Heidi" had enough pull to pre-empt an NFL game, back when the Championship Game wouldn't even sell out, and when it only enjoyed a regional uptick in the TV ratings".was nothing to wax rhapsodic about.

Actually, it was. And these famous games, played in bad elements, that still get talked about, 40/50 years later, are the games that proved football was a television sport.

I think his point was that the producers/execs thought heidi would be more well received than the NFL back then. Guessing again, then it'd be a point where the game wasn't as popular with these snowy stuff but amidst these perfect weather Supes.

The generation of fans who can say they remember those Ice Bowl games are all senior citizens now. You may get a different point of view from the older fans than what has been romanticized by the media. As an example, they still show those grainy black and white highlights of Vince Lombardi celebrating a victory in the snow, and goal line plunges over and snow-covered goal line. But I argue that those games did not prove to anyone that football was a television sport. It wasn"t until the NFL/AFL merger, Monday Night Football, and sunny weather Super Bowls that the game caught on as a television powerhouse. Anything else is revisionist history, and chock full of holes. If the NFL has learned anything during their unprecedented growth among sports on TV, it's that they are bold and willing to meet new market trends and polish up the game to appeal to a wider audience. I have no doubt that they think expanding to the New York market is another bold step in engaging a football hungry demographic base. If the weather is just cold and clear, the move will pay off in spades. But if the weather gets ugly, this could backfire on them. I'm just not convinced it is a good idea. For a generation of football fans, it is a tradition that Super Bowls be played in nice weather, and now they're changing that. For what purpose? It appears to be a big sellout by the NFL, taking the circus to the biggest tent for the most money. It has nothing to do with getting back to those early NFL "roots". The Super Bowl should continue to be played in conditions that make the game as neutral as possible and let the talent on the field decide the game, and not the conditions. All the rules changes in the 00's led to a more wide open passing game, and teams have changed their game plans accordingly. This has led to a much more interesting game. I don't want to watch 1960's football. I am happy with the game we have today, thank you. The game has progressed to allow coaches to exploits the speed and finesse of elite skill positions. The Super Bowl would be diminished if it was played in a blizzard. The playcalling and field tactics would all change to be a much more conservative game. Turning the Championship into a game of 3 yards and a cloud of dust isn't what anyone wants to see.

 

[Smack Tripper]

The Super Bowl would be diminished if it was played in a blizzard. The playcalling and field tactics would all change to be a much more conservative game. Turning the Championship into a game of 3 yards and a cloud of dust isn't what anyone wants to see.

Who, your aunt Mildred who checks in on her box numbers once a quarter? Who cares about the casual fan?

Believe me, America would go bezerk for a blizzard bowl.

As for the comfort of fans, what do I care about how the State Farm rep from Des Moines feels? Maybe, just maybe, a cold weather game would get some FANS inside of the game.

I think this bowl will be a huge hit. Jersey, when the gov isn't riding the teacups, is pretty good at removing snow. I think its a whole mindset shift to knowing you're going to a cold weather, outdoor game. Hollywood does pretty well in Aspen, Winter Olympics are well attended, so its a chance for something unique. I can see the unexpected inclement weather being rough in a place like Dallas, where there is going to be a warmer weather mindset and a place that can't deal with conditions. This bowl sounds like a real disaster. I think its those more marginal cities like Atlanta, that in the event of cold winter weather can't really deal with managing it. Jersey/NYC will be fine.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The "roots" of the game, back when Championships were played in ice and snow, back when "Heidi" had enough pull to pre-empt an NFL game, back when the Championship Game wouldn't even sell out, and when it only enjoyed a regional uptick in the TV ratings".was nothing to wax rhapsodic about.

Actually, it was. And these famous games, played in bad elements, that still get talked about, 40/50 years later, are the games that proved football was a television sport.

I think his point was that the producers/execs thought heidi would be more well received than the NFL back then. Guessing again, then it'd be a point where the game wasn't as popular with these snowy stuff but amidst these perfect weather Supes.

The generation of fans who can say they remember those Ice Bowl games are all senior citizens now. You may get a different point of view from the older fans than what has been romanticized by the media. As an example, they still show those grainy black and white highlights of Vince Lombardi celebrating a victory in the snow, and goal line plunges over and snow-covered goal line. But I argue that those games did not prove to anyone that football was a television sport. It wasn"t until the NFL/AFL merger, Monday Night Football, and sunny weather Super Bowls that the game caught on as a television powerhouse. Anything else is revisionist history, and chock full of holes. If the NFL has learned anything during their unprecedented growth among sports on TV, it's that they are bold and willing to meet new market trends and polish up the game to appeal to a wider audience. I have no doubt that they think expanding to the New York market is another bold step in engaging a football hungry demographic base. If the weather is just cold and clear, the move will pay off in spades. But if the weather gets ugly, this could backfire on them. I'm just not convinced it is a good idea. For a generation of football fans, it is a tradition that Super Bowls be played in nice weather, and now they're changing that. For what purpose? It appears to be a big sellout by the NFL, taking the circus to the biggest tent for the most money. It has nothing to do with getting back to those early NFL "roots". The Super Bowl should continue to be played in conditions that make the game as neutral as possible and let the talent on the field decide the game, and not the conditions. All the rules changes in the 00's led to a more wide open passing game, and teams have changed their game plans accordingly. This has led to a much more interesting game. I don't want to watch 1960's football. I am happy with the game we have today, thank you. The game has progressed to allow coaches to exploits the speed and finesse of elite skill positions. The Super Bowl would be diminished if it was played in a blizzard. The playcalling and field tactics would all change to be a much more conservative game. Turning the Championship into a game of 3 yards and a cloud of dust isn't what anyone wants to see.

Some of what you post isn't revisionist history, it's your own version of history. The NFL did not become the juggernaut that it is today because of warm weather Super Bowls, it was because television as a whole expanded, gambling became more widespread, fantasy football exploded, and people got bored with the former national past time of baseball.Start a thread asking people to list some of their fondest playoff game memories and I'm sure you'll get plenty of people that will bring up the Pats-Raiders (tuck rule), Giants-Packers, Packers-Seahawks, or Cinncy-SD (going back aways) thrillers where the weather was a factor but took nothing away from the game itself.The elements have long been a part of NFL football - more NFL fans hate domes than cold weather games from my experience.It's a myth that there's no passing in snowy conditions. It's actually easier for teams to pass in the snow. It's wind that limits passing games - and it's not all that unlikely that you get a windy rainy Super Bowl in Miami.Both teams play in the same weather so cry me a river for teams not "built to play in bad weather".Personally I think the NFL got this one right and I hope we get a nice snow storm for that game - people will LOVE it.

 

[Clarence the barber]

I'd love to see a Super Bowl in difficult weather too, but based on whatever cowardly decisions were made in Philly earlier this season, I can see Goddell announcing the postponement of the Super Bowl too.

 

[Smack Tripper]

I'd love to see a Super Bowl in difficult weather too, but based on whatever cowardly decisions were made in Philly earlier this season, I can see Goddell announcing the postponement of the Super Bowl too.

Lets face it, it will all be up to the networks.

 

[Bri]

I'd love to see a Super Bowl in difficult weather too, but based on whatever cowardly decisions were made in Philly earlier this season, I can see Goddell announcing the postponement of the Super Bowl too.

Lets face it, it will all be up to the networks.

there is a gigantic difference between a regular season game and the super bowl.It can not be canceled. The NFL would probably have to fold due to the reaction from that both from it's fan base and all the revenue producers. Could be fun to play along with though-That stock market baby would be sitting in Goodell's chair. How many billion wings are eaten that day? So those gotta be thrown out (there's no way anyone has that much freezer space) and chicken will suddenly become a delicacy that costs 20 bucks per drumstick.CBS(?) will play that Band of Brothers guy in his pepsi commercial over N over again instead of all their shows for a month.

 

[Binky The Doormat]

NFL Precedent setting? Ok, then how about holding it on a converted soccer field in the middle of the jungle in Zimabwe and then sell it on closed circuit for $200 a pop.

"Don King Presents the Superiest Bowl" by Don King Productions. Producer Don King.

 

[Andrew Garda]

Sort of a tangent but since we're talking bad weather super bowls - I'm sure we've all had enough opf the media crying about having to cover the biggest game of the year in snow - Kissing Suzy Kolber took down one guy in pretty funny fashion, IMO.

Enjoy!

/tangent

 

[CrossEyed]

Four inches of snow overnight in Dallas. At least New York would have plows and salt.

 

[trader jake]

Four inches of snow overnight in Dallas. At least New York would have plows and salt.

Dallas is better at importing hookers dancers than plows and salt.

 

[gump]

Looking forward to the Big Game returning to its rightful places in FL and SoCal.

 

[Premier]

Game is in Indianapolis next year. Should be a real party.

 

[gump]

Game is in Indianapolis next year. Should be a real party.

Detroit without the Canadian option.Indy is known for putting on great Final Four events...in March.

 

[Clarence the barber]

Sort of a tangent but since we're talking bad weather super bowls - I'm sure we've all had enough opf the media crying about having to cover the biggest game of the year in snow - Kissing Suzy Kolber took down one guy in pretty funny fashion, IMO.

Enjoy!

/tangent

 

[netnalp]

I like them moving it around. If the league wanted warm and a huge event, then build Super Bowl stadium in Vegas and have it there every year. Then you'd have no ice, no hurricanes, no earthquakes. And thousands of discrete professionals that can cater to the Lawrence Taylor, Pacman Jones, Michael Irvin types.

 

[Bankerguy]

Personally, I am not a huge fan of the SuperBowl in NY in Jan/Feb. I have also never really been a fan of Football in general played in January. I wish the regular season started in August and the season ended in early to mid Dec.

I'm not adverse to weather "potentially"a playing a factor in a playoff game, but I don't like KNOWING it will for sure be a factor in the game. Jaunuary football in the North = freezing cold and snow. It almost seems like 2 seasons...warm weather, then the cold weather season. Many of the COLD weather teams hold a HUGE advantage. I'd like to see it altered slightly. It will never happen though.