2014 Super Bowl in New York

[Big Sexy]

This game is to decide which team is better than the other. Weather should not play a factor in that. This is purely 2 teams, with perfect conditions, trying to outplay the other. What's hard to understand about that?

The only way for that to always happen would be to play every Super Bowl in a dome. It could just as easily rain in Florida as it could snow in New York. If bad weather plays a part in getting to the playoffs and getting to the Super Bowl then why shouldn't it play apart in the actual Super Bowl? What's to say the Colts wouldn't have made it to the SB over New England if they played those 2nd round and AFC title games all in domes during the mid 2000's?

 

[People's Champ]

The only way for that to always happen would be to play every Super Bowl in a dome. It could just as easily rain in Florida as it could snow in New York. If bad weather plays a part in getting to the playoffs and getting to the Super Bowl then why shouldn't it play apart in the actual Super Bowl? What's to say the Colts wouldn't have made it to the SB over New England if they played those 2nd round and AFC title games all in domes during the mid 2000's?

I used the wrong word when I said "perfect". And I know it could rain in Florida or San diego or anywhere else for that matter. The fact is, though, that there is less chance of that kind of weather in a warm weather city than say in NJ. As I said before, and has been said better by other posters, we don't want weather affecting a game to the point where we don't get to see these teams at their best. Should the Saints go back to the SB in '14, their team and offense gets drastically affected by bad weather. They are no longer going to be able to play the style THAT GOT THEM THEIR IN THE FIRST PLACE. I don't want to see teams have to alter their play because of weather. I want to see the 2 best teams go head to head being able to play their style without having to worry about changing because of factors outside of football.

As far as the Colts go, that's why we play the regular season. That's why there's home field advantage. Its funny how playing in cold weather, even snowy is considered an advantage if during the playoffs, like say a the Colts vs Pats. You don't think it would be an advantage for say, the Jets vs the Saints? The regualr season gives you an opportunity to get that advantage at home. But isn't that why the SB is played on a neutral site? To take out an advantage? The NFL tries to make the game and its conditions as even for both teams as possible. Which is why weather should not be allowed to affect a game that's suppose to be a level playing field.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Who here really enjoyed the Ice Bowl that much, no really, had anyone actually watched the Ice Bowl all the way through? If it wasn't for national media telling us how important and how historic this game was it would just be another game. In fact the Ice Bowl is one of the reason why we don't have the superbowl in that type of weather. Also, the Ice Bowl is one of the most boring games EVER, sure its got some history behind it, but let be clear, NOBODY wants another Ice Bowl, especially not the NFL.

For people STILL confusing the playoffs, home field, and the superbowl, I'll give it one more good try. During the regular season you have home games, during these games you have what is known as the home field advantage, now this advantage is based off your hometown crowd and hometown weather conditions. Now winning enough of these regular season games may just get you home field advantage during the playoffs, remember now, you EARN the right to have home field in the playoffs by braving the elements during the regular season, playing at other teams stadiums to see just who has what it takes. So now that we have the regular season and the playoffs out of the way we can crown a champion. Now we have the superbowl, the two survivors of the regular season and the playoffs, the two teams that braved the elements, that did what they had to do to make it to the super bowl. No longer is there a homefield advantage, as that would not be fair to either team, so the game is played on a neutral site, a site equally fair to both teams, a site that will declare a superbowl winner, not based on home field, or braving the elements, but based on who is the best football team.

one more time in big letters, YOU EARN HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE IN THE PLAYOFFS, that makes it fair. Giving homefield to one team in the superbowl is not fair, as they did not earn it, no more than the other team, thus a neutral playing field.

 

[TwistofRKO]

Were you actually going to counter my arguments in your diatribe, or just tell me I am wrong without backing it up? Did your response to my post evolve? Nope. Same poorly thought out argument.

Because I was replying to your post, established as trying to make a point out of a stupid thought.

Are NFL players men, or *****es? Why should the Pats/Cards hypothetically play in the cold? How about because if you want to be able to claim you are best team in the NFL, you need to be able to prove it regardless of conditions?

This is so dumb. Just because players don't want their careers affected by 5 inches of snow, they are *****es? Their entire career is spent trying to get to a Super Bowl and make money, why should one team gain a clear advantage that has nothing to do with what they've done?

You prove your worth in every game in getting to the Super Bowl.

Doesn't bad weather affect both the home team and the away team? When it rains does only the visiting team get wet? If its cold and snowy, so be it.

If your strength is passing, its definitely being compromised, BY NOTHING THE OPPONENTS ARE DOING.

The Super Bowl is meant to show the best team, not the better weather team.

PS. the fucking greatest game in NFL history is called the ICE BOWL. Playing in a cold weather stadium in the cold and snow is no more a guarantee of a bad game as playing in a warm weather stadium is a guarantee of a good team. In fact, we have seen quite a few piece of shit worthless Super Bowls played in beautiful weather, haven't we?

Gee, tell that to the players. Instead of giving the players the fairest chance to succeed, lets tell them there have been bad Super Bowls were one team was clearly better than another, so we should even it out.

HOW. INCREDIBLY. STUPID.

Then there is the obvious economic aspect. The Super Bowl has been played in Miami and New Orleans 10 times each. That means almost half of the Super Bowl, and almost half of all tourism revenue was split between the same two cities. Hundreds of millions of dollars, two cities. How is that even remotely fair to the other 30 cities that host an NFL team? That money isn't part of revenue sharing, the hotels in Miami don't split their profits with hotels in Denver, restaurants in New Orleans don't share with restaurants in Green Bay. Southern NFL cities get a clear economic boost that isn't shared by anyone else. And why? Because NFL players aren't tough enough to play a Super Bowl in New York? It's the greatest city on the entire planet, but its not good enough for the NFL? Ridiculous. You know damn well New York is going throw one hell of a party in 2014.

WHO. CARES??!

I want to see the best team. I don't care if Buffalo doesn't get more money. I want to see the best team, or my team, win the championship. This is such an absurd argument.

Whats the name of the Super Bowl trophy again? Oh, that's right. The Lombardi trophy. The VINCE Lombardi trophy. Named after the guy who won 12 NFL titles in Green Bay, the coldest NFL city their is come playoff time. You trying to tell me that they can't play the game that awards the trophy named after him in the same town he coached in to get his name on that trophy? It's the Vince Lombardi trophy, what city would be more appropriate to host the trophy named for him than Green Bay?

What the heck is the point? They EARNED the right to play their conference playoff games at home. They didn't play the Super Bowl at home, did they?

In what universe does it make sense to put one team at an advantage in the freakin' SUPER BOWL???

In what way does a dome take anything away from either team? Running team? Can do that indoors. Passing team? Can do that indoors. Defense? Indoors. Special Teams? Indoors. All without an advantage.

 

[Барбоса]

I mentioned this in the Bar Room thread already but I feel that it is valid for here as well.

If there are going to be complaints about playing the Super Bowl in a city which might produce sub-par weather conditions, then the game should always be played in domes even if I think that the sterile lack of weather takes something away from the game.

That the NFL sends the Super Bowl around the country each year yet has a temperature requirement that disqualifies certain cities and stadiums is grossly unfair. The sheer fact that America's biggest city that has two franchises representing it or the capital city have never held the Super Bowl, I find to be laughable. Maybe New York or even Washington does not need the money but it still seems unfair.

Furthermore, if such a thing as the weather can be construed as favouring one team or another then surely the possibility of a team getting to play the Super Bowl in their home stadium or state is even worse. There is a 1 in 32 chance for the next three years that this could happen while in 2014 that reduces to 1 in 16.

To prevent what I perceive as unfairness, the NFL should build their own dome stadium in a state that does not have its own franchise and hold the Super Bowl there every year. I suggested Hawaii

 

[Davi323]

FYI....the NFL, before the NFL/AFL merger, and thus before the Super Bowl, routinely played NFL title games in the winter, in New York, Cleveland, Chicago and Green Bay. In less than ideal situations. And you know what? They managed just fine.