I'm torn on the SB issue. On one hand, I want to see Woody fail at getting a SB hosted at the stadium, out of spite for the PSLs. But on the other hand, how goddamn funny would it be to see the assholes who attend the Super Bowl freezing their asses off?
That is the way football should be played outside in any element. But again it is all about the mighty dollar now unfortunately. :jets:
As alleycat said in the post right before yours (yes, I know it's easy to skip right over his posts, but sometimes he trips over a good point), the NFL would decide on gamedays if the dome was open or not. Which means no inclement weather, which means less of an impact for homefield advantage. Dome teams wouldn't have to play in the snow or rain against us. I'd hate that. I'm glad there isn't a retractable dome.
The argument that no roof makes opposing teams suffer in our weather is beyond stupid. How many playoff runs has this helped with in the past 30 years? That's what I thought. You don't need weather gimmicks as a crutch to win, you need a good hard-nosed team.
If you think the weather is a gimmick, you shouldn't be calling anyone stupid. It's a part of the game, and it's why dome teams tend to pass all day long at home.
It is a gimmick - if you can't win on a level playing field you have no business going to the super bowl
Level playing field? Then I guess we should do away with all domed stadiums. Since, y'know, 2 dome teams just played each other in the Super Bowl, and 3 dome teams played in the conference championships.
Domed stadiums are the gimmick, now that the rules are being changed to make the NFL a passer's league.
How many? Let's see, how did opposing teams--Peyton included--fare going into New England in this decade in bad weather? How did Buffalo do in getting to four straight Super Bowls, three of the four years opponents had to go into Buffalo to take them on. That's right off the top of my head and looking only at our division. You want to go back further you can look at San Diego and Dan Fouts going into Cincinnati with their high powered offense, Minnesota in the 70s went to four Super Bowls when they had an outdoor stadium and none in almost 30 years since. You think Atlanta beats them in the NFC championship game outdoors at the old Met? Anyone who thinks we could have a retractable roof and leave it open in bad weather are kidding themselves. The people paying huge money to be in the new stadium--which would be a lot more with a roof--would never let that happen, nor would the NFL. Even if a few diehard football fans like some of us on here would prefer it. About the only thing preserved for the real football fans in the new place are the upstairs Jet seats with no PSL and no roof. Put a roof on and that's the end of both. No thanks. At least now, even in the new place, when we get a bad weather game it will inspire the real football fans to come back that have been priced out, which would also help us in a big late-season game. The place will be catering enough to corporate pansies with their 5-star restaurants, you put a roof on and what you would have is the Short Hills Mall with a football game going on inside. Again, no thanks.
Teams that play most of there games inside are not as adept to playing in the elements and generally build there teams with the idea of playing indoors in mind. Outdoor teams tend to be more adept to playing in the elements and tend to build there teams with the idea of playing outdoors in mind. This is part of home field advantage. It's part of the reason why Peyton Manning and the Colts have failed to advance deep into the playoffs when they didn't have home field advantage. Of course, you need to build a championship caliber team either way.
You're right, teams are constructed based on the most favorable conditions for where they play. But IMO, your team should be able to win in any conditions, indoor or outdoor. And yeah the Colts have shown that they can't take the heat and they deserve to have blown their opportunities. The point of a roof would be that the Jets would be able to host super bowls on a regular basis and have all this extra revenue from conventions wand more concerts, etc... I don't think the roof would take away much of an advantage, and I want my team to be able to win in any condition anyways
Of course you want the team to be able to win in any conditions, but why not give yourself and additional home field advantage against teams like the Colts who are perfectly built to play inside? We've got a coach who wants to build a team to play in the elements and all of the groundwork for that type of team in place. If we could get home field advantage in the playoffs against a team like the Colts I'd be MUCH more confident we'd be able to slow down there high powered passing attack. Why wouldn't you want an environment that plays to your teams strengths? The Colts do just that by playing inside.
Here's where I disagree. Everyone has the same budget under a salary cap, which will likely be the situation going forward however they settle the labor situation. Therefore getting extra revenue give us no real advantage we don't already have. The Jets already have a brand-new facility that is as good as any in the league and now a brand new stadium--revenue is not a problem. I'd say having an open air stadium gives us a greater advantage, as long as we build a defense and running team the way the Giants always have and look how successful they've been in the Giants Stadium era. You lose a lot more of an advantage by putting a roof on the stadium than you do by not hosting events like the Super Bowl, etc, especially when you're sharing that revenue with the Giants and you have a hard cap.
Wow this is the first time I heard this issue being brought up, EVER. (insert sarcasm) Just like the thousands of other posts on this topic, it's a advantage playing in the north eastern elements. Bring this up next year when we have a home playoff game and the teams are playing in the freezing cold and maybe some snow. It shows Woody's dedicated to the TEAM, he wants to win. He knew if they built a dome countless of events could've been played there, I think he deserves some props for this. You can't have it both ways, he's either greedy or not.
Thanks. Yeah, I'd rather be the Giants and win three Super Bowls in various locations than the Dolphins, who host it every few years and never get there.
Not wanting to be the the wicked warlock from the north but since the stadium is already fitted for a dome once all the PSLs are sold on the NYJ side there will be an announcement by the NYJs & NYGs that the stadium will be domed just in time for what that 2014 or whatever SB hosting they are shooting for. Naturally included in that announcement will be a supplemental PSL to cover the cost of the doming. JMHO
