Woody on the Upcoming SB in NJ

Why the fuck would ANY Jets fan want a roof on Metlife? It's a concrete POS as is.

The best thing it has going for it is the open air/home field advantage, old school Meadowlands winds aspect.. Put a roof on that thing and it changes everything about the NYJ football team going forward. Struggles on the road, no home field advantage.. etc. Fuck that.

Look at what changing to an open air stadium has done for Seattle.. That place is a hornet's nest for the away team, used to be an average away game..
Look at how a roof killed Minnesota's homefield advantage, they are just another away game now - back in the day that was almost worse than playing in Lambeau.

This week has been KILLING me with all the bitching associated with the SB weather. Last time I checked, this is football, and one of the best aspects of the game is that it can and has been played in virtually every weather condition, and how it is ingrained in the spirit of the sport. That's what is so great about it. They make this game wussier and wussier every year, now they got a problem with the weather? Holy hell.

 

when Seattle was good in the 80s the Kingdome was a great homefield advantage. if Seattle wasn't good now then their current field wouldn't be too intimidating.

I agree about Minnesota but again if they have a good team the dome would be a great homefield advantage b/c of the noise.

NE wasn't a tough place to win in until they got Brady and became a dynasty. it's less about conditions and Stadium and more about team.

 

Anyone who things the fans in the stands have any influence on the results on the field is delusional. It's all a marketing gimmick. The teams want to make Joe Average think that when he ponies up the money for season tickets and merchandise, it's an essential part of the team's victory. They want you to believe "The team can't win without you!!!" It makes the person feel invested and mind tricks them into paying money when they normally wouldn't.

Effect on the field? Bwhahaha. Anyone who's ever been on the field with 60,000 people in the stands knows you never even hear any crowd noise until the game is over; it's just a low buzz in the background.

 

The players would disagree with you on never hearing crowd noise in Seattle but what do they know?

 

NHL and NBA decided to take advantage of the SB week and the people coming for the event. NBA brought OKC and MIA to NY this weekend to play games and the NHL set up their Yankee Stadium games this week too.

This is much more logical than the main argument of most sports writers "we shouldn't let weather decide the SB". This focuses more on the fan experience, but sometimes that isn't first and foremost for sports leagues

 

But these aren't football fans so who cares what their experience is?

I don't care where the game is played, it's not about football. I'd love to see them play one in London rather than move a team there.

 

I don't know how I missed this yesterday. I'm assuming this was a response to my post, I don't know though because if it is it missed the point.

The fans may or may not have an effect on the field, but weather certainly does. A team that's used to playing in poor weather or used to the weather of their area, has a clear advantage at home with an open air stadium. To most people this would be obvious.

 

I think this ends up being an argument for a warm weather site. Since SB location is not a function of seeding of the best team from each conference, why should a team used to playing in the cold have an advantage over one that does not? The principle of site neutrality argues that no such advantage should exist.

 

Vikings 1961-1981(21 seasons, 154 games) at Metropolitan Stadium:
91-57-4, 61%
7-3 postseason record, 70%

Vikings 1982-2013 at Metrodome(32 seasons, 249 games):
162-87, 65%
6-4 postseason record, 60%

 

Of course weather does. Why would you read my post, that said absolutely nothing about the weather, and then chide me about not realizing weather plays a roll in an outdoor game? Particularly when my two or three previous posts in the thread clearly stated the NFL was beyond stupid for playing a Super Bowl outdoors in the northeast?

 

those are just meaningless stats without context, junc. I hate when average fans just show statistics without adding in their own biased, often contradictory context.

 

I think over 20-30+ years they average out. The difference is the Vikings best stretch of football came in the 70s when they were playing outdoors and yet the win % is still lower than in the dome.

I guess your little theory is incorrect, huh?

 

I apologize - I suppose we are referring to different things, I misread your point, etc. Carry on

 

you need to add context.

 

no context needed, it was stated how much harder it was to beat a team like Minny when they played outdoors than it is indoors. That was proven false. This isn't like throwing out TD #s or QB ratings. it's about wins and losses.

 

But what about rain or wind? Should it always be played in a dome, or is that then advantage to teams that play indoors all year on that type of surface and environment?

I definitely get what you are saying, the snow and cold usually are the biggest advantages when considering weather, but site neutrality doesn't necessarily mean warm weather outdoors. There is always a chance that hey it becomes rain/windy and the team that played outdoors all year played in more games like this than the dome team has all year.

I think they should move away from cold weather sites for the SB just because what if there is a huge snow storm and it is prime snowing time. That doesn't just impact the game, it impacts the transportation to and from the game, the transportation to and from the location of SB, events/parties/hangouts for the game, people at the game, people staying healthy/warm at the game. I put those at more troublesome than the actual game not being "fair".

 

I did not mean to suggest otherwise, and i agree that likely the issue of access, and possibly having to reschedule the SB, is more of an issue than fairness and site neutrality. Having said that of the six sites I mentioned, NO is a dome, Phoenix is as well, and of the other four while there was a great deal of rain when they last played in Miami, mid winter is not the rainy season in Florida. In San Diego I guess it tends to rain more in Southern California in the winter, but not this year! Seriously the risk of rain in San Diego in early February is small.

But your point is well taken - rescheduling due to a snowstorm is a huge problem and risk for the NFL, and that is true even for a domed site like Indy, Minny or Detroit.

 

Yeah I was just going to the extreme. I don't think fair/neutral site is ever going to be "fair" unless we plan to play in a dome every year except then what if a dome teams plays in the dome. I was just being a bit of jerk because I don't like the argument that snow/cold isn't fair but then nobody talks about avoiding rain or wind which are just as likely to impact a passing game or "warm" weather team.

And yeah I hope a SB in a snow area is done for now. It would just be way too much rescheduling going on. A serious snow storm can really effect the fans traveling to the area just for the game. Also, like you first mentioned, I want to go to Phoneix or Miami or San Diego in February, I don't want to go from a cold place to another cold place to watch the SB and then in this case, sit in the cold to watch.

 

Complete nonsense. Just listen to what you said. The Jets have home field advantage because there are elements? They haven`t won shit in 45 years now. Elements have not helped the Jets EVER. It`s time for change imo, but we ain`t never gonna get it now. Not in my lifetime anyway. I have already quit going(2010 was my last season). Had tickets for 27 years and it was fine being a sucky team because the price was right. The stadium is a dump and it`s what the Giants wanted but didn`t want to pay full price for. The Jets do not need an 82,500 seat stadium. 65-70,000 would`ve been more than enough. Now they suffer for it with empty uppers.

So far, this Super Bowl is an epic failure. I work in the shadows of that stadium(Pat. Plank Rd.) and there ain`t shit going on there for the last 2 weeks except a ton of cops and helicopters. It`s a huge scam so the cops and security can make a ton of OT $$$. Hotels have been empty. I think the Hilton on rt.3 E is the only hotel with anything going on but that is where most of the security is staying. None of the restuarants have had an increase at all. They all thought they were gonna make thousands upon thousands of dollars these last 2 weeks. NOTHING other than it`s regular truckers stopping to get lunch. There are still over 15,000 tickets available on the secondary market. Those prices have been plummeting all week long. Eventually they will have to be all sold for a loss by tomorrow morning or they will be empty. The whole SB is a joke. Very Uneventful event I have noticed. Times Square has had most of the action but that place has action just because it`s a weekend and this SB just added a few hundred more people to the square. Major failure all around imo. Good. Now lets hope the rains soak the corporate douchebags tomorrow. They deserve it.