It's funny how many people I talk to about this who express surprise that somebody is actually building a new stadium without a retractable dome in this day and age. Woody's official story was that the money from a Super Bowl or two wasn't enough to justify the investment. It's a questionable financial conclusion, as a roof makes the stadium a viable host for many events, not just the Super Bowl, but I'll give him the benefit of a doubt and concede that he wouldn't have personally profited from construction of a roof. First of all, it's a rationalization which completely disregards the health, nevermind enjoyment, of the fans, from whom the money for every bit of this organization ultimately flows. If there's anything worse than having to stand in the wind and the rain to attend a football game, it's having to watch a football game played in the wind and the rain, while standing in the wind and the rain. It's also a lack of regard for the players, who have to play in what frequently amount to unsafe conditions. I won't endeavor to do any sort of statistical analysis of injuries for games played in rainy, muddy conditions, but I think anybody who's played a game of backyard football on a slippery lawn will agree that a correlation exists. Just a gross disregard for anything not made of green paper. On top of that, now we learn that they're petitioning the league to play a Super Bowl in the new stadium anyway. I hate to say it, but I'll be extremely disappointed if the NFL awards this stadium a Super Bowl. I would presume that the dome requirement is based on these sorts of concerns, safety and health concerns, which the NFL has, at least for the Super Bowl audience, even if the owners of both New York football organizations don't share them for their own audiences. The men who made these decisions don't deserve the financial windfall they'd receive from hosting a Super Bowl. To reward them in spite of their choices would be the worst kind of message to send. Then again, maybe the best thing for us, the New York fans, would be to have a Super Bowl played outdoors at the Meadowlands on a rainy, windy, 35-degree day.
Count me in the group that doesn't want a roof. People have been watching football outside for over half a century, it's just part of the experience. Maybe it's just me, but the cold wind and rain doesn't bother me too much. As for the players, that's why they get paid millions of dollars - they can put up with the mud and snow a few games a year. Especially since they have the proper equipment to do so. Maybe the only thing that would change my mind is if a retractable roof would mean that they could use real grass. I think the PSLs are more offensive than anything else.
