2013 NFL Football

[newtogolf]

Oh so you flew in for the game on Sunday but the weather is so bad we're pushing the SB back to Tuesday sorry for the inconvenience. But the game will be still be awesome in the snow dont you think?

Contingency plans, according to the Sports Business Journal, include moving gameday up a day or pushing it back a few days. Of particular concern to the NFL is the possibility of a paralyzing Nor’easter. “We have to look at all the angles: storm arriving day-of-game, storm arriving prior to game, storm arriving after game,” a source told Daniel Kaplan.

The game is scheduled for Feb. 2, and changing the date would cause all sorts of travel headaches for fans, who would be trying to reschedule flights with the possibility that flights could be canceled and the area’s three airports closed down. Moving the game up would be a problem as well because many fans arrive on the day of the game.

“You know it will be a lot cooler, but there will be a lot of people and transportation issues regardless,” Jeff Miller, NFL vice president of security, told SBJ. “When you have a lot of moving parts and large crowds, you are moving on transportation systems already overloaded with daily commuters, so you’ve got some issues to deal with.”

It's going to be a mess on the roads and at the train stations.  They are eliminating 1/2 the parking to accommodate buses and television vans and eliminating drop off services.  Mass transit might handle getting people to the game as people tend to stagger their arrival times but when the game is over it's going to compete chaos as drunken idiots fight to get to train stations and on trains back to their hotels, cars or airports.

I know what it's like after a crowded Jet game and a Springsteen concert, the SB will pale in comparison.  You couldn't pay me enough to be there that day even if it is the Super Bowl.

[iacas]

I just don't get why that's a bad thing for a game that's played in the elements.  Wind and rain make kicking and passing difficult, but I don't think anyone here would advocate only playing in domes.  Or playing all playoff games in neutral sites?  If cold is so bad for the game why do we let NE play at home in the conference championship?

Bingo. Those are "championship" games too. You get a big trophy and everything.

So, @Fourputt , should the Broncos never be allowed to host an AFC Championship game because they could possibly be playing in extreme conditions (not to mention the fact that they're the "mile high city," a condition so extreme that people like Ryan Clark can't even play for fear of death or serious illness due to his blood condition)???

[RonTheSavage]

The Championship games are played in New England and Denver because those teams had the best record and EARNED those games at home. Big difference Chief. The SB was given to a cold weather Domeless City by a bunch of rich guys in suits.

[dsc123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsc123

Why do you equate good weather with what football is supposed to be?  Or with fairness? Football is a fall/winter sport played outdoors. I don't get why you would think that dealing with the elements = bad football.

It's not football if you cant kick field goals or extra points.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsc123

Well, if you don't like that part of the game, then why argue against weather conditions that might eliminate it?  I don't think you really mean that

Again kind sir, you are putting words in my mouth...........

Sorry I guess I thought that when you responded to my question to fourputt about why he wants to eliminate extreme weather with " It's not football if you cant kick field goals or extra points" I took that as you indicating that you would like to eliminate conditions where kicking will be eliminated by the weather.  Sorry if i misunderstood, i'm not trying to be a jerk.

[dsc123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

Bingo. Those are "championship" games too. You get a big trophy and everything.

So, @Fourputt, should the Broncos never be allowed to host an AFC Championship game because they could possibly be playing in extreme conditions (not to mention the fact that they're the "mile high city," a condition so extreme that people like Ryan Clark can't even play for fear of death or serious illness due to his blood condition)???

The Championship games are played in New England and Denver because those teams had the best record and EARNED those games at home. Big difference Chief. The SB was given to a cold weather Domeless City by a bunch of rich guys in suits.

After years of being given to a team in the south or with a dome....by.....a bunch of rich guys in suits?

---

I would expect this debate to be split between fans of cold weather teams vs fans of warm weather teams but golfindgad (SD) and fourputt (denver) are messing up my perfect world.

[newtogolf]

If you're right, then the equipment manager for the lions should be fired and every team should take notice and buy the right shoes--advantage gone.

The cold doesn't really affect the score much, but it affects the play.  Teams run the ball more and its sloppier.  Its harder to run, but its even harder to defend.

I just don't get why that's a bad thing for a game that's played in the elements.  Wind and rain make kicking and passing difficult, but I don't think anyone here would advocate only playing in domes.  Or playing all playoff games in neutral sites?  If cold is so bad for the game why do we let NE play at home in the conference championship?

Why don't you view adapting to the elements as "good football"?

I can't remember the game, but there was a Packers Super Bowl decided by having the right shoes back in the early days.  Detroit was traveling, so they probably only packed a turf shoe and cleat when they traveled on Saturday.  No one expected the snow accumulations by game time that Philly was hit with.  I was returning back from Atlantic City and despite the reports claiming we wouldn't get snow until after 3, there was 3 - 4 inches of snow on the road at 12:30 pm.

Philly being at home probably had all their shoes handy and made the switch to a shoe that worked better in the snow.

It's not a matter of "good" football, I just prefer games where the skills of the players determine the winner versus referees or weather.  As I said in my post, when the field is frozen or snow covered, the offense gets the advantage so it favors a team with the right shoes and a running game over a team that typically throws the ball.   For example, Denver would have a good shot against Seattle in decent weather, but no shot in the snow.

[RonTheSavage]

LOL ok I should've left the rich guys comment out. But my point was that the Championshipo games are played in the home stadium of the team that earned it. So you cant compare that to having a SB in NY in Feb.

[saevel25]

Here's the thing, IT'S FOOTBALL. For how much the NFL wants to make it into a pansy non-contact sport, it is played OUTDOORS!!!!

Guess what it is fair, why, because both teams play in the same weather. If you want to discuss fair for a championship. What about Freeman for the Packers, when the ball bounced off his foot, and he caught in, while lying on the ground, got up and ran for a touchdown. Why not get rid of all the BS plays. That has nothing to do with ability or skill, or who is the better champion, but is still part of the game. Same as weather.

[dsc123]

I can't remember the game, but there was a Packers Super Bowl decided by having the right shoes back in the early days.  Detroit was traveling, so they probably only packed a turf shoe and cleat when they traveled on Saturday.  No one expected the snow accumulations by game time that Philly was hit with.  I was returning back from Atlantic City and despite the reports claiming we wouldn't get snow until after 3, there was 3 - 4 inches of snow on the road at 12:30 pm.

Philly being at home probably had all their shoes handy and made the switch to a shoe that worked better in the snow.

It's not a matter of "good" football, I just prefer games where the skills of the players determine the winner versus referees or weather.  As I said in my post, when the field is frozen or snow covered, the offense gets the advantage so it favors a team with the right shoes and a running game over a team that typically throws the ball.   For example, Denver would have a good shot against Seattle in decent weather, but no shot in the snow.

I should have added you to my list of people not fitting my preconceived division of opinions on this.  You're from Long Island, right?  Shouldn't you want those jets of yours to have a cold weather super bowl?  Geno can't throw anyway and defenders would miss him all day long on the ice

I think the bolded part is what I don't get.  The skills of the players determine the winner in both the cold or the warm weather.  The relative value of different skills--say running game and passing game--shift with the weather, but its still skills winning the game.  McCoy ran for 200 yards because the weather favored the running game AND because he's one of the best backs in the league.  If you build a team that wins through the air, you know that you're risking trouble in cold weather games. Why is warm weather, which relatively favors passing, the standard and cold weather the outlier?  Particularly for a game played in February.  The only reason why warm weather is considered the baseline is that " a bunch of rich guys in suits" decided they could make more money that way.

[GangGreen]

Interesting debate for sure, one thing I think we all can agree on is that regardless of the weather...THE COWBOYS STILL STINK!!!

[RonTheSavage]

AGREED! LOL

[GangGreen]

Here's a question for everyone, when it comes to weather influenced outcomes on sporting events, I'm assuming that those who are OK with a snowy Super Bowl also have no issue at all with a final round at one of the majors being decided/played in extreme weather conditions either.

[dsc123]

Here's a question for everyone, when it comes to weather influenced outcomes on sporting events, I'm assuming that those who are OK with a snowy Super Bowl also have no issue at all with a final round at one of the majors being decided/played in extreme weather conditions either.

Golf and football are completely different.  You wouldn't be able to putt over snow unless they cleared the greens.  You wouldn't be able to find your ball.  You literally cannot play golf in the snow, by the rules of golf.

[Golfingdad]

Here's a question for everyone, when it comes to weather influenced outcomes on sporting events, I'm assuming that those who are OK with a snowy Super Bowl also have no issue at all with a final round at one of the majors being decided/played in extreme weather conditions either.

In the British Open?  Absolutely!  That is part of the game over there.  Here is the US?  Nope.  We play our golf in good weather only (we're a little bit wimpy like that).  But this is a silly comparison because golf is not football.  Just like baseball, golf (here in the US at least) is canceled due to the weather all of the time.  Football?  Not so much.  If there is not lightning, then they're playing.

[Golfingdad]

I would expect this debate to be split between fans of cold weather teams vs fans of warm weather teams but golfindgad (SD) and fourputt (denver) are messing up my perfect world.

LOL.  If it worked out that San Diego made the Super Bowl this year (by the miracle of all miracles) and they were playing against, let's say, the Eagles, and the forecast was for really, really cold weather, along with possible snow, then there is no doubt that the Eagles would have a huge advantage.

But, on the other hand, if the game was played in Miami or a dome, San Diego would have the advantage because they like to air it out.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why some people are insisting that one is more fair than the other.

Some golfers are shorter and straight hitters, and others bomb and gougers, and some tournaments are played at courses that favor one or the other, but none of the tournaments are unfair to anybody.  All golfers play the same course.  If you want to win the British Open, then learn how to play on the ground.  Don't bitch about the bounces and say "thats not real golf."  If you want to win the US Open, learn to keep it in the fairway instead of complaining about the length of the rough.  If you want to win the Masters, learn where you need to leave your ball and learn how to putt.

--------------------------------------------------

Side note:  I find it amazing that in XLVIII years there hasn't been one time where a team got to play a home Super Bowl.

[GangGreen]

Ha, sorry, probably should have made myself clearer, wasn't advocating playing golf in the snow (that truly would be silly), my question was more geared around whether or not you enjoyed watching (or had any issue with them playing) major golfing events in which the "extreme" weather conditions (ie. wind/rain) could likely have a "significant" impact on the outcome. For me personally, I don't have any issue with it, but if I had my preference I would rather watch an event of that magnitude where the weather wasn't the story. I feel the same way about football, don't mind a regular season game or even a playoff game where the elements are a factor (heck, that's what home field advantage is suppose to be about) but the Super Bowl is also suppose to be played on a nuetral field.

[boogielicious]

Just for reference, the Farmer's Almanac predictions for early Feb are for "heavy winter weather".

http://www.usnews.com/news/newsgram/articles/2013/08/26/farmers-almanac-forecasts-snow-on-super-bowl

This is Nor'easter time of year.  Some of the biggest, baddest snow storms in history have hit that week including the Blizzard of '78.  It won't be 6 degrees, but there is a real chance of a nasty storm with lots of snow or a mix and plenty of wind.  Tough conditions.  Given that, the one hope I have is that the half time show will be cancelled or at least, Bruno Mars will look like this.

Preparation is the key in this kind of weather, not necessarily if the team was built for it.  The Colts beat the Bears in a real nasty rain storm and they were a dome team.  It was in the 60s though.

[GangGreen]

This is Nor'easter time of year.  Some of the biggest, baddest snow storms in history have hit that week including the Blizzard of '78.  It won't be 6 degrees, but there is a real chance of a nasty storm with lots of snow or a mix and plenty of wind.  Tough conditions.  Given that, the one hope I have is that the half time show will be cancelled or at least, Bruno Mars will look like this.

Preparation is the key in this kind of weather, not necessarily if the team was built for it.  The Colts beat the Bears in a real nasty rain storm and they were a dome team.  It was in the 60s though.

Yep, I remember the year the Birds lost to Tampa Bay in the NFC Championship game, all week long all we heard about was how the Bucs had never won when the temps were below x degrees, yadda yadda yadda, and it was frigid that day, needless to say they kicked our arses that day.