Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I will never forgive TD for getting rid ( elevating out of the way ) of Rusty Jones. We were always one of the best conditioned teams from an injury standpoint but MOST importantly for hydration and stamina in warm wether games. We lost in Tampa Bay and Miami because our D ran out of gas. Yes they were on the field a long time but we were always the last team standing before. How about strength to go along with the conditioning? We are constantly pushed around on the line.

 

Now for the controversy: You can say all you want about home team advantage and I agree with crowd noise as an advantage. My question is all continually write that they don't want a dome or retractable roof but I think all teams should have one. This way, all teams play on a field that isn't affected weather, can see a Super Bowl vist once in awhile and only noise should be the home advantage. Point being, if the field is so frozen you cannot run as was the case in the Denver game, you have no advantage if you cannot run or are not as good as the other team is at running. Or, if wind or cold is so bad that all players are not able to play to their potential. To say nothing about injuries from slipping or crashing down on frozen ice. Those players are not crazy and want to protect their careers.

 

We lost probably 4-5 games this year due to these issues. Look back this year and you will see we do not perform well in warm weather or on a frozen field. I think people want to see a game where your team can beat the other team with all conditions optimal. JMO

 

PS: with regard to MM " a good coach can beat you with his'ns ( people) and he can beat you with your'ns" Bum Phillips

Posted

Have you ever seen a game inside of a dome? Living in Minnesota, I've seen several and the word "sterile" comes to mind. Instead of a nice breeze (or a cold snowfall...), you get air conditioners. Blah. Nobody in the Twin Cities enjoys having the dome, and I think all teams should get RID of domes, instead of adding more. Domes are not good for football.

CW

Posted

I've actually been there to watch the Twins and agree to a degree about sterility. A retractable roof is the best if you can afford it. The NFL should extract a portion of revenues and suppliment each team for upgrades to new stadiums.

Posted
I've actually been there to watch the Twins and agree to a degree about sterility. A retractable roof is the best if you can afford it. The NFL should extract a portion of revenues and suppliment each team for upgrades to new stadiums.

544083[/snapback]

Football was meant to be played in the elements. I don't see why putting a dome up for every team would be a benefit to anyone...

 

CW

Posted
I respect your opinion but then why do they play Super Bowls in places where conditions are optimal?  Domes or warm weather.  We don't have warm weather in February.

544095[/snapback]

They play the Superbowl in warm weather because businessmen don't want to sit in the cold to watch a game, and let's face it - 95% of the "fans" at the game are corporate.

 

It has nothing to do with the game.

 

CW

Posted
I will never forgive TD for getting rid ( elevating out of the way ) of Rusty Jones. We were always one of the best conditioned teams from an injury standpoint but MOST importantly for hydration and stamina in warm wether games. We lost in Tampa Bay and Miami because our D ran out of gas. Yes they were on the field a long time but we were always the last team standing before. How about strength to go along with the conditioning?  We are constantly pushed around on the line.

 

 

 

544076[/snapback]

Mularkey chose to get rid of Jones, not Donahoe.

Posted
They play the Superbowl in warm weather because businessmen don't want to sit in the cold to watch a game, and let's face it - 95% of the "fans" at the game are corporate.

 

It has nothing to do with the game.

 

CW

544210[/snapback]

 

 

Exactly, the Superbowl is much more than just a game and therefore the league ensures the best of conditions.

 

A few years ago I saw a Bills/Titans game in TN. I had nose bleed seats on a raw, windy day with constant rain. It was one of the best games I ever saw.

 

Imagine a Superbowl on a frozen field with snow covering the hash marks and the wind whipping the bowl around. What a great dream that would be. Who doesn't love watching a good muddy game in the driving rain or a snowbowl game? It adds an element of uncertainty to the game that you feel even greater about if your team can over come not only the other team but nature, itself.

Posted

The Vikings used to enjoy one of the best home field advantages in all of sports when they played at the Met. Ain't so anymore. There' a reason dome teams rarely have post season success (StL Rams being the single example to the contrary).

Posted
I respect your opinion but then why do they play Super Bowls in places where conditions are optimal?  Domes or warm weather.  We don't have warm weather in February.

544095[/snapback]

 

 

Cuz you wont get the entertainment value for the Super Bowl in a cold weather region.....sponsors want a bigtime event....You think Bono or Aerosmith will come do a halftime/pregame show in 10 degree weather???

 

 

The Super Bowl is more then just a football game...It's about the BIG $$$$$

Posted
The Vikings used to enjoy one of the best home field advantages in all of sports when they played at the Met.  Ain't so anymore.  There' a reason dome teams rarely have post season success (StL Rams being the single example to the contrary).

544236[/snapback]

Yup. And the Super Bowl was in the Georgia Dome the year the Rams won - meaning that 38 seasons after the Oilers first moved into the Astrodome, a dome-home team has yet to win it all on an open-air field...

Posted
Yup. And the Super Bowl was in the Georgia Dome the year the Rams won - meaning that 38 seasons after the Oilers first moved into the Astrodome, a dome-home team has yet to win it all on an open-air field...

544551[/snapback]

And neither have the Bills. :blink:

Posted
So much for the outdoor playing experience angle.

 

:blink:

544589[/snapback]

That's only because we never got to play the early-90s Vikings or Rams in any of those Super Bowls. We would've beaten them.....

Posted
That's only because we never got to play the early-90s Vikings or Rams in any of those Super Bowls. We would've beaten them.....

544592[/snapback]

:blink:

Posted
I will never forgive TD for getting rid ( elevating out of the way ) of Rusty Jones. We were always one of the best conditioned teams from an injury standpoint but MOST importantly for hydration and stamina in warm wether games.

544076[/snapback]

 

If Rusty was such a great guy, why did he never get Ruben Brown into shape? Especially after his rookie year, Ruben was just a waste of potential, and his waist size (no pun intended) had a lot to do with it.

Posted
If Rusty was such a great guy, why did he never get Ruben Brown into shape? Especially after his rookie year, Ruben was just a waste of potential, and his waist size (no pun intended) had a lot to do with it.

544630[/snapback]

Yeah, let's dump on Brown some more. The guy must be out of the league by now, right?

 

Oh wait, he's a starter on the NFC North Champion Bears. :blink:

 

Yeah, what a waste of potential.

 

CW

Posted
Cuz you wont get the entertainment value for the Super Bowl in a cold weather region.....sponsors want a bigtime event....You think Bono or Aerosmith will come do a halftime/pregame show in 10 degree weather???

The Super Bowl is more then just a football game...It's about the BIG $$$$$

544251[/snapback]

 

I went to SB 26 in Minneapolis and it was terrific. I spoke to some high-roller Redskins fans who had been to numerous SBs and they also thought that Minny had done the best job of hosting the game up to that point.

 

The point is, it's not about "where" as much as "how well run." Jacksonville's a warm place but many people thought they pooped the bed with their shot as a host city.

 

You're also right about the SB being about BIG $$$$...and folks will follow that anywhere, regardless of where its held.

Posted
I went to SB 26 in Minneapolis and it was terrific.  I spoke to some high-roller Redskins fans who had been to numerous SBs and they also thought that Minny had done the best job of hosting the game up to that point. 

 

The point is, it's not about "where" as much as "how well run."  Jacksonville's a warm place but many people thought they pooped the bed with their shot as a host city.

 

You're also right about the SB being about BIG $$$$...and folks will follow that anywhere, regardless of where its held.

544677[/snapback]

After the Minnesota Superbowl, it was widely reported that a cold weather team would not get another Bowl for a long time (if ever) because the sponsors didn't like the cold.

 

Also, Minnesota has a dome, so the entertainers aren't out in 10F weather (once they get inside :blink: )

 

CW

×
×
  • Create New...