Jacoby wrote:
KyleTheGhost wrote:
Even if it was below zero with wind or a thunderstorm?
Sure. Where would the NFL be without the Ice Bowl? Playing in the elements is part of what makes the sport special to me.
I agree. For example as a soccer fan I know that I would never want to play a Russian team in the winter, and as a fan of an Israeli team I know that we have an advantage in the summer, especially when my team is from Tel-Aviv where we have high humidity. That's part of the game. That's why I don't like domes. I remember when Maccabi played a soccer match in Stoke. Stoke is famous for having a rainy weather in their home ground, and a pitch which doesn't handle it the best way possible. But that's part of the game. Games shouldn't feel like they're played in a neutral ground. When you face a northern team in the playoffs you should expect hard conditions, and the players of the local team should be adapted to it by training in the same climate.
I also think that's the "compensation" for not hosting the Super Bowl like the southern towns.
Do we really want a league in which there's no difference between various stadia? Or do we prefer a league in which stadiums have a unique feature? And if not exactly unique, at least not shared by too many other teams.