Dome Advantage

[DallasEast]

​

I'm a firm believer that weather should not factor into professional football games. To be frank, I would prefer that weather wouldn't factor into any football games but the overwhelming majority of college, high school, junior high, and pee wee football teams across America cannot afford domed stadiums. Sorry pee wee players.

However, the NFL has built and can build domed stadiums. The Cowboys are one of those teams blessed with one. And while teams like the Chiefs (and their fans) are extremely worried about the weather DAYS before their game kicks off, the Cowboys know that their game with the Packers will be decided not by freaky bursts of wind or rain or by freaking <expletive> ICE but solely through man versus man, skill, determination and execution.

Dallas and Green Bay will decide yet another important postseason meeting played between them. May the best team win.

Minus the elements.

And when I say the best team, I mean Dem Cowboys.

 

[Clove]

Totally agree

 

[Swanny]

Disagree. Nothing more entertaining than watching a football game in snow, ice, rain, mud, fog whatever the element is.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Disagree. Nothing more entertaining than watching a football game in snow, ice, rain, mud, fog whatever the element is.

In the regular season that is fine. It can be entertaining but that isn't what the post season is about. In the playoffs, the team that plays the best should advance not just the team that plays best in bad weather conditions.

 

[DogFace]

Bad Weather almost always favors the least skilled participants.

 

[Swanny]

In the regular season that is fine. It can be entertaining but that isn't what the post season is about. In the playoffs, the team that plays the best should advance not just the team that plays best in bad weather conditions.

I just completely disagree. Nothing to really argue here. I'm just going to agree to disagree

 

[bark]

Agree east and I would add that it feels like AT&T actually gives us a home field advantage this year. Not sure I've felt that way before

 

[Trouty]

Well, we have a dome, so we good!

 

[jazzcat22]

Disagree. Nothing more entertaining than watching a football game in snow, ice, rain, mud, fog whatever the element is.

Agree as long as it is not us playing those games....

 

[FiveTime]

I completely agree with the OP. I have this debate with my neighbor every once in a while. I say Super Bowls should only be played in favorable climate areas like Miami, San Diego, Arizona etc or in domes. He wants wants them played up north in challenging climate areas...of course he is a Steelers fan so he thinks it would be an advantage for Pittsburgh.

 

[Risen Star]

Disagree. Football is made for the elements. Dome teams are soft.

And just about every player from the past that you worship would scoff at such a suggestion.

 

[mahoneybill]

Agree east and I would add that it feels like AT&T actually gives us a home field advantage this year. Not sure I've felt that way before

Agree. Long time since I too have felt that way

 

[perrykemp]

Disagree.

The sport is already homogenized to an incredible degree.

 

[JBS]

Typically the elements are a significant part of that teams home field advantage..I wouldn't support taking that away..

 

[LocimusPrime]

I love domes, artificial turf, and artificial women. Modern miracles

 

[Kevinicus]

Disagree. Nothing more entertaining than watching a football game in snow, ice, rain, mud, fog whatever the element is.

Disagree. I think a lot of those games are some of the most boring. When the weather is extreme and severely limits one aspect of the game, leaving what is generally a sloppy, uneventful experience, I can't call it entertaining. And from just the perspective of the game, it takes away from it by eliminating the impact of the skill of so many players.

 

[DallasEast]

Disagree. Nothing more entertaining than watching a football game in snow, ice, rain, mud, fog whatever the element is.

Cool. My entertainment is based more how well or poorly people play--not how well or poorly people play because of some non-human factor. There are many opinions about what's enjoyable. Some people love mudding in trucks. Pigs love wallowing in mud. It takes all kinds.

 

[willia451]

There are only 8 teams that have domes of the 32 teams in the NFL.

Yet, two domed teams have won SBs over the last 10 years. The Saints and the Colts.

The top 2 teams in the NFC this season have domes.

So the whole argument that domed teams cannot have success and are somehow inherently weaker is obviously BS. Just some analogue from the distant past that modern day neanderthals push because they think its scary and intimidating.

The dome is there for the comfort of the fans. Not for the comfort of the players.

So if you have the means to provide the comfort of a dome for your fans so they can be entertained by the speed and skill that the game can provide, why wouldn't you want to do that?

 

[DallasEast]

Disagree. Football is made for the elements. Dome teams are soft.

And just about every player from the past that you worship would scoff at such a suggestion.

Yeah, the Saints, Colts, (St. Louis) Rams were so soft that they won Lombardi trophies.

 

[AzorAhai]

Randomness does not equal competitive. Playing in extreme cold/elements brings an element of randomness that takes away from the actual skill of the game so I'm in no way in favor of that. Particularly in the playoffs where it's do or die. I'm sorry, but the tuck rule game wasn't entertaining. It was an exhibition of who can play better bad football. A team that's better in the small percent of bad weather games shouldn't have an advantage over a team that are better in all other games which is very much possible in outdoor stadiums. I'm completely in favor of domes/retractable roofs and think in another 50 or so years that the most stadiums will be just that.