Super Bowl weather

[grim rpr]

So far not terrible... 10 day forecast shows some snow Friday with very little wind and 32 degrees but I also know that those reports always change as things get closer...

 

[OregonDucks]

I hope it is like the Eagles/Lions game.

 

[cdumler7]

Yeah I have seen reports saying it will be 35 with no wind then others that it will be 20 with 25 mph winds so at this point it really is just a guessing game.

 

[Malibu]

To early to tell.

 

[wingsauce7]

I know that if I ever had the $ to afford the Superbowl experience, I wouldn't want to drop all that cash for a vacation to New England in fucking February. What a joke. Bowl Games are supposed to be played in the warmth and sun.

 

[TDs3nOut]

I know that if I ever had the $ to afford the Superbowl experience, I wouldn't want to drop all that cash for a vacation to New England in fucking February. What a joke. Bowl Games are supposed to be played in the warmth and sun.

It is potentially unfortunate that we finally get back to the SB the first time that the game is played in a place where there is a fairly good chance that weather could affect how the game is played. Just hope it's not too windy or rainy.

 

[wingsauce7]

It is potentially unfortunate that we finally get back to the SB the first time that the game is played in a place where there is a fairly good chance that weather could affect how the game is played. Just hope it's not too windy or rainy.

As far as the game itself goes, whatever weather is involved effects both teams. My point is, that as a fan, who the fuck wants a february vacation to NY/NJ? Pre and post game activities should include a beach, cocktails with little umbrellas and scenery wearing bikinis. Not walking in Times square in a parka.

 

[cdumler7]

I think New York as a city has a lot to offer fans. Now for the game itself I don't think many fans really want to go sit in the cold possibly snowy weather to watch the Super Bowl. My guess is most fans that can afford to go to the game would want to enjoy a nice warm day in paradise while watching a great game.


Right now for the weather honestly I could care less if it is cold. Manning has shown plenty that the cold is not what changes the game plan for this team. If there is a ton of snow that could be a challenge (although that could favor the Broncos considering there is more of a chance for the Broncos to practice in snow than that of Seattle during a season). The wind will be the big deal. IF there is anything 20 mph or stronger it begins to take away our deep ball that keeps the safeties honest and helps open up the run game. The same could be said for Seattle but since they are a ground and pound team wind doesn't disturb their game plan quite as much.

 

[TDs3nOut]

As far as the game itself goes, whatever weather is involved effects both teams. My point is, that as a fan, who the fuck wants a february vacation to NY/NJ? Pre and post game activities should include a beach, cocktails with little umbrellas and scenery wearing bikinis. Not walking in Times square in a parka.

That's a good point. Since I wouldn't be attending the game, regardless of where it is played, however, my interest in where it's played lies solely in how if affects the Broncos chance of winning. While you are obviously right that both teams have to play in the same weather, it is equally obvious to me that strong wind or heavy rain figures to hurt the Broncos chances more than they would Seattle's.

 

[germanjohn]

I know that if I ever had the $ to afford the Superbowl experience, I wouldn't want to drop all that cash for a vacation to New England in fucking February. What a joke. Bowl Games are supposed to be played in the warmth and sun.

It is potentially unfortunate that we finally get back to the SB the first time that the game is played in a place where there is a fairly good chance that weather could affect how the game is played. Just hope it's not too windy or rainy.

As far as the game itself goes, whatever weather is involved effects both teams. My point is, that as a fan, who the fuck wants a february vacation to NY/NJ? Pre and post game activities should include a beach, cocktails with little umbrellas and scenery wearing bikinis. Not walking in Times square in a parka.

The game was meant to be played in seasonal weather like this, mostly because it adds extra emphasis to the fact that the best team would be able to overcome the challenges the environment poses and win the most important game of some of their careers.

Protip: Games are not supposed to be played in the warmth and the sun in February. It's called winter for a reason.

"Yeah, I'd like to have 75 degrees and sunny all the time too, but that's not football."
-Bill Cowher

 

[cdumler7]

The game was meant to be played in seasonal weather like this, mostly because it adds extra emphasis to the fact that the best team would be able to overcome the challenges the environment poses and win the most important game of some of their careers.

Protip: Games are not supposed to be played in the warmth and the sun in February. It's called winter for a reason.

"Yeah, I'd like to have 75 degrees and sunny all the time too, but that's not football."
-Bill Cowher

I agree somewhat. Both teams if the weather becomes an issue will have to deal with it. To me though the Super Bowl is to be a place where no outside elements play a part in which team wins the game. There are certain teams in the NFL geared towards playing in certain conditions but to me the Super Bowl is to be about the players not the weather.

Now both teams knew from the moment this game was picked to be in New York that this was a possibility so I am sure they have done everything possible to prepare for it. As you have shown they now just both have to "Deal with it"

 

[WalkerBoh]

The game was meant to be played in seasonal weather like this, mostly because it adds extra emphasis to the fact that the best team would be able to overcome the challenges the environment poses and win the most important game of some of their careers.

Protip: Games are not supposed to be played in the warmth and the sun in February. It's called winter for a reason.

"Yeah, I'd like to have 75 degrees and sunny all the time too, but that's not football."
-Bill Cowher

But the flip side to the argument is that the Super Bowl is meant to be two teams playing their best, and to determine which team's "Best" is enough to win. It becomes a true test on which team IS better if weather is taken out of the equation.

Would really suck if the game turned out to be some sloppy snowfest where you get 10 turnovers and other sloppy play only to see the final score 9-3. That would be by far the worst Super Bowl ever. Why risk that?

 

[TDs3nOut]

The game was meant to be played in seasonal weather like this, mostly because it adds extra emphasis to the fact that the best team would be able to overcome the challenges the environment poses and win the most important game of some of their careers.

Protip: Games are not supposed to be played in the warmth and the sun in February. It's called winter for a reason.

"Yeah, I'd like to have 75 degrees and sunny all the time too, but that's not football."
-Bill Cowher

You are right. At the same time, since I'm a Broncos fan more than a fan of some Platonic notion of "how the game is meant to be played", I prefer weather that is ideal for PFM to throw the ball.

 

[wingsauce7]

The game was meant to be played in seasonal weather like this, mostly because it adds extra emphasis to the fact that the best team would be able to overcome the challenges the environment poses and win the most important game of some of their careers.

Protip: Games are not supposed to be played in the warmth and the sun in February. It's called winter for a reason.

"Yeah, I'd like to have 75 degrees and sunny all the time too, but that's not football."
-Bill Cowher

Bullshit. Football can be played anywhere. Bowl games are meant to be played in paradise.

 

[germanjohn]

I agree somewhat. Both teams if the weather becomes an issue will have to deal with it. To me though the Super Bowl is to be a place where no outside elements play a part in which team wins the game. There are certain teams in the NFL geared towards playing in certain conditions but to me the Super Bowl is to be about the players not the weather.

Now both teams knew from the moment this game was picked to be in New York that this was a possibility so I am sure they have done everything possible to prepare for it. As you have shown they now just both have to "Deal with it"

Definitely, but consider the following:

If the Super Bowl is supposed to be about the players, and not the weather, would you not agree that a player looks that much better if he is able to perform in adverse weather conditions?

But the flip side to the argument is that the Super Bowl is meant to be two teams playing their best, and to determine which team's "Best" is enough to win. It becomes a true test on which team IS better if weather is taken out of the equation.

Would really suck if the game turned out to be some sloppy snowfest where you get 10 turnovers and other sloppy play only to see the final score 9-3. That would be by far the worst Super Bowl ever. Why risk that?

I don't understand why weather has to be taken out of the equation. See my response to cdumler above- if a player OR a team is good enough, they should be able to get comfortable with new play-calling and offensive/defensive strategies. Whichever team is better prepared for the conditions is a testament to their coaching, their coachability, their ability to adapt, and their ability to execute. Those 4 factors, I think most people on this board (if not everyone) can agree (leaving a little room for modification), are excellent criteria for measuring which team is better in a direct competition.

In addition, your 2nd paragraph irked me a bit. I personally think that a lot of the reason this sport is becoming bastardized is because of the league's tendency to legislate so more touchdowns are scored. I'm talking too many pass interference calls, somebody's pinky toe grazing another player's helmet, a mandatory flag being thrown if anybody's neck jerks violently, and the QB being protected more now than ever in NFL history.

Simply put: the NFL has caught on to what many fans enjoy: lots of scoring. Unfortunately, they have altered the game (in my opinion) way for the worse. Manning, if he were a player during the Montana, Staubach, or even Elway times would not be able to throw as many TD's as he did this season simply because he and his receivers wouldn't have a fraction of the protection they enjoy today. Don't get me wrong, I still think he's a first ballot because of his natural ability to read and pick apart a defense, but at the same time I can't pretend that he's playing in the same setting that some of the true greats had to compete in. I'll leave it at that.

You are right. At the same time, since I'm a Broncos fan more than a fan of some Platonic notion of "how the game is meant to be played", I prefer weather that is ideal for PFM to throw the ball.

I'd be in the same shoes as you if in some parallel universe my Cowboys made it to the Super Bowl, let alone past the 2nd round of the playoffs.

 

[wingsauce7]

Bullshit. Football can be played anywhere. Bowl games are meant to be played in paradise.

I'd say the same thing if your lame ass Cowboys were in it and my Broncos were staying home. I'd say the same thing if the game was in Denver. I said the same thing when the game was inside in Indy and at Ford Field. For fans going to the SB, it's a lot more than the 4 hrs of actual game time.

 

[cdumler7]

Well and this is where it boils down to would you rather the weather play a factor or not in the game. Defensive players have said that playing in horrible weather is a huge advantage for them as it eliminates parts of the field for the offense to attack. Nice weather to me makes it all about the players and what they bring to the field.


Now both teams will have to adjust and they have known this all year long. Look at the Broncos in the playoffs having more of a focus towards running the ball and playing clock control. They already have had to switch up some of how they have played and have found just as much success with this playing style as they did with their high flying offense.


Again though like I said weather gives one side of the ball a great advantage. Given that is for both teams but when one does depend on the pass a little more for success then it does take a big part of what they can bring to the table off the table. We shall see as all of this is just speculation right now of what the weather is going to be like anyway. Most of the latest reports I have been reading have been mid-30's and sunny with a slight chance of snow so I don't think the weather other than it being cold will play that much of a factor.

 

[WalkerBoh]

I don't understand why weather has to be taken out of the equation. See my response to cdumler above- if a player OR a team is good enough, they should be able to get comfortable with new play-calling and offensive/defensive strategies. Whichever team is better prepared for the conditions is a testament to their coaching, their coachability, their ability to adapt, and their ability to execute. Those 4 factors, I think most people on this board (if not everyone) can agree (leaving a little room for modification), are excellent criteria for measuring which team is better in a direct competition.

In addition, your 2nd paragraph irked me a bit. I personally think that a lot of the reason this sport is becoming bastardized is because of the league's tendency to legislate so more touchdowns are scored. I'm talking too many pass interference calls, somebody's pinky toe grazing another player's helmet, a mandatory flag being thrown if anybody's neck jerks violently, and the QB being protected more now than ever in NFL history.

The game ceases being about coaching and strategy when the weather turns bad. Take the Detroit/Philly game. Strategy is basically thrown out the window, and winner in those types of games is usually the team who benefits from the lucky (or unlucky) bounces of the ball. I certainly don't want to see such slop in a Super Bowl. It's the penultimate game of the season. It should be the BEST game of the season, not the sloppiest/worst.

If my 2nd paragraph "irks" you, then you take the game way too seriously. I'm not talking about having the Super Bowl being an offensive shootout. I'm equally entertained when two colossal defenses collide in a 10-7 game that may even come down to the final possession. What I DON'T want to see is some fumblefest in the Super Bowl because the ball is so slick that players on both teams can't hold onto it. I don't want to see players slipping and sliding all over the field trying to just stay on their feet. The championship game of the NFL should be a like a chess match, where the winner is determined by who planned, coached, and executed the best. The winner shouldn't be determined by pure, dumb, sloppy luck. That's why I think weather should be taken out of the equation.

 

[germanjohn]

The game ceases being about coaching and strategy when the weather turns bad. Strategy is basically thrown out the window

After that...

 

[grim rpr]

After that...

.. now u can remove yourself from our board.