Originally Posted by 300 Bowler
Completely agree. As I was reading this thread, I figured I'd be the first one to post a dissenting opinion, and that I'd get blasted for being a wimp who doesn't appreciate real football. I'm glad htismaqe beat me to it.
I want the Super Bowl to decide who the best team is, and the way you guarantee that is to play the game in a warm weather site or in a dome. I don't want extreme weather conditions to decide the Super Bowl winner.
Don't get me wrong, I love watching regular season games played in blizzards (as long as I get to watch it on my HDTV), and I have no problem with playoff games being played in blizzards and ice as well. But the Super Bowl is a two-week extravaganza. Flacco is right: it's retarded to play the game in a cold-weather city.
I hope next year's Super Bowl is played in zero degree temperatures, blinding snow, and perhaps even an ice storm. It will be fun to watch from the comfort of my living room, and the NFL may just learn something from the experience.
Playing the Super Bowl in a warm weather stadium every year benefits teams who play in warm weather all year (or indoors). A team that's built to survive cold-weather football in order to win its division then doesn't have a chance to play for a championship in that weather? That just doesn't seem right.