Many football fans, myself included, love watching a football game being played in winter weather. There's something fitting about it, considering the sport is played in the fall months into the winter, and by the time December rolls around cold weather starts to affect how games are played in half the cities across the country. There have even been a few notorious games played in heavy winter weather, most notably the Raiders/Patriots playoff game in January 2002.
The Super Bowl has perennially been played in either domed stadiums or warm weather cities since it's played in early February every year. The NFL hasn't wanted winter weather to potentially impact the game, and with good reasons. Snow and ice impact travel and mobility of fans coming to a host city, as well as the actual field conditions for the game itself. Still, Goodell announced that Super Bowl 48 (I think Roman numerals just look stupid now) would be played in East Rutherford, New Jersey, where the Giants and Jets play their home games. When he had made the original announcement, he took the obvious risk of inviting Mother Nature to affect the game, but also claimed that fans had been clamoring for this kind of Super Bowl for years.
Despite my love of watching football being played in snow and winter weather, I never liked this idea at all. Having the rest of the playoffs being played in potentially cold cities like Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Baltimore, or Denver is fine. There isn't much that the NFL could do to avoid weather during January in cities such as those, and the home teams have a bit of an advantage in being used to the weather there. The home fans are also used to what the weather is like, so they know what they're getting into if their team has to host a playoff game (or more) in January. They can adequately prepare for cold and/or snow, and take an extra jacket or two if need be.
So what happens if a warm weather team has to play in Super Bowl 48? Teams in cities like Miami, Tampa, Phoenix, or San Diego aren't used to playing in freezing temperatures, and Northern Jersey is typically below 32 degrees in early February. Their play in cold weather could be affected negatively, and who would want to watch a sloppy Super Bowl? I wouldn't like watching players slip and slide in the snow, especially if the players from that team rarely ever see snow in the first place.
Consider the fans in this equation as well. Fans in those same warm weather cities aren't used to cold or snow either, so they don't know how to prepare properly either. They sure wouldn't know how to drive in such conditions either, so unless they rely on taxis or other public transportation they would have to walk for the most part. That would either get very expensive very quickly, or not be much fun at all.
Taking all those factors into account now, think about this latest potential development: The Farmers Almanac made its annual predictions of what winter 2014 will be like, and it ain't pretty.
"Pretty" may not be the right term. A blanket of snow is actually very beautiful to admire....from the comfort and warmth of one's own house. I happen to love watching the snow fall while sitting on my couch, sipping hot chocolate and watching a movie. I don't mind shoveling snow from a driveway or sidewalk. And who doesn't love a good ol' snowball fight?
The key here is that I'm talking about dealing with snow within the confines of where I live. If I'm traveling to New York or Northern Jersey because my team is in the Super Bowl, I'd have to drive up there through a potentially awful snowstorm. Then I'd have to find a place to park it in a hotel. Then I'd have to walk around the snow when I want to sight see. Then I'd have to avoid slipping on a patch of ice somewhere on the ground.
And that's before we even get to watching the game.
Oh, and don't forget - I'm used to brutal winter weather. What if fans from cities like Atlanta or San Francisco come to New York for the Super Bowl? They have no idea what they're in for. Their flights could be affected, and by the time the game actually starts on Sunday night (when it's coldest, considering the sun won't even be out!) they may be more excited to go home than watch the game.
Plus, what about the halftime show? If the snow is falling and it's 20 degrees outside, what will the NFL do with its performance at halftime? I suppose the concert could be played from an alternate location, but that would only help the fans watching from home. The fans in the stadium would be screwed.
What if the weather got to be so bad that fans would actually leave the stadium? I realize that would only happen in the most dire of circumstances, but it's happened to plenty of football games in the past. The NFL wouldn't like the idea of a half-empty stadium by the 4th quarter. There's only so much a TV broadcast can cloak by concentrating on the action on the field.
My overall point here is that I think the idea of having the Super Bowl being played in a stadium where winter weather could impact the game is a terrible idea. I thought it was a bad idea from the moment Goodell had first announced it, and if the Farmers Almanac was correct in its predictions, the worst possible outcome could happen. Such a situation would make the debacle in Dallas a couple years ago look like a minor hiccup.
I know I sound like a Daniel Downer in talking about this, but I guess in my eyes the Super Bowl was never broken in the first place. It certainly didn't need "fixing." I realize this is just an experiment for the league, but it does want its #1 media market to enjoy the exposure of hosting the Super Bowl, especially when much smaller markets like Jacksonville and Detroit have hosted Super Bowls in the past.
I only hope this doesn't mean that Denver will one day host a Super Bowl. Talk about a recipe for disaster.
No comments:
Post a Comment