Superbowl question
 

When's the last time weather played a factor in a SuperBowl? It seems like they only play in Dome stadiums or florida.

Damnit people, give me an answer. I know it's a dumb random question, but I am curious.

BLAAAAAAAAT!!!!!! I don't recall Btw.

thats the whole point weather is not supposed to matter, sneakers game was the last time i guess

Weather makes football more interesting. It makes every sport more intereting. I'd love to see the Superbowl played in a snowstorm.

Patriots are used to playing in snow though so they have that kind of advantage.

Well I read somewhere that they do it where weather doesn't play a major factor, so they can see who the real champon is. Of course if they go by that basis then every game should be played like that...

Exactly! Whats the point of having outdoor stadiums? I don't think it's fair to a team like Green Bay, Buffalo, New Yorks, that they will never host the Superbowl because it might snow. Mind you I think I did hear that New York may host it. But still, it seems like it's always down south.

I used to think that weather thing was bullshit and had nothing to do with the actual game. I always thought it was because they wanted the fans to be able to go all the Superbowl events and all the extra shit, but now I dunno because they just had it in Detriot last season. I went to the Superbowl, and I'd much rather go to a game in Jacksonville than NYC the first weekend of February personally.

Yeah like sTiMa I always thought it was for all the other shit that goes on the week before, but the fact that it was in Detroit kinda threw me for a loop :?:

Lol the Sky presenters were freezing their bollocks off in Detroit. Looked like they'd rather watch it at home on the couch with a nice cup of tea. Why don't they just extend the season? September-February (and most of the teams' seasons end in December anyway) is pretty damn short. Why don't every team in the NFL just play eachother once (whoever you play home and away would just be decided at random, luck of the draw I guess, but obviously have an even number of home and away games. Or have some kind of seeding policy ex.: a team like the Texans would get the Steelers at home.) which would give you a 31 week regular season, starting from the beginning of September until the end of April, which would then leave you 4 weeks for the play offs, and then the Super Bowl would be played in early May. 4 months or so off season then would be plenty. This would give you a really good, long, drawn out, exciting season, and will truly test teams' consistency. And of course every city would get an equal chance of hosting the Super Bowl

Have you played football?

Have you played it for 35 weeks straight?

Obviously I can respect how physically demanding it is, but I wouldn't say it's hardly much more demanding than rugby, which is played from September-May.

In the Northern Hemisphere that is. :D

Laurence Maroney.

Football is pretty much the only sport that has such a short season with rest time in between games.

Yeah dudes would be dieing and shit if they played 31 games, people think the pads make it easier or something but it really doesn't, its not like one guy is in pads and the other isn't.

Eh? This has nothing to do with what they're wearing.

All I'm saying is that people think it would be completely ludicrous to play 31-35 games in a season, you only assume that because we're not used to it and it would be a dramatic change to the sport...but for the better.

Now I'm not gonna be all ignorant and say that rugby is "harder" than football, blah blah blah, because that would be foolish. All I'm saying is that rugby players play from September-May every week. They go out non-stop for 80 minutes, apart from a 10 minute break at half time. No offensive or defensive teams, it's the same 15 players out on the field the whole time. The play is a lot more continuous in rugby. If you've never watched a game before, you should just to see what I'm talking about. There's a world cup next year, you should check it out.

Regardless, the point I'm trying to make is that if Rugby players can go through that kind of physicality for 8-9 months, I'm sure Footballers could.

LOL extend the game to 31 games? Yeah, that would work...

the thing is, only complete nutjobs play rugby.

I guess I'm a nutjob then. :p