LOL As much as I love football, and will be annoyed on the day of, there is a part of me that is hoping for a blizzard to wipe it out and make them move it to another day because of the conditions. Seriously, this was a dumb idea to have it in a frozen, snowy climate, outdoors, in winter!

yeah, whoever thought football was suppose to be played in the cold and snow

The location doesn't bother me. These "rules" are a bit ridic tho.

not the first time played outdoors or in cold weather...have we become that wimpy?

True Happy, but this is the first Super Bowl that will be played outdoors, where the weather had a very good possiblity of being less than ideal. All other Super Bowls played in cold weather were either indoors (Detroit, Indy, Minneapolis) or played in locations that had cold weather well below the norm for the location.

Personally, I don't mind the weather I think it will be interesting, but there is something about 2 teams playing in ideal conditions to determine a champion that seems more "fair".

They will both experience the same weather, so how is that not fair? Just playing devil's advocate here.

I don't understand why football can't be played in cold weather. One of the greatest games ever was the 1967 NFL Championship, The Ice Bowl, between the Packers and the Cowboys. 15 below zero, and the refs whistles froze to their lips.

Wasn't the infamous "tuck rule" game a snowy superbowl? Or am I remembering incorrectly?

My bad Jays - I was also thinking of NFC and AFC championship games in the pre-superbowl era, where home team hosted the game...more than a few of these were played in less than ideal conditions...

I think you're thinking of a scene from Silence of the Lambs!

O M !!

Okay so y'all don't think I'm a werido (thanks AA_G! ), I googled it.

2001 AFC divisional playoff game

Not a superbowl.

you googled a tuck? yeah, no one here will think that is weird...

Most coaches will tell you that weather is the great equalizer. I put fair in quotes because I couldn't think of a better quick way to say what I mean. In ideal conditions you can get a better idea who has the better team, not who has a better team in snow. If that makes sense.

in Super Bowl XLII Justin Tuck had two sacks off of Brady and a forced fumble.

So much for Tuck and the Superbowl.

during his rookie season, Tim Tebow had a Friar Tuck haircut

It does, I think I get your meaning. I just consider a good (championship-good) team one that is able to adjust to and succeed in different types of playing conditions. It wouldn't serve a team well to only win at home in their indoor stadium.

sure helped the Saints on the Superbowl run!

I don't disagree, and that is why the playoffs have home field advantage. If you are a well rounded team, that can play in all sorts of weather, you will have proven that all season long, and will have the benefit of playing your playoff games at home. The Super Bowl is generally a neutral site game, conditions should also be neutral. Just to continue with the devil's advocate approach. ;-)

Either way, this season's final game could prove very interesting!

I like wings.

Paul McCartney?

::pats DeeQ on the head:: Good for you sweetie.

Reading DeeQ's post about liking wings, I immediately thought of Rainman. Not sure why.....5 thousand 2 hundred and forty six.

Vodka?