Statistically putting on a dome will only make this franchise WORSE.
I think the least of our worries is what kind of stadium we play in. It's not the stadium crapping the game on gamedays, it's the Bears team. We play outdoors, yet we have all seen dome teams come in and beat us. A good team will win, a bad team will lose. We are a bad team.
Statistically putting on a dome will only make this franchise WORSE.
I think the least of our worries is what kind of stadium we play in. It's not the stadium crapping the game on gamedays, it's the Bears team. We play outdoors, yet we have all seen dome teams come in and beat us. A good team will win, a bad team will lose. We are a bad team.
I disagree, a stadium is something long term while players and coaches are short term. Getting rid of any advantage will only hurt this franchise. Do we really need another souless jerry world in which we're at the game watching the tv of football?
Again JABF, let's use statics. Sure Dome teams came here and beat us but the stats say we have the advantage. Isn't it crazy that the Vikings and Lions struggle against us while having the same amount of talent?
I think the least of our worries is what kind of stadium we play in. It's not the stadium crapping the game on gamedays, it's the Bears team. We play outdoors, yet we have all seen dome teams come in and beat us. A good team will win, a bad team will lose. We are a bad team.
I disagree, a stadium is something long term while players and coaches are short term. Getting rid of any advantage will only hurt this franchise. Do we really need another souless jerry world in which we're at the game watching the tv of football?
Again JABF, let's use statics. Sure Dome teams came here and beat us but the stats say we have the advantage. Isn't it crazy that the Vikings and Lions struggle against us while having the same amount of talent?
I'm not disagreeing with you so much as just saying it's not something I'm concerned about. That retractable roof system with real grass sounds like a nice way to get the best of both worlds. That way you don't end up with a mud hole from playing in a mudder game. And with the Bears owning their own stadium they can avoid stuff like when the City would rent SF out to events that trashed the field. The Park District did to a better job in recent years maintaining the field. But I'd still like to see the Bears have total control over the stadium.
Play on real grass, but have the ability to close the roof as needed (it takes 15-20 minutes to open these now).
I disagree, a stadium is something long term while players and coaches are short term. Getting rid of any advantage will only hurt this franchise. Do we really need another souless jerry world in which we're at the game watching the tv of football?
Again JABF, let's use statics. Sure Dome teams came here and beat us but the stats say we have the advantage. Isn't it crazy that the Vikings and Lions struggle against us while having the same amount of talent?
I'm not disagreeing with you so much as just saying it's not something I'm concerned about. That retractable roof system with real grass sounds like a nice way to get the best of both worlds. That way you don't end up with a mud hole from playing in a mudder game. And with the Bears owning their own stadium they can avoid stuff like when the City would rent SF out to events that trashed the field. The Park District did to a better job in recent years maintaining the field. But I'd still like to see the Bears have total control over the stadium.
Play on real grass, but have the ability to close the roof as needed (it takes 15-20 minutes to open these now).
The thing about retractable roofs are they're only used when the weather is nice. Taking the weather away from the sport and the advantages of an open field creates.
I'm all for a new stadium but want to keep the open field like many other norther teams have. I could careless about hosting a Super Bowl or Wrestlemania. I want teams to fight through Chicago winter in the playoffs. Any advantage that helps us and hurts the other team should be kept.
Design it like how the Dolphins or Seahawks design their field. Make the away team pay.
I disagree, a stadium is something long term while players and coaches are short term. Getting rid of any advantage will only hurt this franchise. Do we really need another souless jerry world in which we're at the game watching the tv of football?
Again JABF, let's use statics. Sure Dome teams came here and beat us but the stats say we have the advantage. Isn't it crazy that the Vikings and Lions struggle against us while having the same amount of talent?
I'm not disagreeing with you so much as just saying it's not something I'm concerned about. That retractable roof system with real grass sounds like a nice way to get the best of both worlds. That way you don't end up with a mud hole from playing in a mudder game. And with the Bears owning their own stadium they can avoid stuff like when the City would rent SF out to events that trashed the field. The Park District did to a better job in recent years maintaining the field. But I'd still like to see the Bears have total control over the stadium.
Play on real grass, but have the ability to close the roof as needed (it takes 15-20 minutes to open these now).
Hoge and Jahns were talking about it, and they shot down the idea of bear weather and I just laughed. Jahns said there was one game he could remember where it worked, and it was Goff with the Rams couldn't do anything. The field, the stadium the turf will all be better in AH.
I'm not disagreeing with you so much as just saying it's not something I'm concerned about. That retractable roof system with real grass sounds like a nice way to get the best of both worlds. That way you don't end up with a mud hole from playing in a mudder game. And with the Bears owning their own stadium they can avoid stuff like when the City would rent SF out to events that trashed the field. The Park District did to a better job in recent years maintaining the field. But I'd still like to see the Bears have total control over the stadium.
Play on real grass, but have the ability to close the roof as needed (it takes 15-20 minutes to open these now).
Hoge and Jahns were talking about it, and they shot down the idea of bear weather and I just laughed. Jahns said there was one game he could remember where it worked, and it was Goff with the Rams couldn't do anything. The field, the stadium the turf will all be better in AH.
That I agree with. They will own their own stadium but let's not pretend facts don't say that outdoor teams generally do better than indoor teams.
Outside teams at home owned a .583 win percentage, while dome/retractable-roof teams boasted a .545 win percentage.
The data displayed minimal discrepancy, but on the road, the difference was more apparent.
Outside teams won 43.3% of their away games, whereas dome/retractable-roof teams won 38.8% on the road.
"In the postseason, outdoor teams won 67.5% of home games, compared to 66.7% for dome/retractable teams, and in playoff road games, outdoor teams won 38.2% of the time. Dome/retractable teams won just 24.4% of those matchups.
If anything, playing home games inside a dome created a disadvantage, as teams accustomed to that environment did not adjust well when they visited outdoor sites.
The teams used to an open, outdoor stadium, where changes in climate are typically frequent, seemed to perform better on the road, when they had to adjust to a new stadium and other unfamiliar elements."