Chicagoist: Dept. Of Bad Ideas: A Domed Stadium For Bears?

Scott the Jerseyist

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:53:47 -0600

This year's Super Bowl should be played in beautiful East Rutherford, NJ. It should always go to the city that won it the year before. Knowing how difficult it is to repeat, the defending champion should have some sort of advantage if they have made it this far! The NFL should ban all domes, not reward teams for building them. Awful weather is not marketable, but it is an essential part of the game. It'd be like saying the NHL should switch to roller skates because the arenas are too cold!

Sears Tower

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:42:17 -0600

Political conventions are another thing which could be easier to obtain with a dome as well, although there are no Republicans here and Blago has removed any chance of the Dems coming for a while, but still. And the UC wold do all right I guess. Soldier Field better than a generic domed stadium? Lets see. Alongside an expressway? Check Acres of parking lots? Check Similar looking to other stadiums, except not being smart enough to build it outside the old one? Check

tc3

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:08:49 -0600

The other point of a domed stadium is that you don't pay extra cash for a state-of-the-art drainage system or the lawn care in the case of inclement weather, which again defeats the purpose of leaving the roof open in those less than ideal "Bears weather" conditions. Having been to the new stadium in Indianapolis, there's no way that roof will be open more than twice a season. Then again, it did get them the 2012 Super Bowl. I'm already looking forward the massive amount of columnist whining that will be coming from that.

Albanyparkour

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:01:51 -0600

Give me rugby. Where mutated convicts beat each other to death over a ball and a "cup" is considered "too bulky".

Stealth

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:56:56 -0600

Great idea Ed Sherman. You're only a few years behind everyone else who said that...

mss2400

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:44:48 -0600

Having sat through four hours of rain in Miami watching the Bears lose to the Colts in Super Bowl XLI, I can tell you that the NFL does not have a rule requiring that the Super Bowl be played in a dome. I still don't think I've dried out from that experience. At the end of the day, I think most Bears fans are happy with the remodeled Soldier Field. It's a good location for the fans (relatively close to transportation, hotels, restaurants, bars, etc) and is a great advertisement for the city when the cameras capture the skyine on television. It is much, much better than a generic domed stadium built along side an expressway, and surrounded by acres of parking lots. Can we host a Final Four or Super Bowl in Soldier Field? No, but who cares...

ropesack

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:40:47 -0600

domes suck!

irishman1

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:32:30 -0600

Albanyparkour...good point. It is not a requirement for the Super Bowl to be played in a dome stadium. The last two were outside in Arizona and Florida. If a city with bad weather in January/February wants to host the Super Bowl then they have to have a dome stadium. I agree 100% with ya...I love watching football, but it does come off as if they are whining little man-babies.

Albanyparkour

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:08:00 -0600

It's a great idea. Let the teams and their corporate sponsors pay for it. Every...fucking...dime. The cubs just sold for what, just shy of a billion? I'd rather not hear any pleading for public funds from the jock-sniffers for a few years. Though it does strike me as quite funny that the NFL has to hold it's championship game in a domed stadium. Thus proving once and for all that American football is a sport for whining little man-babies.