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

By Marcus Gilmer in Miscellaneous on Jan 28, 2009 6:45PM

Could Chicago have become a routine host of the Super Bowl and the Final Four? Crain's Ed Sherman seems to think so, saying the city should have built a new stadium with a retractable roof rather than renovating Soldier Field.

Instead of building the Space Ship by the Lake, the city should have constructed a domed (preferably retractable) stadium. A Super Bowl and a few Final Fours would have helped pay for the extra expense.

Yes, Chicago definitely would have received a Super Bowl with a domed stadium. Cold-weather cities such as Detroit (twice) and Minneapolis have staged the big game. And Chicago is much better than those towns.

Sherman sorta has a point: if Detroit, Houston, and Jacksonville could land a Super Bowl, why not us? Of course, the thing he forgets is that the NFL has begun the asinine policy of "rewarding" teams who build new, plush stadiums with a Super Bowl. We stand with ESPN's Bill Simmons on this matter: the Super Bowl has to be held in a location you would want to go. Does Chicago fit this mold? Sure. But would people from Phoenix want to go to watch their team play in Chicago in February, domed stadium or no? (We also agree with Simmons on this point: a rotation of Miami, New Orleans, and the Rose Bowl in Pasadena is the perfect way to go for Super Bowls.) As for the Final Four? Anyone who has attended a basketball game in a large domed stadium not meant for that purpose can tell you how atrocious the views are. Even the players have issue with depth perception at these larger venues.

But what about the general idea of a domed stadium in Chicago? It's not a bad idea, given the absolutely brutal cold teams and fans have to endure every December (and occasionally January). But we totally understand why they stay in the open air Soldier Field: that cold is part of the experience of Chicago Bears football. Sherman misses this point when he says, "If they built a retractable dome, they always could leave the roof open for 'Bears weather.'" Then what's the point of the retractable roof? So you can close it up for the three home games in September and early October when it might be kinda warm? Isn't the point of a domed stadium to shield fans and players from unpleasant weather? Sherman's heart is in the right place, but it's still not a good idea.