the three best NFL teams record wise are dome teams. And before the cowboys lost, every division in the NFC had a dome team first, not to mention the colts in the AFC are in first.
So, is there an advantage or not?

And the Steelers won the Super Bowl last year. It just happens to be working out that way this year--doesn't mean they have an advantage at all. You can't make that general of a statement based on one year--especially one that isn't even over yet.

Yes there is, but the opposing team has the same advantages when they come to the domes.


1.) Don't have to worry about rain/snow/cold/heat/wind.
2.) Turf is normally a pretty fast surface.
3.) Field doesn't get tore up like the Steelers surface does.


At the same time, teams like the Rams are horrible and they play in a dome.

HighRoller74 wrote: Yes there is.


1.) Don't have to worry about rain/snow/cold/heat/wind.
2.) Turf is normally a pretty fast surface.
3.) Field doesn't get tore up like the Steelers surface does.

Both teams playing in any game play on the same field so there is no advantage...

SQ_Crazies wrote:

HighRoller74 wrote: Yes there is.


1.) Don't have to worry about rain/snow/cold/heat/wind.
2.) Turf is normally a pretty fast surface.
3.) Field doesn't get tore up like the Steelers surface does.

Both teams playing in any game play on the same field so there is no advantage...

You got in there, before I could edit that in

I agree with what you said though, this year it just happens that the 3 best teams are in a Dome.

how about the indoor noise? Its alot louder indoors, and it makes opponents not be able to hear plays as well. Plus if you are used to cleveland/pitts weather, it could be different atmosphere. Going from cold grass to turf could add up. idk, just wondering.

donkeykong wrote: how about the indoor noise? Its alot louder indoors, and it makes opponents not be able to hear plays as well. Plus if you are used to cleveland/pitts weather, it could be different atmosphere. Going from cold grass to turf could add up. idk, just wondering.

Steelers have won 2 titles recent. The Patriots have been a dynasty this decade. They both play in shitty weather places without domes.

So if you want to ACTUALLY analyze this (meaning you have to study patterns over the course of a few years at least--not just 13 games of a season that isn't finished) I bet you'd come up with the exact opposite conclusion.

A few years old, but still relevant.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=668

We went until SB XXXIII (Falcons) without a single dome team ever making the Super Bowl. It took until XXXIV for a dome team (Rams) to win it. So (SB, dome partcipants in game, winning or losing, and whether the SB was in the Open, Dome, or Retractable but closed roof):

33: 0-1 (O)
34: 1-0 (D)
35: 0-0 (O)
36: 0-1 (D)
37: 0-0 (O)
38: 0-0 (R)
39: 0-0 (O)
40: 0-0 (D)
41: 1-0 (O)
42: 0-0 (R)
43: 0-1 (O)

So, in the past 11 years, five dome teams made the Super Bowl, twice winning (Rams and Colts) and thrice losing (Falcons, Rams, and Cardinals).

In the prior 32 years, the Saints, Seahawks, Colts, Lions, Falcons, Oilers, and Vikings never made the title game in years they were playing in a dome. Colts made it in Baltimore, Vikings made it prior to the HHH Metrodome being built, and the Seahawks made it after going to an open-air venue.

There also is no trend, as the Colts/Saints theorized matchup would be the first dome-v-dome matchup, which would be an anomaly. The fact is most dome teams, for decades were rather bad teams. Maybe even adding to the argument they needed the dome to draw 'fair weather' fans, literally. Therefore, they weren't that successful otherwise, and are just now experiencing a boost when previously they had not.

Sykotyk

I would think if anything it is a disadvantage since you aren't used to the weather when you play outdoor teams in cold/crappy weather.

I mean, when you have a home game especially late in the year its loud, you're playing fast on the turf, and no outside elements to affect the kicking game....

darbypitcher22 wrote:no outside elements to affect the kicking game....

What could possibly go wrong?

Uggh...He WAS perfect until then though, lol. I always thought the Vikes should be an outdoor team. With no heater allowed on the sidelines, like the Bud Grant days. January in Minnesota. THAT'S a homefield advantage....