Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 128
  1. #11
    Mr. O's Avatar
    Mr. O is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    273

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Play in the cold, bring us back the glory days of old. But, I do like the idea of having the fans covered and heated seating. Just not the field.
    A man falls in love through his eyes, a woman through her ears. - Woodrow Wyatt

  2. #12
    Vikestand's Avatar
    Vikestand is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    801

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Man do you guys realize why we suck so bad outside??(take away the green bay game)...We need to play outside...If you dont realize you guys could hold a huge home feild advantage up there in the Twin Cities....I say play on open feild like every game should be...


    By Pack93z

    "Success is the ability to go from one failure to the other with no loss of enthusiasm"-Sir Winston Churchill

  3. #13
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Once upon a time, if a snowflake hit the ground the Vikes won. We were the consumate outdoor team

    Now, we've turned into indoor prima-donnas who struggle on grass.

    Rip the roof off the damn thing and make a killing selling blankets and fanny warmers.

    Real football is played OUTSIDE on REAL grass (or mud, or snow, or slush, or ...well .... you get the idea).

    Caine

  4. #14
    Viking_Spirit is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,891

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Outdoors w/out the retractable roof, no question about it. The Dome sucks, and we suck outdoors b/c we play in a dome.

    To start winning outdoors, we need to build our new stadium outdoors.

    Guns don t kill people. Chuck Norris kills people.

  5. #15
    JDogg926's Avatar
    JDogg926 is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,786

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Why do they always have the Superbowl in domes and/or warm weather???

    I think they should have a superbowl in Denver, Buffalo, Green Bay, Cleveland, somewhere that in late January, early February you've got a good possibility of snow.

    Those are definitely the best games to watch are the ones in snow. Why not make the superbowl like that?
    542cbf305f333b0554e8ffa937f852d6

  6. #16
    PAvikesfan's Avatar
    PAvikesfan is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,037

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    "Odin VAVikefan" wrote:
    I would like to see a stadium with features like Dallas's stadium. I would like to see an open (or retractable) roof over the playing field, but covering over the seating areas. Perhaps they could have heating systems limited to the audience area as well, which wouldn't warm up the playing field. That way the fans who pay 70+ dollars for a seat can be comfortable, but we get the weather elements on our home field.
    ezactly what i was thinking... a roof over the fans areas but a big gaping hole right over the field... however, with the right wind only 3/4 of the filed will be covered if a snow storm hits.

  7. #17
    RK.'s Avatar
    RK.
    RK. is offline Ring of Fame Rally Cross II Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4,458

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    Play in the cold, bring us back the glory days of old. But, I do like the idea of having the fans covered and heated seating. Just not the field.
    Being the oldest poster on this board (according to the age thread) let me remind you guys that we never won a Super Bowl in the "glory days" of old. One of the reasons always given in "those days" was the lack of ability to practice at the end of the year because of the weather and a frozen field. It was one of the main justifications for building the dome in the first place. Second a lot of great players don't want to play in ice and snow. Its not football its just slip and slide entertainment for brain freeze fans. It makes it tough to attract really good free agents. The advantage in snow and ice always goes to the team with the best running game. Look at the recent Colts/Patriots game. I think the Pats would have won anyway but the weather was a major factor why Manning was ineffective. If we are going to an outdoor stadium we might as well trade off our offense because we are a passing team. No point in that if we are going to play the end of the season in ice and snow and wind. Also being able to play in that kind of condition will not help us win a Super Bowl. The Super Bowl will never be played in those conditions. Reason: because most fans want to see a "team" win the game not the weather.

    I love the statement above..heated seating for fans but let the players freeze their asses off. :roll: Also our record on natural turf has little to do with us playing in a dome IMO. Its just that we tend to win more at home as most teams do. We are always on the road when we play outdoors. And our victory over the Packers this year should put that wives tale to rest. :tongue:

    The best alternative is a retractable dome if it can be affordable, if not then a dome. Oh and for you young guys who claim you will be life long fans of the Vikes, when you get into your 50's and 60's or more, the thrill of going to a game in sub freezing temps starts to lose its appeal. You will be at home watching the end of the year games on TV providing they aren't blacked out in your area because the weather kept the stadium from selling out. :P

    Get over your macho selves and think about what is really best for the team and all of the fans. If you just want to freeze your @sses off to show what a fan you are, thats what tail gating is for. :lol:

    WWBGD

  8. #18
    VKG4LFE's Avatar
    VKG4LFE is offline Jersey Retired Tetris Champion, Monkey GO Happy 4 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    15,994

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    I'm all for a new owner and the team staying put in Minnesota! Oh that didn't answer the question. I personally like the dome, but anything new would be great too!!

    I get the most pissed off looks from people with my VKG 4 LFE Wisconsin license plate, and I LOVE IT!!

  9. #19
    skol_vikes! is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    141

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    "Mr. O" wrote:
    Play in the cold, bring us back the glory days of old. But, I do like the idea of having the fans covered and heated seating. Just not the field.
    do you guys not realize what you're proposing? You're saying that you should have open air to bring back the glory days of old when men were real men, but then you turn a 180 and say that you should have heated seats?
    "If it's not fun, you're not doing it right. "
    ~ Fran Tarkenton

  10. #20
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    What Type of Stadium Do You Prefer?

    "RK" wrote:
    Being the oldest poster on this board (according to the age thread) let me remind you guys that we never won a Super Bowl in the "glory days" of old.
    No, but we made it to four of them. That's four more than we've seen with a dome.

    "RK" wrote:
    One of the reasons always given in "those days" was the lack of ability to practice at the end of the year because of the weather and a frozen field. It was one of the main justifications for building the dome in the first place.
    Indoor practice facility sort of negates that.

    "RK" wrote:
    Second a lot of great players don't want to play in ice and snow. Its not football its just slip and slide entertainment for brain freeze fans.
    Heated field. The technology didn't exist in the 70's to make a viable outdoor cold weather stadium. With todays advances, we can have a natural field, free of ice. Sure, it mught get muddy, but that's football.

    I'm sorry that you believe all of us who enjoy seeing a team overcome the elements are "brain freeze" fans. I certainly don't feel that I am, yet I enjoy a great outdoor game.

    "RK" wrote:
    It makes it tough to attract really good free agents.
    Philly plays outdoors. Have they had a hard time picking up FA's?

    "RK" wrote:
    The advantage in snow and ice always goes to the team with the best running game. Look at the recent Colts/Patriots game. I think the Pats would have won anyway but the weather was a major factor why Manning was ineffective. If we are going to an outdoor stadium we might as well trade off our offense because we are a passing team. No point in that if we are going to play the end of the season in ice and snow and wind.
    The advantage in snow, ice, mud, rain or any other element goes to the best prepared team...PERIOD. Doesn't matter how good your running game is if your HB can't make turns.

    There would be no need to trade off our offfense, they would simply have to adjust to a more diverse set of environmental factors.

    Also, when we were a cold weather team, Tarkenton was the QB. I don't think that the majority of his records were involving the run, were they?

    Weather affects the game, but a well prepared team can overcome those obstacles.

    "RK" wrote:
    Also being able to play in that kind of condition will not help us win a Super Bowl. The Super Bowl will never be played in those conditions. Reason: because most fans want to see a "team" win the game not the weather.
    Superbowls are also attended by people who didn't watch a game all year, but have the money to afford the "prestige" of going. Those fans (and I use the term loosely) don't want to see a team baet another team...they simply DON'T want to be cold and/or wet.

    "RK" wrote:
    I love the statement above..heated seating for fans but let the players freeze their asses off. :roll: Also our record on natural turf has little to do with us playing in a dome IMO. Its just that we tend to win more at home as most teams do. We are always on the road when we play outdoors. And our victory over the Packers this year should put that wives tale to rest. :tongue:
    While we do win more at home, our record on natural turf is simply that - our record on natural turf. Other dome games are not factored in, so what you are saying above doesn't apply. We're what, 3-20 on grass?

    Yeah, being a dome team definately DOES affect our ability to win outdoors.

    "RK" wrote:
    The best alternative is a retractable dome if it can be affordable, if not then a dome. Oh and for you young guys who claim you will be life long fans of the Vikes, when you get into your 50's and 60's or more, the thrill of going to a game in sub freezing temps starts to lose its appeal. You will be at home watching the end of the year games on TV providing they aren't blacked out in your area because the weather kept the stadium from selling out. :P
    I disagree. While the seats may not be occupied, they will be sold. Especially if we are fielding a winning product (In which case the seats will be filled regardless of weather).

    "RK" wrote:
    Get over your macho selves and think about what is really best for the team and all of the fans. If you just want to freeze your @sses off to show what a fan you are, thats what tail gating is for. :lol:
    Now, which part of that should we do? Think about what's best for the team or think about what's best for all the fans? They aren't the same thing.

    Our team has shown an inability to win outdoors since moving indoors. Sure, the fans are happy at HOME because we've got a dome and they're all snug and warm.

    However, I don't see Lambeau Field suffering attendance problems, and I have yet to see a Packer game blacked out.

    It isn't about being "macho", it's about addressing an issue that has plagued us for years. We DON'T win outdoors as a rule. Sure, once in a while we pull one off, but TYPICALLY, we fall flat outdoors.

    Build an open air stadium - with covered seating (to help protect the fans from the extremes of the elements - and we can regain our extreme weather dominance.

    I don't want to freeze to show how dedicated I am, I want to see a team taht can handle extreme weather. I want to recapture the ability to play on ANY surface.

    Look, there are many arguements pro and con to both sides of the issue. The bottom line is we are an indoor team, and we only do well indoors, and even then not always. Our guys need to be able to perform on grass as well as turf. Right now, they don't. In my "Opinion", the best way to correct that is to get our butts outdoors, not to stay insode and hope we get better.

    Caine

Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. MOVED: Goal line blitz: new type of fantasy football type of game!
    By shockzilla in forum Fantasy Football Talk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2008, 08:44 PM
  2. MOVED: Goal line blitz: new type of fantasy football type of game!
    By ultravikingfan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2008, 06:07 PM
  3. Roof or no roof on New Vikes stadium?Which would you prefer?
    By Lungshot in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-18-2005, 08:09 PM
  4. New type of Stadium
    By dart18 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-16-2003, 02:06 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •