Tecmo Bo wrote:Hey frisky, you want to expound on why it would make it better for the average fan?
First of all, I'm talking purely about the game, not the commercials or the halftime show or who you watch it with. The game. Because for some of us, that's all that matters.
Obviously, once you get on the field and the game starts to take shape, anything can happen. As we have seen throughout history, most SB games tend to be pretty boring. But are you telling me that a stadium that is rocking in unison for one common purpose doesn't get you fired up? I don't know, maybe I'm the only one. I think it adds a lot to the atmopshere, and atmosphere is a huge part of the game presentation. There's a big difference between 70,000 hardcore fans and 30,000 hardcore fans mixed with 40,000 who don't give a rip either way. I don't know what the exact ratio usually is, but you get the idea.
Have you ever played a sports video game where the crowd ambiance just sucks? You jack a homerun and you get a frikin golf clap? Then play a game where the developers got the crowd right. There's a huge difference. The latter is just more fun to play. I think it's the same way with a game in real life. It's just more fun to watch (and for the players to play) when the crowd is into it. But that can't happen the way it should on a neutral field.
And it would also be great to see a Snow Bowl. In my mind, there is no better combination in sports than a football game and a blizzard. But then again, I'm from Cleveland.
As I said, I admit that it doesn't make fiscal or logical sense, but you surely can't deny it would make it better for fans watching on TV.
