Homefield advantage? The Luke's roof (lid)

by Piojocuau on Nov 2, 2009 12:29 PM EST Comment 17 comments

Indianapolis Colts, Lucas Oil Stadium (via Indy Wayne)

Yesterday, we all saw how the Luke had its amazing roof opened for a sunny game against the 49ers.

But was it a good thing or a bad thing?

Well, it seems that, at some plays (mostly in the beginning of the game as I remember), the glare affected our guys, while trying to catch the ball. Passes should've been caught but still, sun was a factor.

I went to colts.com yesterday, and found this:

"STADIUM ROOF OPEN TODAY. PLEASE DRESS FOR OUTDOOR WEATHER."

Now, I've never been to Indiana, but I assume the weather is quite cold so, maybe they opened it so the sun could warm up the field. But, besides that, I can't really find any other reason of why it would be a good thing to have that thing open.

If it was natural grass, it would be quite useful. It isn't.
If it was during the summer, it would be also useful so you could have some warm environment. Well, its use is mostly for fall or winter (at least for football)

In snowy days, you have to close it or you should close it. For extremely cold days, people would prefer it closed and have heaters do their thing. So , it seems that it would be better if the roof would remain closed. I mean, that's why they played in a dome for several years, right? Thats why they built a stadium that could be closed, right?

As we saw yesterday, and in some other games, the glare is not something we could benefit from. It causes good players to miss some balls. The crowd does its thing, but the structure does not.

I mean, it's amazing in terms of engineering/architecture but for its use and conditions, I find it like some kind of waste or more than so, it is just in the inappropiate place. I do like it, but it just seems that it would be better to keep it closed. Like a $100 million better.

So, what do you think? Is it useful? For you guys that have been there or live in Indy, how is it better?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 17 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The glare

seemed to be a HUGE disadvantage, and should have been known from the first game of the season when it was also apparent. I can’t remember… is the coin toss like in college where the winner can choose to receive the ball (or defer) and the other team chooses the end of the field to defend? If so, the Colts should learn to defend a different goal at the opening of the game (where they get the choice).

How can you not love a team that does this?

by LovinBlue on Nov 2, 2009 1:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Temp/Sun and Faking Injuries

The sun shining on the North End Zone was the only possible, maybe, iffy problem about the roof open, but I have a very difficult time complaining about the Sun in November so I’m going to cast that aside. I was in a Short Sleeve jersey, it was in the mid 50s and Sunny… in Nov in Indiana. That was a nice Fall Day.

The Colts should learn to pick the better end zone though. Silva looked dazed on those first returns. Knowing the sun would have moved on as the game went on, the Colts could have avoided that altogether picking the South End Zone to start. Silva should not be given return duties moving forward. A special teamer, but not a return guy.

I completely ripped apart the IBJ Sports Guy for running repeated stories about the Temp inside Lucas Oil Stadium and I will refrain from going there this time, but this is a NON-ISSUE. It was a nice, sunny day. We paid big bucks to top LOS with a retractable roof so we should use it when we can. It had nothing to do with us not being able to FGs into TDs. If anything the Colts could turn it around as an advantage on a day like that.

The real issue from yesterday is WHAT IS THE NFL GOING TO DO ABOUT FAKING INJURIES TO STOP A NO-HUDDLE OFFENSE??? My idea is to make an “injured player” sit out the Series/Possession instead of just 1 play. If they are indeed “injured” then a Series is sufficient time to heal/rest up and a meaningful temporary loss for a Defense. Plus, if it can be proven that the 49ers were calling signals to the D to fake an injury that is some trickery B.S. that needs to be addressed. Eliminating No-Huddle offenses by exploiting rule loopholes is garbage and can be addressed through minor rule changes that make it less attractive for a Defense to do. Until they address it, the NFL will see lots more of this.

by XLI on Nov 2, 2009 1:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Fake Injuries

In WA state the junior football regs say that when a clock is stopped for injury, the kid must sit out the next four plays. Of course that’s for the kids’ safety and we’re talking about fairness for “cheating,” but I’d be okay with a similar rule.

Except, and I think Detroit or Seattle did this a couple decades ago (pardon my poor memory) they can send out a backup to the designated flopper. And replace him with another reserve LB, or CB if they shift to a nickel/dime, etc. It was a big deal in the news when they quite blatantly had about four or five guys go down late in one game. I do not recall what the league did about it and don’t know what the rules specify.

It’s certainly shabby but may not be illegal. Who can actually tell if a guy is hurt? Wind knocked out, bell rung, poke in the eye, flu, cramps…. can’t really verify or measure those on the field. And in the interest of player safety, you HAVE TO let guys who are hurt take care of themselves…. SO I am okay with a series or 4-5 plays sat out for each guy who flops, etc. It would hamper our no-huddle maybe twice a game, but any more and the D risks getting too thin, so they probably wouldn’t do it much more than that, and we should do decent damage in those plays with the D undermanned.

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Nov 2, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sounds right in theory

but you must know of some super tough competitors who would rather risk playing through an injury than come out – if it meant sitting out what could be 4 or 5 key plays. I remember one guy breaking his forearm, but stayed on the field an extra play at which point it completely cracked. We all love these players and value their toughness, but at what point should the league save them from themselves and their desire to stay on the field.

Some of these guys are playing for contracts,their jobs or their pride and to them, coming off the field for anything less than an amputation just would never be an option.

The idea of allowing only a sub for the injured player sounds pretty fair, as does keeping the player off the field for the current time allowed – 1 or 2 plays. That way, the guys who get popped in the head or chest and just need a moment to recover aren’t punished because they might be faking, and aren’t pressured into staying on the field if the alternative is missing 4-5 plays, which could mean all the difference in a game.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Nov 3, 2009 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

if you never repeat that story about the broken forearm again

it will be too soon

I was just about to have lunch and I think I’ve just lost my appetite!

How can you not love a team that does this?

by LovinBlue on Nov 3, 2009 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

it's the latest NFL diet for weekday workdays

makes up for the game-day snacks, lol.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Nov 3, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the glare affected clark

D Clark didnt even see the pass in the end zone , that was a TD pass he would have surely caught if the damn roof was closed.

so my vote goes for closing the damn roof for ever

by thebossuzzi on Nov 2, 2009 2:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

A few things

For the fans, I have to say that having the roof open yesterday was nice. It was chilly, but it was nice to have fresh air blowing around……its friggin football right! All the more reason to get your a** out of the seat, clap and yell for the defense.

I had seats on the North end of the stadium, and there’s no doubt in my mind that the ball gets lost in the sun, and with things hanging from the structure. I think that its a bit louder with the roof closed as well. Im sure once the temperature starts dipping below 40 even on sunny days, that they will close it up.

by MARVININDY on Nov 2, 2009 3:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gamesmanship

This might seem a bit shabby (okay, it is) but we could use the roof as gamesmanship depending on whom we are playing. A bombs-away offense on a sunny day—just make sure the roof is open and we pick the right EZ to defend for the 1/4 to 1/2 of the game that is affected. A stout running team? Might as well close the roof to help reverb fan noise. A team with zero running attack comes to town in Dec and the weather’s iffy—leave it open and hamper their passing game.

I never liked how baseball teams slow down the game for their ground-ball-out-pitchers by leaving the grass long, or speed it up by mowing the grass short depending on their opponent and their starter. But it IS done all the time. New England’s mud and ice pit for the playoffs? (that might predate the Razor, however—is Gillette grass or turf?) “We’ll show those speedy carpet-running dome teams how we use HFA….”

Now I feel ashamed for even suggesting it.

I hate Joe Namath. That's how long I've been a Colts fan.

by Bobman on Nov 2, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

im assuming

that the 49ers won the toss yesterday and elected to receive (since the Colts always seem to elect to receive when they win) so I’m not sure why they chose to go into the sun?

Anyhow, I think it stays closed the rest of the year, since its all big games from here on out, and they’ll want the extra noise, and no more missed TDs because of glare.

by SpazMo on Nov 2, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I certainly hope so!

"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007

by peytonsthebest on Nov 2, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gillette is turf

When Gillette first opened, it had grass but one year it was just miserable (the Revolution uses that field too) no matter how many times Kraft had it replaced. During the Bye week that year, a company came in and replaced it in record time with the current turf field.

Pittsburgh, on the other hand, fought the league and kept it’s grass/mudpit field.

Keep the faith!

by Marima on Nov 3, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It was the first time I was cold at a Colts game

I had to buy a ridiculously overpriced hooded sweatshirt because I was freezing in long sleeves. The roof should not be open for 1:00 games. They shouldn’t have even made it retractable in the first place, but I digress.

"Brett Favre was a man who thought he was retired, but he knew it wouldn't last."

by Colts Homer on Nov 2, 2009 8:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs