Does Cold Weather Really Make a Difference?

[Pokerbrat2000]

Maybe a roof could be added to Lambeau Field.

Go take your %^&&&%$##$%^ meds.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[KiDcUdI]

I have always believed cold weather is an advantage to the inferior team. Its an equalizer. It slows the field down, causes slips and mistakes from players you wouldnt normally see. It adds a little RNG to the game on the field.

 

[DrBob806]

The Broncos have the ultimate home field edge, with the elevation thing. Sure, there's rowdy crowds like in Philly, Cleveland, Buffalo, and just plain loud places like KC & Seattle.

Ultimately, it comes down to poise & making plays. Look at Pittsburgh for example...Bill Cowher's teams went 1-4 in AFC Title games at home (somehow he still got inducted into Canton).

 

[OldSchool101]

It used to be +3 points for home teams, but now it's more like +1.5. Home field advantage is not as valuable as it was, with teams barely winning more than 50 percent of home games nowadays.

I think there are a few reasons why there has been this shift. Sports science has helped players better deal with traveling. Teams have figured out how to best time their travel based on the distance/time zone change, trainers give treatment to counter the negative effects of altitude, etc. Stadiums today are also much more likely to contain fans from the opposing team, limiting the impact of crowd noise. Anyone can buy tickets online, and with the internet, it's much easier to be a fan of a team that you don't live near. I've never lived in Wisconsin but I can still consume a lot of Packers material, something that would not have been possible 25 years ago. I think organizations have also cracked down on the rowdiest, drunk fans to make the stadium a more welcoming environment, also quieting the noise of the crowd. And ticket prices are much more expensive than they once were, meaning games attract a different style of fan, i.e. upper class/upper-middle class, less rowdy. So the demographics of the crowd have also changed.

So I wouldn't say that home-field advantage is gone, but I do think it's exaggerated. It's been so ingrained in fans' minds for generations that you have a big edge at home, that a lot of people haven't realized that the advantage has largely withered away.

It may also be impacted by other factors. Such as the experience of the Road team particularly OL +QB silent Snap counts. Also domed stadiums or those with an acoustic bowl (think NO or Seattle) likely reverberate noise better and It’s like adding 25,000 more fan noise.

The bottom line is Wins or Losses records. We could possibly extend that to Win or Loss margins (score differential) as a secondary measurement. In the end though more teams win at home and until someone can show significant evidence that Home teams Win less? It’s all a peeing match into a head wind. Convoluting home games onto weather patterns just makes makes the argument more muddy.

I would stick to what many of us said pre game. Home field has its slight advantages and any weather scenario is likely marginal help at best. That goes for cold or hot like our game in Jacksonville , FL

PS. I apologize to @melvin dangerr I think I misinterpreted his post. I got frustrated I’m in warm weather and it’s January!

 

[melvin dangerr]

Home field advantage isn't defined by who wins or loses the game, it is defined by the home team having an advantage over the visiting team. I believe Vegas and other oddsmakers give the home team +3 points. As Old School correctly pointed out and some posters just don't seem to grasp, the Packers may have gone out West and lost this game by double digits.

So next time you hear "home field advantage" don't equate that to "sure win".

I never posted home field was a sure win, I believed I stated it correctly that it doesn’t matter if your at home in bad conditions or stadium fans, that it is a sure win, the gamblers may think so yes, but they don’t play the game, even at home if you don’t have a better game plan than your opponent you will lose! Home field or not, GB has proved that the last 3 seasons, that’s the point I was making..

Home field advantage isn't defined by who wins or loses the game, it is defined by the home team having an advantage over the visiting team. I believe Vegas and other oddsmakers give the home team +3 points. As Old School correctly pointed out and some posters just don't seem to grasp, the Packers may have gone out West and lost this game by double digits.

So next time you hear "home field advantage" don't equate that to "sure win".

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

even at home if you don’t have a better game plan than your opponent you will lose! Home field or not, GB has proved that the last 3 seasons, that’s the point I was making..

But your point seemed to be that the home field didn't help the Packers at all and now you are throwing in "bad game plan".

So let me ask....had the Saturday night game been played in San Fran., same results? How about the loss to TB in the NFCCG in 2020 at Green Bay? Same results in TB? The loss to the 49'ers at San Fran in 2019, different results in GB??

 

[melvin dangerr]

But your point seemed to be that the home field didn't help the Packers at all and now you are throwing in "bad game plan".

So let me ask....had the Saturday night game been played in San Fran., same results? How about the loss to TB in the NFCCG in 2020 at Green Bay? Same results in TB? The loss to the 49'ers at San Fran in 2019, different results in GB??

Ok so I don’t spend a lot more time on this, home field did not help the Packers, only getting the game played in GB, if it was such and advantage, then tell me the last 3 seasons how many SB appearances did the the Packers make with this so called advantage? Teams have had the “advantage”and I’m talking PO’s here and lost, why? Their opponents came in with a better game plan, and beat them, if GB played this game in SF with them having home field and won, what would you be saying about advantage, probably it didn’t mean anything we just out played them, you really think teams fear coming into GB for a PO game hardly, its 50-50 bad conditions for them bad for us, I would say if you want the real home field advantage we have more fans on our side..

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

home field did not help the Packers, only getting the game played in GB, if it was such and advantage, then tell me the last 3 seasons how many SB appearances did the the Packers make with this so called advantage?

Again, you are assuming that by having home field, you win the game. The Packers got shelled out in San Fran in 2019 in the NFCCG. So I don't get why you are trying to use that as evidence that home field isn't an advantage, sure seemed to help the 49'ers on that day.

Packers lost the 2020 NFCCG to the Bucs by 5 points, with very few fans in the stands. Are you saying had they gone to Tampa Bay, the Packers lose by less than 5 or win?

Packers loss on a last second FG on Saturday @ home. You keep avoiding answering my questions directly. What is the final score if the game is played in San Fran.?

 

[rmontro]

Bill Cowher's teams went 1-4 in AFC Title games at home (somehow he still got inducted into Canton).

1-4 in conference championships? Why does that sound so familiar?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

1-4 in conference championships? Why does that sound so familiar?

Since 2007, the Packers are 1-5 in Conference Championship Games. Of course you were thinking of Rodgers Record in NFCCG's that he has started.

 

[melvin dangerr]

Again, you are assuming that by having home field, you win the game. The Packers got shelled out in San Fran in 2019 in the NFCCG. So I don't get why you are trying to use that as evidence that home field isn't an advantage, sure seemed to help the 49'ers on that day.

Packers lost the 2020 NFCCG to the Bucs by 5 points, with very few fans in the stands. Are you saying had they gone to Tampa Bay, the Packers lose by less than 5 or win?

Packers loss on a last second FG on Saturday @ home. You keep avoiding answering my questions directly. What is the final score if the game is played in San Fran.?

Somehow my lengthy reply didn’t go through so I’ll make this as short as possible you get home field advantage, but for the last 3 seasons the visiting team wins, no matter 1pt or by3pts you lost at ”Home”where you we’re supposed to have the advantage, I’m not ducking your question, you just don’t like the answer, so there is no advantage if you keep losing it at “Home” and to a traveling west coast team at that..

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Somehow my lengthy reply didn’t go through so I’ll make this as short as possible you get home field advantage, but for the last 3 seasons the visiting team wins, no matter 1pt or by3pts you lost at ”Home”where you we’re supposed to have the advantage, I’m not ducking your question, you just don’t like the answer, so there is no advantage if you keep losing it at “Home” and to a traveling west coast team at that..

Again, you continue to assume that a home field advantage equates to a win. I am telling you it does not. Yet you won't answer the simple question of "How do you think the outcome/score changes if Saturdays game is in San Francisco, like it was in 2019 or last years NFCCG game is at Tampa Bay?" You aren't answering those questions, because you know what the answer means, the team with homefield does have an advantage.

 

[swhitset]

Again, you continue to assume that a home field advantage equates to a win. I am telling you it does not. Yet you won't answer the simple question of "How do you think the outcome/score changes if Saturdays game is in San Francisco, like it was in 2019 or last years NFCCG game is at Tampa Bay?" You aren't answering those questions, because you know what the answer means, the team with homefield does have an advantage.

I think he is using a different definition of advantage lol. let’s put it another way… I think most people would say that the Packers had an advantage at quarterback. Even in this game where many of us thought Rodgers’ performance was anemic based on his standards, his numbers were still better than Garapolo’s. That advantage at QB did not result in a Packer win. Each team had its own advantages, The home field likely was ONE of the Packers’. Unfortunately it did not outweigh the disadvantages… like a historically bad special teams.

 

[longtimefan]

HF in GB doesnt mean what it used to mean

 

[rmontro]

Again, you continue to assume that a home field advantage equates to a win. I am telling you it does not.

You're saying SF was the better team. Well, I guess they were, they won.
Seems like I recall several years back, we had a crazy good record against warm weather teams if the thermometer dipped so low (we may have even been undefeated). So I wonder what happened to that.

Our regular season home record has been pretty good under MLF, but come playoff time when the strongest teams come around we haven't done so well.

And speaking of different advantages, there's SF and Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs, SF wins every time. At least so far.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Our regular season home record has been pretty good under MLF, but come playoff time when the strongest teams come around we haven't done so well.

Key statement right here and it is really glossed over by many Packer fans. The Packers have been a very good team over the last 3 seasons, one of the best in Football. However, when it comes to the playoffs, you need to play your best football to win, because you are playing the top teams, some that have peaked just at the right time.

The Packers didn't play perfect football on Saturday night. Matter of fact, the Special teams had their worse game of the season and the Offense couldn't come up with any answers to the adjustments that the 9'ers made after the opening TD.

I think if Gute and MLF could rewind the clock (with hind sight knowledge) they would have done something mid season about special teams, firing a coach, looking for players elsewhere to improve it. I also think they would have tried harder to add a legit #2 receiver to the offense.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers started their 7th OL lineup of the season and were expecting Bakhtiari to play; when he couldn't they decided to start Turner at LT (which was a bad decision) instead of Nijman (who played well against the 49ers earlier in the year). Then Dillon got hurt and the run game went to sh*t. Cold weather doesn't hurt offenses (unless it's well below 0) but wind hurts the passing game. I would also point out that it appeared some of the targets in the receiving game couldn't get their fingers to work and felt like dropping easy passes at the start of the game, which appeared to make Rodgers not trust them. So, in summary, I think the cold weather Saturday night, coupled with OL injuries and bad starting lineup choices, made a difference Saturday. I also think the 49ers defense had an excellent gameplan to limit a gimpy Packers offense that had OL issues, was missing their #2 WR, and was missing their 1B RB.

 

[Mondio]

I think the decision to put turner at LT was a mistake, thought it was before the game started. Leave Nijman out there and commit more to the run. Losing Dillon hurt, but PTaylor runs hard too. For some reason it was obvious they didn't trust him to carry the ball and Jones can't be our pass catcher and runner on every down. Outside of special teams I thought those 2 decisions were huge in this loss.

 

[rmontro]

The Packers started their 7th OL lineup of the season and were expecting Bakhtiari to play; when he couldn't they decided to start Turner at LT (which was a bad decision) instead of Nijman (who played well against the 49ers earlier in the year). Then Dillon got hurt and the run game went to sh*t.

Funny how in the press the 49ers were the team portrayed to be banged up, but it turned out injuries ended up hurting the Packers more.

the Offense couldn't come up with any answers to the adjustments that the 9'ers made after the opening TD.

This is what we supposedly have MLF for. Maybe it hurt that we actually led most of the game, because maybe they figured what they were doing was good enough to eke out a win.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Funny how in the press the 49ers were the team portrayed to be banged up, but it turned out injuries ended up hurting the Packers more.

Media ignored the Packers' injuries all year because they went 13-3. All the potential injuries of note for the 49ers ended up playing while the Packers lost more players as the game went on.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Key statement right here and it is really glossed over by many Packer fans. The Packers have been a very good team over the last 3 seasons, one of the best in Football. However, when it comes to the playoffs, you need to play your best football to win, because you are playing the top teams, some that have peaked just at the right time.

The Packers didn't play perfect football on Saturday night. Matter of fact, the Special teams had their worse game of the season and the Offense couldn't come up with any answers to the adjustments that the 9'ers made after the opening TD.

I think if Gute and MLF could rewind the clock (with hind sight knowledge) they would have done something mid season about special teams, firing a coach, looking for players elsewhere to improve it. I also think they would have tried harder to add a legit #2 receiver to the offense.

The special teams had the "worst game in the history of the playoffs" would probably be more accurate.

 

[Half Empty]

HF in GB doesnt mean what it used to mean

One of the very few statements in any sports forum that's really, really hard to argue against.

 

[PackerDNA]

Home teams lost three of the four games sunday. The playoffs are a different beast.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

HF in GB doesnt mean what it used to mean

I think it still does, maybe not as much as it used to, but there is still an advantage. Just depends on how you measure said advantage. If you are measuring strictly in wins...the Packers were 8-1 at Lambeau this year and 5-4 on the road. Home field advantage? Oh but some only want to measure it in cold weather, in the playoffs and only when the Packers are at home, to hell with them on the road. These same people want to say that the Packers lost all the games that they had a decided advantage in at home...one game the 49'ers. Put all that aside. Just how one measures this advantage is important and I for one don't agree that you measure it with wins and losses.

Todays players are in much better condition than they were 40 years ago. Teams hire specialists, to study how to best prepare their players for road games. Many players have been on several teams and have experienced playing in cold weather at some point in their careers or at multiple stadiums, so they know a bit of what to expect. So maybe the road or the cold doesn't effect the visiting players as it once did, but I contend that it still is an advantage to play at home.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Home teams lost three of the four games sunday. The playoffs are a different beast.

Yes and how many games did the home teams win the week before?