How big of an advantage would the cold weather really be for teams in colder climates? I randomly came across a football freakonomics article which seems to imply that it may not be the advantage that people typically make it out to be (thanks Flipboard for keeping me entertained in class). Okay, you might say, it could be in large part because of things such as heated fields and benches that not all NCAA squads will have access to. That would still imply that a cold weather college kid would do better in the cold weather, right? Wrong.
We also wondered if cold- and warm-weather teams draft players based on whether they played at cold- or warm-weather colleges. In short, the answer is no. (See the graphic for details.) I guess with the multitude of factors that teams need to consider when making a draft pick, the question of whether your guy is more acclimated to heat or chill just doesn't register as very important.
So players just deal. Which coming from the more temperate climate of NC to OH, I can personally say while it was a rude awakening, it was managable and I've more or less gotten used to it (granted I don't have to compete athletically outside in front of thousands of people). I also remember players such as Favre who would actually thrive in the cold, despite being from the South and even spending his off seasons in his home state. Unfortunately I don't think we could make a side by side comparison at the collegiate level, since I can't think of any SEC squad that's ever made a trip north in say October to see if this really does translate to the collegiate level. Looking at the D3 level, two of the squads that have the best conference records are the Ohio Athletic Conference and the Wisconsin Intercollegiate Conference, but it is hard to say if this isn't due to any number of other factors. Given regionals are limited to a 200 mile radius, I doubt the weather would be much of a factor given they both come from the same climate.
All that basically to say, I don't think weather would be a huge factor. Not that it would even be something to consider in our lifetimes, but we all know snow can't stop eS-EEE-sEEE SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED.
That freakonomics article doesn't take into account the way different offenses are built based on where they are located. For instance, many SEC and Sun Belt schools can use a full spread and play sideline-to-sideline football because they know they'll never have to deal with snow or extreme wind. It's much harder to cut up field on an end-around when the field is frosty.
It is also tougher to go over the top deep when it's extremely windy. NCAA footballs are slightly wider than NFL balls, and thus they're more affected by the wind. I've always contended that wind is a bigger factor than cold or snow. You can't throw the ball effectively with steady 30 MPH winds like we get here in November. Especially not with an average college QB.
I understand that it probably doesn't affect the NFL much. QBs have stronger arms, larger hands, and a slightly thinner ball to cut through the wind. Also, I don't know of a single NFL team that builds their offense around a pure spread like many southern colleges. The elements are much more likely to affect college football - where teams can play a whole year without leaving their region - than pro football.
Dude, the SEC is so fast that we are at a disadvantage. We have to plow through the snow as the precipitation eeks into our shoes and those guys run on top of it, so lithe and agile that not hardly a snow flake can catch them.
I don't always take names when I kick ass but when I do, they most often belong to a Wolverine.
Irricoir: it's because, down south, the kids run all year around, while the sun seeps through the pores in their legs, making them faster. Strangely enough, though, all that year-around running doesn't make them any better at long-distance running. Hmmm . . . they must have fast-twitch sunshine down there.
I don't think it's a question of whether an individual NFL draftee from a warmer climate can become acclimated to the cold after living, training in the cold for more than a few months.
The question is whether a college team that plays all of its games in temperate weather might struggle to adjust in the short-term without an opportunity to first become acclimated to those conditions.
I've never been one to really think that where a team is from impacts the outcome of the game that much. Sure there are individual games where they can be impacted, but I don't believe a player or team from Alabama would come up to Columbus and get dominated because it was 55 degrees and kind of windy. Also, look at high school players who come to colder climate schools and play well.
It'd be nice, especially if there is a playoff, for the B1G region to land a regional or some home games just so we aren't playing in LSU's backyard or Florida for that matter. I just don't get the notion that somehow Bama could play Ohio State in Chicago and it would drastically impact that southern team so much that Ohio State would gain an advantage. The only advantage would be proximity to the venue for fans to come watch, but Bama travels as well as anyone so even that would be minimal.
Albert, you're building a strawman again. Who said that a warm climate-based team having to play in a cold climate would "drastically impact" a game? Even if nasty weather merely modestly impacts a game, if the two teams are fairly evenly matched, that one factor (of many that would impact the game) might help swing the balance in favor of the home (cold climate) team.
I think the argument of a kid in the south coming to play for the Buckeyes and performing just fine (Shazier) and a team from the south coming to say, "The Shoe" are drastically different. Shazier made mention of how the cold was kicking his hind end. He had many months to get acclimated to weather. If an LSU or Florida came to the The Shoe in January, not reminiscent of this year but of years past I think that the shock of Snow or sub 20 degree weather could be a huge impact.
Think about your experiences. You walk out of your air conditioner and into the heat. The only adverse factors you face are sweating and cramping, maybe dehydration. For that short length of time, maybe as much as 30 mins to an hour, your physical performance is unaltered what so ever.
Now imagine yourself in a heated room. You walk into the parking lot on a sub 20 day. No jacket, nothing that would prepare you for the cold. What happens to your body? Your digits go numb circulation slows, your muscles tighten to keep you warm. You just don't perform at your peek when you are freezing. Maybe you can warm up and fight through it but there are some that are very mentally weak when it comes to those conditions.
You may not be able to perform at peak for long periods of time in the heat but I am not sure you can ever reach peak output in the cold. Just analyzing it.
I don't always take names when I kick ass but when I do, they most often belong to a Wolverine.
I do agree that the article may not translate directly to the college ranks, which is why I tried to look at how it has played out at the D2 and D3 level as a comparison (unfortunately to no avail, and that would require excel or something and my soul withering away from a non-class activity for a change).
However, I think it does point out that the cold weather advantage is not the "drastic" factor to winning we might think it would be, if our collective fantasies came true and a team like LSU or 'Bama were to come north in December for a playoff game. Keep in mind, the "they run a spread offense snow argh" arguement really doesn't hold much weight. First, by that simple arguement, so do we. Second, note there are variations of the spread, and not every southern team is going to run a pass happy variation of it. Heck, even if you do wanna throw the ball around, you can tweak it to make it work in cold weather, as the Patriots have done with some marginal success, allegedly. Btw, if you haven't ready this article about Meyer's spread offense, please do. Got me a weee bit excited, if you kno what I'm sayin'. Right? Right? Anyways, essentially Belicheck came to worship at the alter of Meyer in Florida to juice up his offense, leading to:
It is unclear if Belicheck sacrificed any video coordinators to apease the Myer for his blessings. Kinda makes you kinda chuckle at the new Penn State hire a little bit. Although, the BOB did join the Pats in '07, so maybe, just maybe, it was his offensive genius instead. But I digress. "Spread" does not instantly equate to decreased offensive production, just because it is cold, crappy weather.
As to the arguement about cold weather affecting passing or kicking:
Something of a difference there, sure. So scoring must be like, idk, an Alabama vs. LSU game right? Not so much. According to the article, cold weather doesn't really affect scoring. This leads one to believe that while the passing and kicking games may not be as reliable, they still manage to get points on the board. My guess is that good coaches find a way to get it done. Even minor advantages like footing may not help us out all that much. Watching the Gator Bowl, one segment during the game pointed out how the night before, there was some NFL game that tore up the grass. Of course, the Gator's support staff, with their SEEECEEE speed thinking, made sure to change up the cleats to account for this. Of course, this is where they zoomed into the OSU players' cleats to go "durr hurr look they stupid don't they know grass bad."
So good coaches and good support staff would compensate, and I hear they do have some of both down south. Thankfully, now so do we.
HumbleBuckeye is right. You have to take weather into account in certain parts of the country more than others. That will affect coaching plans/decisions and offenses that can be run. That's just a fact, and not everyone at the FBS level is going to be a professional football player so the weather is going to have more affect on those who are not pro-caliber.
Playoffs without home games for the higher seeds in the early rounds are simply a joke. What benefit is being ranked number 1 throughout the season if you are going to have to play the #8 seed on their home turf (if say Ohio State had to play in the Orange Bowl against Miami). The reward for being the higher seed is the home field advantage. Not the weather.
vacuuming sucks
I totally disagree after watching the Champs sports bowl in 2009 Wisky vs miami
the temp was in the 50's the Badger players wore short sleeves and the caines wore long sleeve and they sat near heaters on the sidelines . That was just 50 degree wheather and it had an impact on the caines performace just imagine if it were 15 degree.
I personaly know what its like to play sports in the outdoor weather here and i can tell you from experience that throwing and catching a ball in warm weather is easier than in cold and not to mention even with todays turff a cold ground is alot harder when you land on it .
I would be a fool to claim the players couldnt adjust to the climate change after some weeks of practicing in it I just dont think a few practices in the colder climate areas will be enough to prepare for a big bowl game plus its also a big advantage to play a bowl in your home state.
Theres a reason why alot of people from the colder climate areas move to places like Florida when they get older. :)
O H I O is the Buckeye State
xtremebuckeye is right about the '09 Champs Sports Bowl... Temp at the start of the game was 50 and got down to 42 by halftime and the Miami players looked cold and slow. Also, a slick cold rain made footing on the field terrible, and the Miami players had tremendous trouble cutting up-field at even a moderate speed.
Another thing to point out is the hashmarks. In the NFL, they're closer together. Thus when a player tries to turn up field on a play like an end-around, he's most likely not at full speed, whereas in college if an end-around is run to the far side of the field, the player has much more momentum and needs solid footing to be able to turn it up-field. And once again: the wind. A throw to the far sideline is more drastically affected by the wind in college football, since it's a longer throw and the ball is slightly fatter.
Also, BTA, you really don't think the wind would be a factor for an SEC team? Have you seen SEC QB play? It's pitiful. It's duck city. Even a lot of McCarron's throws the other night were quite wobbly. There's a reason Painter, Tolzien, Stanzi, and even Adam Weber (practice squad) are on NFL roster's despite being mediocre athletes. Big Ten QBs are generally more adept at throwing decent spirals. And this year you'll see Cousins, Wilson, and Persa all make roster spots.
Wasn't there a time where the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were 0 and a bunch all-time in games where the temperature was less than 40 degrees? I know that's NFL, but this is less of a factor there obviously.
Overall, I think an SEC team would be affected little or none by cold temperatures, but if you throw in wind and snow, then you might start to see effects. If an SEC power were to come to the 'Shoe for a January playoff game, and let's say it's a sunny day, winds under 10 mph, no precipitation, dry field, and 20 degrees, I don't think the temperature would do much to that SEC team. However, let's throw in snow - snowy field, snowy air, maybe some gusty conditions - now you start to see some effects. The precipitation and wet field conditions would neutralize any perceived or actual speed advantage, and the wind would affect passing.
It all depends on the southern team, too. Alabama and LSU really don't run the spread all that much, so they'd be affected less by northern weather. Other SEC spread teams, like Florida, would be affected more. It would also depend on toughness. I remember watching that Champs Sports Bowl between Miami and Wisconsin. That Miami team was obviously not a tough team, and it was about more than not being able to handle 50 degree weather. Alabama, on the other hand, is always going to be a tougher team. They wouldn't be huddled up around heaters and off of their game just because they're playing in cold conditions that they're not used to.
The bottom line is that I think it all depends on offensive strategy and toughness of the southern team. A finesse spread team would be affected by northern weather. A tough, power football team wouldn't.
Class of 2010.
Fido, my comment wasn't directed at what anyone said on this post, just saying in general we always hear people say I'd love to see those southern teams come up north and play in our cold weather and snow etc etc etc. So the implication is made, a lot, that somehow a southern team wouldn't be able to dominate or win in cold weather. It's said on here all the time, and I just think it's BS. Alabama, for example, is a team geared to play B1G football. They are physical, they run the ball, they play for field position, and take the 3 points when they are there to be had.
That being said, when do B1G teams every play in extreme conditions? It's damn hot in September, warm in October, and hell I was at an Iowa/Ohio State game in November in Columbus and it was 80 degrees. I rarely even seen games in the B1G where a winter coat would be essential gear to wear to the game.
Can weather affect players? Absolutely! If USC or Texas had to play in Minneapolis in Late January and only had a couple of days to be on the ground and prepare for the game, they would be at a disadvantage, probably so. Is it enough of a disadvantage to impact the game? Maybe.
When the guys get out there on the field and are running and pushing and fighting, I just don't think how cold it is matters that much. Maybe on the sidelines it's a big deal when you are just standing around.
It comes down to this: if you want to win the Big Ten, you have to be able to win in November. If you want to win in November, you have to be prepared for mother nature. Sure, we've had pretty mild Novembers the past few years, but you can't count on that, because historically, places like Madison, Chicago, Minneapolis, State College, Ann Arbor, East Lansing, and Iowa City are already pretty cold and windy by November.
There's also the mental factor. For the most part, teams up north get absolutely psyched about playing in the cold and snow, whereas southern teams do not, and while they may claim it doesn't bother them, it certainly does. Just watch the '09-10 Cap One Bowl (cold rain) or the '09 Champs Sports Bowl. Sure, Alabama is built to accomodate cold weather. Perhaps LSU too. But the rest of the SEC is not. Neither is the Sun Belt.
How bout the recruiting advantage? Many 17-18 year old dudes would rather play in a better climate and see girls in short skirts year-round. We lost Jordan Hicks and Spencer Ware from our own backyard, and a few linemen to Alabama. We used to see TSUN take guys from Ohio. But nNow we're seeing southern teams take kids from Ohio, which bucks the trend historically. Ben Martin - arguably the highest recruited defensive player in the '07 class - was between Ohio State and Notre Dame. Then after a visit to Knoxville with the Orange Pride ladies there to greet him and show him around campus, he was Vol.
The Buckeyes Have 7 wins and 2 loses against the SEC in regular season play. (home feild matters)
The top bowl games are played in late DEC and early Jan , dont remember any 70 80 degree weather at that time of year in Ohio recently. Nov would be a regular season game and dont expect it to mild at that time of year every year . So yeah going from warm weather to extreme cold weather will matter to fair weathered people as its more of an adapting thing than a toughness thing and it will take more than a day or two to adjust to it. So thats why i would say there would be an advantage for the cold weather team over the fair weather team.
In temps below 20 degree the fingers get cold and even numb regardless how tuff you are and that ball gets harder and slicker the colder the temp and it takes awhile to get used to it.
Go Buckeyes wherever it is you have to play :)
O H I O is the Buckeye State
I've seen several references to snow in this thread, but it's important to point out that (as btalbert25 said) even in the Big Ten, games are almost never played in the snow. In my time in Columbus, there were only a few games at the Shoe that were even "cold" by normal midwestern standards, and not a single game where there was measurable snow cover on the field and/or significant snow during the game.
Now, it's true that if there was to be a playoff system that pushed games in Big Ten country into late December and early January (it goes without saying that the Big Ten should not be party to any playoff system that's all Sunbelt games, all the time) the chances of snow and extreme cold increase. This is just a theory, but it seems to me that once the temperature gets down around zero F, there's not quite as big an advantage to the northern team because you just can't get used to that no matter where you're from. Everyone would be equally miserable. The advantage would come from games played in the sort of weather that's considered normal for the midwest, simply because it is normal.
Having said all that, it simply isn't the case that cold weather teams can't run a spread or pass most of the time (the most recent Super Bowl champions--and favorites to repeat--are proof), or that southern teams pass a lot because the weather is better (some do and some don't).
I think being able to play close to home would be of more benefit to Big Ten teams than the type of weather they would be playing in.
The most "loud mouth, disrespect" poster on 11W.