That's silly. Does a warm weather team not deserve to win the Super Bowl if such a thing happens because they don't play in "football weather"? Come on now, football is just like any other sport in my opinion, the weather should not be a factor in deciding the best team under ideal circumstances, who is the best team should be what decides it. Just like the one thing I don't like about baseball is you get weather like there was in Philadelphia during the World Series last year, 6 months of playing hard and the winner is decided in s*** conditions.

 

Between assuring the game is played in 72 degree conditions, with less than a 3mph wind and 20% humidity or playing in an ice bowl, I agree, the warmer, nicer weather is better. However, I think the range of allowable conditions should include playing in 30 degree weather, I'd even take a little snow once in a while. The weather is the same for both teams, the better team will adapt to the conditions.

I would trade a super bowl for a champions league final straight up.