Dome or No Dome: The Browns having a dome is a good thing

When it comes to the decision for the Cleveland Browns to “renovate the old stadium or build a new domed stadium,” I did my best not to get involved. Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve seen many people give their opinions about the subject. Many people are opposed to the team moving into a new stadium in Brook Park as it seems the Haslams want and, instead, would like to see the old stadium being renovated.

(Discussion of who should pay for such things is a little beyond this conversation)

A new, domed stadium wouldn’t be a bad thing, in fact, I think it would be a good thing

My perspective on this situation

When it comes to the current landscape of the NFL, it is a lot different than what it was back in the early 80s or 90s ever since the mid-2000s.

In this current iteration of the NFL, teams are passing the ball more and running the ball less. If you are trying to play “old school” early-2000s style football in this current landscape of the NFL you are playing an outdated brand of football. If the Browns were to build a dome stadium, the “mystique” or “Cleveland’s football spirit” wouldn’t be lost. To be honest, it hasn’t even existed for multiple decades if we are being honest with ourselves.

Times are changing, you either adapt to them or get left behind and if you wanna stay behind that’s fine but the team will be fine without you.

Why a dome stadium is a good thing

Everyone knows by now that the Browns play right next to the lake, which can be a good thing and a bad thing.

During the winter, the wind blows right next to the stadium and when you factor in the wind chill it feels like you are playing in sub-zero temperatures. During the wild-card round last season, the Kansas City Chiefs played the Miami Dolphins in negative temperatures and many fans suffered frostbite which led to some having to receive amputations. Having a dome stadium can prevent something like this from happening.

Teams who play in dome stadiums don’t lose their identity as a football team. Example?

The Detroit Lions.

The Lions play in a dome stadium but they were a physical football team despite them playing in a dome. Having a dome stadium can open up many possibilities for Cleveland to host other major sporting events, such as the Super Bowl, WWE’s Wrestlemania and potentially a host for a Men’s college basketball National Title game, after the Women’s National Title game was just held at Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse.

The Browns potentially having a dome stadium doesn’t mean they have to change how the team plays. It’s asinine to think that. Instead, it give the team options depending on the roster that they’ve built. They can either be rugged like Detroit, but in a dome that is comfortable for fans, or they can air it out without concern that the weather will limit their passing game.

A dome stadium or a retractable dome can open up new possibilities for the city and that would be huge. There is nothing wrong with the Browns potentially getting a dome stadium, we might as well embrace the possibility because it seems like the owners of the team are moving in that direction.

If the team is good, does it matter what type of stadium they play in? If the team is bad, will it be because of the type of stadium they play in?

Share your thoughts on the dome, no dome subject in the comment section below