 At the turn of the millennium, the St. Louis Rams were known for their explosive offense, which led the league in total offense, passing yards, and quite a few other offensive categories during the 1999, 2000, and 2001 seasons. Because they played at what was then known as the Trans World Dome, their quick players like Isaac Bruce and Marshall Falk acquired the name, the greatest show on turf. They won the Super Bowl in the 1999 season and lost a second in the 2001 season despite being 14-point favorites. I always thought that if the Rams did have some special home field advantage, it would have been due less to the plank surface of their nickname than the fact that they played in a dome where the weather is always ideal. While poor footing does sometimes pop up on muddy fields, the quality of playing surfaces has increased since the league began and high wind, rain, and snow is more likely to be mentioned as a reason that a team is struggling to play on offense. Or was it that the Rams were a really good team who just happened to play inside of a dome? If you look at their running back, Marshall Falk, he won significantly more games inside domes than outside in his career and he averaged more than half a yard inside than out. But as it turns out, this is not the way the league trends overall. On average over the last five seasons, games played outdoors featured about one more attempt and eight more yards rushing than those played in a dome. That's hardly a noticeable difference. Gaming is similar, but the opposite. Teams threw for about 25 more yards a game inside than outside, and quarterbacks averaged a passer rating of 97 indoors as opposed to 87 outdoors. Completion percentage is about 40 points higher indoors, while sacks and touchdowns are about the same. Indoor games do have higher scores on average than outdoor games by about 4.2 points, but the catch of course is that any offense gaining an advantage because of indoors will also be playing against another offense that is also indoors. What about kickers though? Surely less wind has to equal less air, right? This is actually the reason I got started on this topic. I've heard a number of people giving fantasy football advice to pick a kicker that plays in a dome. Turns out this is completely bogus. Kicks in a dome are converted 84% of the time, and kicks outside, 84%. And kicks in retractable roof stadiums, 85%. Similar stuff and extra points. Extra points go through uprights about 95% of the time, regardless of whether or not there's a roof overhead. Not even freezing temperatures outside seem to have much effect on the final score. Only games played in weather under 10 degrees Fahrenheit seem to have a noticeable difference. But as it would turn out, games like that tend to happen less than once a season.