Which neutral site do you prefer?

As Kerkhoff points out, there are no better fans to answer this question than Mizzou fans who have witnessed huge games at both venues. Kerkhoff eventually comes to the conclusion that Kansas City has the better football atmosphere and I'd have to say I agree with him.

I didn't make it to Armageddon last year but I was fortunate enough to make it to this year's Arch Rivalry game. I thought the atmosphere was great. Both sides were pretty well represented. I had a blast tailgating and the game was phenomenal. But it seemed as though we were having a great time despite the venue. The Edward Jones Dome doesn't lend itself to a great tailgating atmosphere. We were in a gravel parking lot that wouldn't have had a football atmosphere at all if it weren't for the fans.

Then you have Arrowhead. 

Like I said, I didn't make it to Armageddon last year but I'm a big Chiefs fan and was lucky enough to go to a game during the Derrick Thomas Era when Arrowhead was in its tailgating prime. You're probably never going to beat that. That's what football is all about. Green Bay could probably stack up to KC in the football atmosphere department but that's probably the only other city that could even come close. When the Chiefs were a perennial contender you just had a perfect storm of barbecue and football that was the ultimate combination. Oh how I long for those days.

I can only imagine what it was like when you coupled that atmosphere with the Mizzou/Kansas rivalry. That's the other thing KC has going for it (as Kerkhoff acknowledges). Even though the Arch Rivalry has heated up after the BCS fiasco last year, you're never going to match the intensity of the Border War. I mean, you're talking about stuff that goes back to Civil War days. 

So when it comes to the StL/KC football atmosphere conversation, I don't think it's even a contest. St. Louis has KC's number when it comes to baseball and beer. But Kansas City has football and BBQ/tailgating.