It is said, “everyone complains about the weather, but no one does anything about it.” I sit watching NFL Network‘s exclusive live Super Bowl 48 Selection Show. The location of the 2014 Super Bowl is being voted on. Three locations were on the ballot, but south Florida has just been eliminated. Why the drama — why all the fuss? This is the first time that a region which features historically freezing winters is considered a favorite to win such a prize.
No one does anything about the weather, but here in a Dallas hotel ballroom full of the 32 NFL owners and their representatives, they CAN do something about it. Choose the warmer climates of the south or the largest media market in the United States that typically, come early February, is buried in snow and ice. Legitimate tension exists as it has come down to a fourth vote… Commissioner Roger Goodell steps up to the podium and declares: “here is the decision of the clubs, Super Bowl 48, in February of 2014 will be played in New York / New Jersey.” With those words Pandora’s box has just been thrown open.
I will explain why in the days ahead…
Like I sad on Twitter. TIMESTAMP me please!!!
Dallas Cowboys will win Superbowl 48!!!
Dallas will finally get their revenge on New York spoiling their opening day celebrations!
I don’t get this decision. I really, really don’t get it. If it were a domed stadium, okay. But this makes no sense.
As for Pandora’s Box, I agree. I think I know where you’re going with this. If a cold weather open stadium in NJ can receive the Super Bowl then why not Green Bay, Buffalo, etc? When NJ gets the Super Bowl there is no good reason to deny other open stadium cold weather locations. Indeed, one could argue that cities like Buffalo NEED to host a Super Bowl as a means to generate revenue for these NFL iconic locations. We may as well hope global warming is true, because we may not see a warm weather city awarded the Super Bowl for some time to come.
Why does the Super Bowl have to be held in a warm weather climate??? I think it would be a good thing to have Super Bowls given to more cities and for the revenue and tourism generated by the Super Bowl to places in the North, and not just have a few cities having the Super Bowl virtually on rotation. Yeah maybe the game wouldn’t generate as much money or be as nice to look at, but I say sod the financial gain and bring the big game to the people who never looked likely to host it.
Also I prefer cold weather games, my favourite games are 13-10 slugfests in the freezing cold with intense defense and brutal hitting, I find that far more preferable to high scoring shootouts in sunshine. Cold weather games are more intense, tougher, really sort out the men from the boys. I love that, and for that reason would gladly watch super bowls in cold, wind and snow.
32 NFL owners and their representatives went to Dallas and decided that Superbowl 2014 will be played in freezing NY/NJ. Meeting in lovely warm state of Texas, giving the love to cold NY/NJ.
If said 32 owners like cold so much, why didn’t they held the meeting in Chicago? or Seattle?
“Oh, we love us some cold weather for the SuperBowl. Lets hold the next owners-meeting in Arizona, Its chilly in the spring up there in the Northern States…” Old men and logic.
Football is an all weather sport. This isn’t changing the way it’s done. Long before the merger all of the nfl title games were played in one of the teams home stadium. get over it you warm weather wusses
Might as well put the super bowl in Alaska for all I(and We) care.
No one on here has mentioned the stadium.
Anyone that says, “yeah you now have no excuse for not holding it in Green Bay or Buffalo in future” aren’t taking into account the fact that the Jets/Giants have just built one of the finest open air stadiums to grace the world. I mean this place is top class, not to mention it holds 82,000 spectators. The weather factor is a concern, as typically it can make games less predictable, however from a fans point of view that’s great because it makes the outcome so much less certain which all in all makes for a more exciting match-up. However I am saying this knowing that I will probably be sitting in my home in the southern hemisphere summer watching the game, not freezing my kahuna’s off in a New Jersey stadium.
I would love seeing a Super Bowl in the snow, “hit em in the mouth” football is hard not to enjoy. With that said I be following the game from my apartment with the heat turned on and the windows shut, no natural elements for me thank you very much
I think that added element of “winter-like conditions” could make for an interesting game and def make for interesting television, but the Super Bowl is less about a game and more about the pageantry, and all of the ancillary events that go on around the game. Media day is usually held in the stadium, and there are parties and other things that are associated with the event that are helped by warmer climates. Obviously, the game has been in Minneapolis and Detroit, so those issues can be overcome (aside from media day, that was helped by having a domed stadium in those cities). It seems to come down to spectator comfort (it’s quite possible the teams could have played in adverse winter conditions in their conference championship games). And many times when the game has been in Florida, there has been a steady rain falling for some or all of the game.
I like it, because it could lead to DC getting a chance to host a Super Bowl. But one issue is that as more and more cities become eligible to host the game, there’s a much greater chance that you could end up with a home team in the game. Many are pointing to Dallas as a potential first ever home team to play in a Super Bowl in their own stadium. It could have been New Orleans this year had the timing aligned (Saints being good and the Superdome being the host site). But once NY/NJ has hosted, who’s to say DC can’t host…then Boston (New England), or Green Bay, or Pittsburgh? While this would allow many more people access to the game, it would seem to increase the odds that you could end up with a home team in the Super Bowl. And while the home field advantage would seem to be the most glaring aspect of this, consider the ticket allocations. The NFL controls tickets to the Super Bowl, and each team gets an equal allotment (and corporations get the lion’s share), so how do you stage a game in Pittsburgh or New England, with passionate fan bases, and then tell them only 25% of the season ticket holders will even have access to buying the tickets on the primary market? The great equalizer now is that fans have to be wealthy enough to afford the expensive tickets and the trip to go to the Super Bowl site…when it’s in your city, and your team is playing, ticket demand will be incredible, and the beneficiary will be the secondary market (ticket brokers and scalpers).
One thing this trend (if it becomes a trend) could lead to is the tabling of the discussion of a London (or any other non-US market) SB. If you are now opening up cities like NY, DC, Boston, Philly, Pitt, Cleveland, etc for consideration, it would be all the more difficult to justify taking the game to foreign soil.
I live in a country with ice and snow in the winter. I sure do like the “summer in winter”-aproach when SB is held somewhere warm and nice and sunny. It also kind of makes me remember the season I am about to finnish. I remember things about fantasyfootball, good games and all. Playing the SB in summerlike conditions make it like a backview of the season. I doubt I will get moments with nice memories while looking at a blizzard in NY/NJ
Firstly alot of the moaning is coming from people who’s junket has been spoiled. No hawaiin shirts and khakis, instead big heavy jackets etc. Warm site Superbowls are like movie wrap parties- a little warm nod to all involved through the season.
On Green Bay and Buffalo, these are small market cities who more than likely don’t have enough hotels etc. to cater for such an event. Of the cold site venues only New York, Washington and Chicago could meet the demand needed for the Superbowl.
As for London, please….the Superbowl should never and will never be played outside the US border.
I’m English but I would never want to see the Superbowl anywhere other than the USA. I can’t see it ever, ever happening – the public outcry would damage the sport for years to come. Could I see the FA Cup Final ever being held in LA or NY? No thanks.
As to the Superbowl being held in NY it certainly spices things up abit. I do feel abit sorry for the cold weather teams in Superbowls who lose any advantage whatsoever when the games are in the warm. They get to the Superbowl having to win Divisions and Playoff games in terrible conditions and have to adapt their style of play to focus on those conditions (a strong run game being the reverse of the advantage a Dome team has in a pass first offence, for example). They then go to a Dome or warm game, and that advantage becomes a disadvantage through no fault of there own. Thats hardly fair either.
It’s all going to make the whole event more of a spectacle the first time anyway ;)
@Phillip – I agree with your post but would point out that I could see Green Bay getting a shot at hosting, despite being a small market. With some of the most loyal fans in all of sports, and with Green Bay and Vince Lombardi’s role in the early days of the Super Bowl, it might be a nice nod to the history. GB is a small city to be sure, but Milwaukee might be close enough to supplement the hotels needed.
The drawbacks would be that seating capacity might be less than any previous Super Bowl (not sure how Lambeau Field stacks up to other Super Bowl sites in seats), and that of all the cold weather cities possible to host, GB could potentially be the coldest of all.
@Boomer 07UK
If coldweather teams doesn’t sit their startes at the end ogf the season. This is when the cold weather inflicts the game. If the team are adopting to the more extreme weather, it has to have the startes on the field. If they are not, then cold weather won’t pull their playinexperience in a certain direction
I think they should make a rule that whichever team comes in dead last from the previous year gets to host the super bowl. That would certainly help that team plan their cap x of a gagillion dollars the 1st round draft pick!
Although I wish the NFL would hurry up and have Dallas host the SB before they finally make them take down that rediculous godzilla tv… I’ve never seen it in person, but would imagine it would make you feel like you were watching the game like a dam HP commercial. I bet people would actually become confused at times of what’s live and actually happening in the game. I mean your line of site is an HD screen that’s probably twice the size over the view of a play developing in the span of 30 yards. Not to mention that the Dallas stadium could house half of America.. There’d probably be enough seats to house 10 different bands. Wouldn’t that be fun where the fans could vote at half time of who they want to hear? Or is it just me that feels like the commissioner gets to choose who plays at half time like a teenager fan boy. Mick Jagger?? c’mon… I think a majority vote by the fans who pay $3k would be fitting.
Yes the weather will be and issue but the fact that its in Newyork/Newjearsy makes superbowl 48 i personally believe more atractive to people overseas to come on watch. Newyork is an attractive place for any tourist to go so throw the superbowl in as well I think you will see alot more Brits and other nationalities there because I feel that it beeing help in such a major city is a majopr plus point for many overseas fans.
I agree with Jack, the fact that the game is in New York is a major attraction for me (a Brit who has not had the pleasure of visiting the US) I’m starting to save now and would love to spend some time in New York before moving over to New Jersey for the game.
Sick of hearing about Lambeau Fields small seating capacity. Lambeau Field is the 11th biggest stadium in the NFL. Green Bay and Milwaukee could very well host a super bowl. I often hear many arguments on this show that were correct years ago that were correct, but today are not. Sometimes the show seems outdated even though it’s only a few days old because their opinions are often not based or current events, but in their prior knowledge of the game. I would enjoy it more if they had more open minds about the NFL.
I don’t see why superbowls can’t be played in Lambeau (btw its 72,000 seats not 50,000) or in Chicago or in New York. I mean, these guys are football players, not frikkin little girl scouts. It will be cold, but these guys are NFL players and not little tiny 5 year old girls. Plus, Landshark Stadium in Miami has hosted superbowls almost on a regular basis.
I like the idea of expanding the Superbowl venue list. Steven said in a previous show that no one player is bigger than the NFL. So I would say that no one game is bigger than the NFL.
It’s not just about the Superbowl, it’s about the wildcard games, it’s thanksgiving, it’s opening day, it’s training camps OTAs and the draft.
It’s the complete journey. As long as the players association is consulted and is cool with it. The other thing I would like to see is a 10 year schedule of Superbowl locations so teams can incorporate the weather factor into their player management strategies.
If we try and make the Superbowl a “showcase” game of high tempo passing offense year after year, well, we all might as well watch basketball or arena football.