Results 1 to 12 of 41
-
01-31-2014, 02:27 PM #1Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
A reported from San Deigo just asked the Commish if there will be a return to warm weather cities getting multiple Super Bowls.
His answer? No.
This prompted a discussion from the talking heads at NFLN to discuss which cities are in play. The two panelists were in agreement that this decision by Goodell would mean cities that normally would not be considered, and Baltimore was in their discussion, would have a shot at landing a Super Bowl.
Hoping there's a link soon since this was on live TV.
-
01-31-2014, 02:41 PM #2
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
This is a good thing if it actually comes to pass. I just worry that Goodell would be quick to pull the trigger on moving the game day and time if snow was forecast for a Super Bowl Sunday in a cold weather city. They are lucking out this year with a calm forecast for NY (40 degrees, no wind), but I'm sure if it was supposed to be "polar vortex" cold they'd try to reschedule the game for a day with a better forecast, which is lame.
How cool would it be to watch a Super Bowl played in conditions like the Vikings game this year?
-
01-31-2014, 02:49 PM #3
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
Yech, disagree. Baltimore is no way set up to host an event of that magnitude. I'd have to avoid downtown like the plague for a week. The only way I'd be happy about it is if the Ravens were in it.
Exactly. I know from making our Super Bowl plans last year -- you pay an absolute premium, you take off of work, you get hotels for a certain number of nights, you get a flight back on a specific day. What if they move the game to Monday? What about all those people who DON'T have a hotel for Monday night? What about the people who have plane tickets out on Monday? Maybe they have jobs, responsibilities. Maybe they can't get a flight out Tuesday because everyone else is moving their flight too. What about them? Do they just eat their $5000 Super Bowl ticket?
The first 58 minutes of that game was some of the most horrible, sloppy, boring football I have ever seen. Thank you, but no. Move the Super Bowl to New Orleans permanently. (It won't happen, but it should.)"Chin up, chest out."
-
01-31-2014, 02:50 PM #4
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
I'm all on board with that. The Super Bowl should rotate to all NFL cities. Why should only 5 or 6 cities benefit from the increased revenue? I Super Bowl at the Vault would showcase how great of a venue Baltimore is. I would a Super Bowl in my hometown, D.C. Biggest professional championship decided in the Nation's Capitol...AWESOME!
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
01-31-2014, 02:52 PM #5
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
I can't see fans being too thrilled about going to Baltimore for a SB. Granted, M&T is a nice stadium...
Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
01-31-2014, 03:09 PM #7
-
01-31-2014, 03:21 PM #8Hyperbolic curmudgeometer
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Balmer Merlin Hon
- Posts
- 5,854
- Blog Entries
- 1
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
My guess is that Baltimore is at the arse end of cities that would even be considered under current conditions.
Considering the cities with NFL teams, there are a fair number where no sane person would even consider trying to play in February: Any in the Rockies, Midwest or Great Lakes areas without a domed stadium--i.e., Denver, Green Bay, KC, Chicago, Buffalo, & probably Cleveland, Cincy & Pittsburgh.
With the first 51 games either played or scheduled, here's how the cities/teams break out:
New Orleans & Miami - 10 each
LA/Pasadema - 7
Tampa - 4
Arizona, Houston, San Diego - 3 each
Atlanta, Detroit, SF area - 2 each
Dallas, Indy, Jax, Minny, NYC area - 1 each.
That comes to 16 host teams (counting NYC and OAK/SF twice & not LA) of 32. Subtract the 8 cities where no sane person etc.... & one is left with 8 candidates: New England, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Carolina, Tennessee, Seattle, & St. Louis.
My guess is that DC, Seattle, Philly, Carolina and St Louis will get Super Bowls before Baltimore, and so might New England (weather being the possible stumbling block there). The only one of those potential host cities that IMO is definitely less attractive than Charm City is Nashville.
So I wouldn't hold my breath for a Super Bowl in Baltimore, gang....If yinz ain't vaxxed & boosted by now, ain't nuffin' I say gonna change yer mind. Just don't drop dead on my lawn.
Слава Україні! героям слава!
-
01-31-2014, 03:26 PM #9
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
Why would no sane person put a SB in Green Bay, Chicago or Pittsburgh? I think a Super Bowl played at Lambeau would be freaking cool. Why is it ok to play at any of those cities for the conference championships, but suddenly 2 weeks later it's too cold to play there?
-
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
-
01-31-2014, 03:30 PM #11Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 141
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
Can you imagine the gridlock that would occur downtown if we hosted the Superbowl? I shudder to think...
-
Re: Goodell: The Amount of Cities Getting Multiple Super Bowls Will Shrink
Bookmarks