Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh come on. Those are all(with the exception of Phoenix) contenders year-in and year-out. Anyone of those cities is capable of hosting an NFC championship game, so then you'll have the NFC ship game, THEN they'll have the SB game in the same city. Give the SB to Miami before we become contenders again(The Phins are on the horizon).
That's not exactly a good reason for why those cities shouldn't host an SB. lol -- the 49ers will be contenders for many years -- they're going to host one in 2016. My team, the Texans, should be contenders for the next few years and they'll be hosting one also. The Giants are contenders and they'll be hosting up this coming year, you can't base it on who's contending and who isn't. Miami already gets the SB a ton, but their main issues lie with their arena and the problems with it which is why both SF and Houston both beat it out for 2016 and 2017.
Quote:
Originally Posted by polo89
I see Miami being a wild card. Let's be honest, the Jets aren't doing much, neither are the Bills. The Pats are Miami's only contender in the AFC East, and Miami plays them close almost every year. Miami will win one of the games against the Pats. Miami could actually win 10 games this season.
Optimistic prediction to say the least. Between the Colts/Bengals and one of Steelers/Ravens will also be fighting for 2 WC spots, Miami winning 10 games with a 2nd year QB is pretty optimistic even though they got some nice additions in the offseason. I'll be surprised if they win 9.
Too many NON NFL fans focus on weather! True NFL fans know that Denver, Pittsburgh and Chicago could pull off a GREAT SB!!!
For a single game, I agree, it's fun to watch a game in rough weather.
I think the difference with the Superbowl is that it is generally between two out of town teams...so travel is important. While residents of Denver, Pittsburgh, and Chicago might be adept at driving in poor conditions, it is not optimal for visiting fans from cities that do not have such weather. That is a major consideration.
The other is the supposed even playing field that you want to see in a Superbowl. Weather being a factor in a game favors a team that is used to playing in such weather. In a dome stadium, weather isn't a concern, of course. In an outdoor stadium such as Miami, you are exposed to the elements, but the weather is generally very mild, and what virtually every team would be accustomed to playing in during the fall.
I will say that I disagree with the usage of "true" NFL fans. That's a little "no true Scotsman" for me.
Any list without a Texas location is absolutely criminal imo. Preferably Houston. Though Dallas has a nicer stadium, it's way out on the suburbs. Houston's, on the other hand, is more centralized. Houston always gets awesome reviews when it hosts the NBA all-star game.
No, I am not a Chicagoan and even if I was, that should not matter. Where I took issue was this line here
And you know this how? Many people would rather sit in ideal conditions with no elements to stop them from enjoying the game that includes rain,snow, ice, heat, and cold. Texas and other sun belt babies? As opposed to Northerners and other Rust Belt babies thinking they're being shunned on anything sun belt cities may have when it comes to having a slight advantage going for them for events? If you don't care yourself, that's fine. When you say neither does all of America, that's not. Because many Americans do care. And you think only the NFL is making the decision about them as to why SB's are in warm locations mostly? The Media also would rather have the Super Bowl in warm weather cities because they will be outside most of the time and they set their stages outside for the entire week leading up to the game.
The Super Bowl is an event and it lasts for a week. It hasn't been only about the game for a good 25 years now.
"Neither does all of America"? To re-phrase, "Neither does every person in America agree". I think you thought I was saying "Nobody in America agrees". And I don't have to substantiate that comment, I am 100% certain that ALL of America (every single person) does not agree with having the Super Bowl in 4 cities. For example, I'm an American and I don't agree.....see, I proved it! Similarly, I'd never say that NOBODY in America wants the Super Bowl in just 4 cities, for the same reason. I think you're taking my words out of context, which isn't hard to do when words are in written format.
I just don't think that the Super Bowl has to be anywhere in particular to be successful....the event will bring a similar (note: I did not say "the same") number of people whether it was held in Green Bay or Miami. The cities that host the Super Bowl, however, have to take that calculated risk of supporting the event financially vs. how much they think they can gain by having the event held there, and some cities (like GB) may opt not to have it anyways. Of course fans prefer sunny vacations over sitting in the cold, but most "fans" care so much more about the game that they'd do the same thing almost anywhere.
I've never been excited to hear Beyonce, either. But I've never had a problem with seeing her.
Who can resist a Texan beauty?
Eh, not my type....there are millions of beautiful women that could do the job for me, so I'd rather (personally) have a half-time show that hit souls of the fans more than the fans' wives.
Any list without a Texas location is absolutely criminal imo. Preferably Houston. Though Dallas has a nicer stadium, it's way out on the suburbs. Houston's, on the other hand, is more centralized. Houston always gets awesome reviews when it hosts the NBA all-star game.
Although I tend to agree, I think you're being a bit dramatic. Here are some cities that could host the Super Bowl indefinitely and the country would not miss Texas one iota:
New Orleans
Miami
Los Angeles
Tampa Bay
Phoenix
San Diego
But if I HAD to (with a gun held to my head and the heads of my children) choose just 4 cities to host, and they HAD to be in the Sun Belt, they'd be:
Miami
Phoenix
New Orleans
[Texas City] Houston would be my choice
*Los Angeles (Pasadena, SoCal, etc.)
I think it'd be smart to have LA in there as well, so I wouldn't have a 4 city rotation, it'd be at least 5.
If I could choose ANY 4 cities to host the Super Bowl, they'd be one from each region in a "football town" or huge city:
New York City
Green Bay (or Chicago)
Dallas
San Francisco (or LA)
My personal opinion is that ALL cities with NFL teams should be able to bid for the Super Bowl, which is currently the way it is and the way it should be.
I see Miami being a wild card. Let's be honest, the Jets aren't doing much, neither are the Bills. The Pats are Miami's only contender in the AFC East, and Miami plays them close almost every year. Miami will win one of the games against the Pats. Miami could actually win 10 games this season.
Um, no. The only people who believe the dolphins will be in the playoffs are dolphins fans haha. They screwed themselves for the next 5-10 years with all of those inept offseason signings. They signed so many free agents because they overpaid for them all.
Um, no. The only people who believe the dolphins will be in the playoffs are dolphins fans haha. They screwed themselves for the next 5-10 years with all of those inept offseason signings. They signed so many free agents because they overpaid for them all.
I saw the Phins schedule, 10 of those games are winnable, and the free-agent signings will fit just right in Joe Philbins offense. Miami lost so many close ones last year, I think Tannehill will be ready to at least not lose us a game. The dude is gonna be good(unless he goes through a Sophomore slump). The Ravens lost a lot, the Steelers aren't the same, the Jets have no QB, Gronk isn't gonna be back on the field for the Pats in a while, etc, etc. And if the NFL has as much parity as people praise it for, than why not Miami?
people talking about cold weather cities are forgetting that the superbowl is not just a game.
You all are talking like thus is just a five hour game.
Host cities put on a display for a week or more.
It is more than just two teams duking it out in the snow.
Clearly the NFL wants the most bang the city can provide and no one wants thousands of guests freezing their ass off or stuck in snow or ice storms.
Sorry, but for better or worse the SB had grown past being just a game.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
