U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2014, 08:49 AM
 
3,438 posts, read 4,739,778 times
Reputation: 5403

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post
It's a football game AND a vacation event.

Regular season games are primarily attended by fans of the home team. Playoff games are the same thing -- season ticket holders for the home team get first chance at the seats. The Superbowl is not a home team event. Nearly all the seats will go to people traveling hundreds or thousands of miles to see the game. A small percentage of Broncos and Seahawks season ticket holders will be offered Superbowl tickets and make the trip; the rest of the tickets are sold off in a national "lottery", etc. Few will go to local fans of the hosting franchise. That makes it a vacation event for most attendees. Obviously it's a football game, but it's much more.

From one who has attended many preseason and regular season games, a handful of playoff games and one Superbowl game, the Superbowl game itself was not that great to attend. It was fun being there, a great experience, but kind of lame. I felt like most in attendance were not great fans, certainly not of the teams playing. They were there for a big "event". Cheering was dismal. The best games to attend are your home team playoff games, especially conference championships.

You nailed it !

 
Old 01-24-2014, 10:20 AM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,847,643 times
Reputation: 1466
Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post
It's a football game AND a vacation event.

Regular season games are primarily attended by fans of the home team. Playoff games are the same thing -- season ticket holders for the home team get first chance at the seats. The Superbowl is not a home team event. Nearly all the seats will go to people traveling hundreds or thousands of miles to see the game. A small percentage of Broncos and Seahawks season ticket holders will be offered Superbowl tickets and make the trip; the rest of the tickets are sold off in a national "lottery", etc. Few will go to local fans of the hosting franchise. That makes it a vacation event for most attendees. Obviously it's a football game, but it's much more.

From one who has attended many preseason and regular season games, a handful of playoff games and one Superbowl game, the Superbowl game itself was not that great to attend. It was fun being there, a great experience, but kind of lame. I felt like most in attendance were not great fans, certainly not of the teams playing. They were there for a big "event". Cheering was dismal. The best games to attend are your home team playoff games, especially conference championships.
That's interesting, but it only makes me believe even more that Super Bowls should be held in bad weather areas now. Because sitting at home and watching a SB being playing in a blizzard, knowing that a huge chunk of people in the stadium really don't care much about the game or either team but are just there to be there, would really enhance my enjoyment of the game.
 
Old 01-25-2014, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Florida -
8,767 posts, read 10,862,335 times
Reputation: 16650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodpete View Post
Why keep score ? That way, nobody looses, everybody feels good and everybody's equal. Football is meant to be played in the elements, don't try to turn it into a sissy sport like soccer.
I doubt that playing the Super Bowl in a warm, neutral location will make it a 'sissy sport.' (That's already been accomplished by hyper-vigilance in the new 'targeting rules' and 'throwing the ball into the stands' every time the quarterback is about to get sacked!).
 
Old 01-25-2014, 05:42 PM
 
Location: Two Rivers, Wisconsin
11,724 posts, read 11,559,537 times
Reputation: 12484
Warm I get but just because it is in the cold doesn't mean it isn't a neutral location.
 
Old 01-25-2014, 07:12 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
10,827 posts, read 9,450,839 times
Reputation: 6186
Most of you don't understand Superbowls.

Having grew up near New Orleans and New Orleans having been a regular "host" for the Superbowl, I can tell you what the Superbowl requires:

* it is a week long event, there need to be plenty of things for tourists/fans to do
* there need to be at least 35,000 hotel rooms and plenty of 5* restaurants
* the stadium must have luxury boxes for the ultra-rich

The Meadowlands meets these requirements, there are enough hotel rooms in the NYC area, there are plenty of 5* restaurants, and there are mega climate controlled suites for the ultra rich. This is also why Pittsburgh or Green Bay cannot meet the requirements, i.e. there are not enough hotel rooms or 5* restaurants.

However, there are other aspects that you want but not all cities can deliver:
* Fans like to walk around the city all day and chant back to the opposing teams fans. This is best accomplished in compact cities like New Orleans in the French Quarter or in South Beach in Miami. This "fan zone" will be in Times Square this year, but the weather I believe will impact the "quality" of the experience. When it was held in Dallas, people complained because venues were too spread out. NJ/NYC is very similar in that regard, the stadium is far from the fan zone. In New Orleans it is a 10 block walk.
* There needs to be a large area for the Superbowl "Experience" which consists of a lot of activities for fans. In New Orleans it is held in the Convention Center, again a 10 block walk to both the Superdome and the French Quarter.

When the SB was held in Indy, it is very similar to New Orleans in the sense of compactness of downtown and how close the stadium is to the "action" so it was successful. When the SB was held in Dallas, venues were all scattered around the DFW area, which is about as big as the NJ/NYC area in question. It was also during an ice storm, however, Cowboys stadium is a climate controlled stadium, so fans were in 72 degrees comfort during the game. Some reporters were actually saying it was a little bit stuffy in the stadium, I believe Jerry Jones cranked the heat a little extra just to be safe. Better warm than freezing though.

So, I expect a repeat of the Dallas Superbowl, but with fans miserable in the stadium too.

NFL needs to stick to either domed stadiums or warm cities.

The Superbowl has nothing to do with the game itself, it is an experience of a lifetime, and the fans need to not be left in non ideal conditions.

Even when it was in Miami and it rained, some fans were quite miserable and had to leave at some point in the game. It's hard to be comfortable being soaked for 3 hours.

In my opinion, the Superbowl should be held in New Orleans permanently.
 
Old 01-26-2014, 08:52 AM
 
Location: Two Rivers, Wisconsin
11,724 posts, read 11,559,537 times
Reputation: 12484
In my opinion, the Superbowl should be held in New Orleans permanently. One city holding it all the time, bad idea in my opinion. There are plenty of places that can handle the crowds, several markets cannot plain and simple.
 
Old 01-26-2014, 08:54 AM
 
Location: southwestern PA
20,419 posts, read 37,702,086 times
Reputation: 39059
Quote:
Originally Posted by cBach View Post

In my opinion, the Superbowl should be held in New Orleans permanently.
Worst idea yet.
 
Old 01-26-2014, 06:38 PM
 
Location: Minnesota
5,147 posts, read 6,345,332 times
Reputation: 1561
Quote:
Originally Posted by susancruzs View Post
In my opinion, the Superbowl should be held in New Orleans permanently. One city holding it all the time, bad idea in my opinion. There are plenty of places that can handle the crowds, several markets cannot plain and simple.
The one city option is unlikely to happen given the influence of team owners. Me, I think a city that lost all its teams might be the best place. LA. People might come a week early just to party till the big game comes.
 
Old 01-26-2014, 07:04 PM
 
Location: Born & Raised DC > Carolinas > Seattle > Denver
9,349 posts, read 5,575,774 times
Reputation: 9446
Even though I'm rooting for Peyton and the Broncos, and I know bad weather would hurt their chances....part of me wants a friggin' blizzard next Sunday night, to make Roger Goodell look like a complete idiot.

I'm talkin' 70,000 people who paid thousands of dollars for the "superbowl experience," sitting in 15 degrees with snow coming in sideways. Football fans across the country would shake their heads and laugh at Roger.

How the hech could you allow weather to possibly play a role in the biggest stage in American sports? Moronic.
 
Old 01-26-2014, 07:12 PM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,475,857 times
Reputation: 12835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghengis View Post
I find it hard to muster up a lot of sympathy for anyone that can afford to go to a Super Bowl and would beeotch about the weather conditions
You take issue with people who work hard and prefer warmer climates?
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top