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.
Yea the 49ers are the only team to win on 'home turf' (although the game wasn't at Candlestick, but was still played in the Bay Area at Stanford). The LA Rams lost one at the Rose Bowl though.
Pretty sure York thought the 49ers would be playing in super bowl 50 at the time of the announcement (well, would at least have a good shot at it)... but now he might be watching the Seahawks 3-peat on his field......
Two cities I literally despised just two months ago but have become two of my favorites in North America (although no where close to how much I love New York or Miami); San Francisco and Houston.
Oh wait, they are hosting the next two Superbowls, what do you know, awesome.
Nothing against Dallas, I quite like that city a lot too, but don't ever give the Superbowl back to them. The setup, which is essentially ziplining across the Metroplex from Dallas to Fort Worth and everything in between in a car or through TRE (commuter rail) is just inefficient. Either give the activities to Dallas or give it to Fort Worth, don't give the Metroplex another Superbowl until they figure that out, please!
SF is probably going to be just as bad or worse in that aspect considering how far Santa Clara is from SF.
At least we can all agree that no northern/snowy open-air stadiums, outside NYC and possibly Chicago (likely need a new or renovated stadium), will ever host a Super Bowl. That includes Denver, New England (as powerful as the franchise is), Green Bay (the best/most historic venue), Pittsburgh (a top 5 franchise), Kansas City, and even somewhere more mild like Seattle. Because it's all about corporate seats, and those people are wusses who don't know the first thing about football.
What's funny is American football is meant to be an outdoor, cold weather sport. All the early NFL teams were in the Upper Midwest or Northeast/New England. Games were always played from fall into winter in places like Akron, Buffalo, Canton, Green Bay, Chicago, Cincy, Toledo, Muncie, Milwaukee, Rochester, Racine, Pottsville, New York, Minneapolis, Kenosha, etc., and everyone played outside until the 70s. Oh well.
Chicago has hands-down the worst playing field in the NFL. It's basically a sandbox. If they were able to get everything up-to-snuff, it would easily be the next-up cold weather city to host the Super Bowl - not even close. Alas, the old lady probably needs to die before the team and its stadium can move into this century.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,174,514 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheese plate
At least we can all agree that no northern/snowy open-air stadiums, outside NYC and possibly Chicago (likely need a new or renovated stadium), will ever host a Super Bowl. That includes Denver, New England (as powerful as the franchise is), Green Bay (the best/most historic venue), Pittsburgh (a top 5 franchise), Kansas City, and even somewhere more mild like Seattle. Because it's all about corporate seats, and those people are wusses who don't know the first thing about football.
What's funny is American football is meant to be an outdoor, cold weather sport. All the early NFL teams were in the Upper Midwest or Northeast/New England. Games were always played from fall into winter in places like Akron, Buffalo, Canton, Green Bay, Chicago, Cincy, Toledo, Muncie, Milwaukee, Rochester, Racine, Pottsville, New York, Minneapolis, Kenosha, etc., and everyone played outside until the 70s. Oh well.
I don't agree with this at all. Kansas City was supposed to host a SB, and will someday.
Yup, I've seen your posts. Anything from Wisconsin "sh**s" all over anything from anywhere else.
Please enlighten us on how Green Bay's stadium "sh**ts" all over Sports Authority at Mile High? Let me guess, it is newer... oh wait. It must be much bigger.... oh wait. Turns out that Sports Authority was BRAND NEW the same year Lambeau was renovated and made feasible to continue being used. And Lambeau only holds a couple thousand more people. Is Lambeau regarded as having the most beautiful view from a stadium in the NFL? Sports Authority field is.
History is the only metric I have ever seen anyone use to claim that Lambeau is one of the best.
Regardless, Denver might actually host a Super Bowl in the future, I predict that Green Bay will NEVER host a Super Bowl at Lambeau. Period. The Packers need a brand new dome or a new home before they will ever host a Super Bowl. (Oh, and if they got a brand new dome, which they wont any time soon, it will be a VERY long time before Green Bay is big enough to even consider it.)
I didn't mean to rant on it, but it seems like you are being the most shameless homer in this thread . I can't think of a metric where Lambeau "sh**ts" on Sports Authority unless you are just hating to hate.
(Still sore from the time Denver played Green Bay in the Super Bowl?)
Dude.. Dont even begin to compare some weak stadium named after some crappy sporting goods store to Lambeau.
Last edited by CaseyB; 01-28-2015 at 11:59 AM..
Reason: rude
An open stadium in Chicago in February is almost guaranteed to be much colder than the same situation in cities like Denver, Seattle, and even NYC. (The Atlantic moderates temps much more than Lake Michigan does.)
I think they would need a dome. If they got a whole new dome/indoor stadium, they could easily host seeing that Detroit has hosted a couple.
It seems to me, to answer the OP's question, the city must be big enough to support the event, had never hosted one before, warm enough in Febuary, and a first class stadium (which over half of the teams have).
If you look at those criteria, the list of potential answers to the OP's question goes down significantly.
The only real options I am seeing that fit all of the criteria *or most* are Denver, Seattle, Carolina, Tennessee, and MAYBE Kansas City. They are all stretches, but the concept the OP is asking for is a stretch....
I don't agree with this at all. Kansas City was supposed to host a SB, and will someday.
I don't agree with the conclusion either. Denver is a mild city in the winter compared to the others he listed, even KC is.
The OP is asking for open stadiums that haven't hosted a Super Bowl that *might* in the future. This poster is basically saying that there are absolutely none.
Lol, can people not read? I never said Sports Authority is better than Lambeau. I said Denver is a much better choice for a Super Bowl city than Green Bay.
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.
