Should the Super Bowl be played in cold weather cities or all NFL stadiums?

[wamfam]

Should the Super Bowl be played in cold weather cities or all NFL stadiums?

Why should only warm weather & dome teams be able to host the Super Bowl? If you argue that the game should be played on controlled weather places, then maybe schedule it only in domes or how about Hawaii like the Pro Bowl is? As far as pointing out that it should be played away from cold weather areas, keep in mind that during the regular season, many games are played in cold, snowy, windy and rainy conditions. Why not the Super Bowl? Why should only a selected number of NFL teams host it? Its not fair to the cities that don't get to host it. Why not host it in warm weathered college stadiums then? That way no NFL city gets that advantage.
Why not have the Super Bowl played in the 2 oldest NFL franchises; Green Bay & Chicago?
Please don't bring up hotels, motels, accessabilty, etc.

 

[Sparkplug]

The people complaining will be the corporate sponsors that pay big bucks to bring all kinds of people to the game that will have no idea how to dress for the weather.

This about all of the winter clothes that people are buying for the game - revenue generation.

 

[3TrueFans]

I like the idea of not playing in a dome or in warm weather all the time. The Super Bowl feels so stale sometimes.

 

[VeloClone]

It would be a big political problem for the NFL for them to shut out their cold weather NFL cities. They have to please all 32 franchises and cities. It is also a bone they throw to the cities that build new stadia for their franchises. There is a positive economic impact to a city by hosting which helps to offset the stadium building costs just a little. More importantly is the big ad for the city the game and hype become. I know Minneapolis was milking their superbowl experience for at least 10 years after they hosted.

 

[wamfam]

So why is this Super Bowl being played in New York? Was it because of 9/11 or because of the new stadium?
Its sad that New York gets to host it before Chicago or Green Bay, the two oldest NFL teams.

 

[djkent01]

I don't know man. It's the Super Bowl. I want to see the players decide it outside of crazy adverse elements. If the weather is as it's predicted, I'm fine with this year. But if it were snowing or bitter cold? Wouldn't like it one bit.

 

[wamfam]

I don't know man. It's the Super Bowl. I want to see the players decide it outside of crazy adverse elements. If the weather is as it's predicted, I'm fine with this year. But if it were snowing or bitter cold? Wouldn't like it one bit.

But weather is a factor in many regular season games, and with only 16 regular season games, every game has a lot of meaning to it. The playoffs are the same as the regular season. Why the Super Bowl?
The World Series is played in cold places sometimes. That's not played on a neutral site.

 

[ISpyCy]

Buccaneers/Dolphins Super Bowl in NYC....the game would suck, but laughing at the under-dressed fans would make it all worth while.

EDIT: Post #2K!

 

[3TrueFans]

So why is this Super Bowl being played in New York? Was it because of 9/11 or because of the new stadium?
Its sad that New York gets to host it before Chicago or Green Bay, the two oldest NFL teams.

Because nobody wants to go to bum**** Wisconsin for the Super Bowl.

 

[ManBearClone]

I have no problem with the super bowl being played in cold weather stadiums. Why should cold weather teams be penalized in the championship game all the time. This goes for college championship games also. How about Florida or Texas teams having to come north to play once in a while.

Also this superbowl will probably be the first in a long time that actual fans might outnumber celebrities looking for a photo op.

 

[djkent01]

But weather is a factor in many regular season games, and with only 16 regular season games, every game has a lot of meaning to it. The playoffs are the same as the regular season. Why the Super Bowl?
The World Series is played in cold places sometimes. That's not played on a neutral site.

I feel the same way about the World Series. October games in NY? I thought it was the boys of summer. Extreme adverse weather conditions change the game way too much.

 

[19210]

I don't know man. It's the Super Bowl. I want to see the players decide it outside of crazy adverse elements. If the weather is as it's predicted, I'm fine with this year. But if it were snowing or bitter cold? Wouldn't like it one bit.

If you can't get amped up to play in the SuperBowl then you are a prima dona. I think every team should have a chance to host it.

The good thing is the weather would be good or bad for both teams. Not only that, but this would give ISU another selling point. If you want to play in the big game you need to be able to weather the elements.

 

[Wesley]

It would be a big political problem for the NFL for them to shut out their cold weather NFL cities. They have to please all 32 franchises and cities. It is also a bone they throw to the cities that build new stadia for their franchises. There is a positive economic impact to a city by hosting which helps to offset the stadium building costs just a little. More importantly is the big ad for the city the game and hype become. I know Minneapolis was milking their superbowl experience for at least 10 years after they hosted.

After they build the replacement for the Baggy Stadium, they will be back in line to milk. Think they can then get on the list?

 

[ia8manfan]

It would be a big political problem for the NFL for them to shut out their cold weather NFL cities. They have to please all 32 franchises and cities. It is also a bone they throw to the cities that build new stadia for their franchises. There is a positive economic impact to a city by hosting which helps to offset the stadium building costs just a little. More importantly is the big ad for the city the game and hype become. I know Minneapolis was milking their superbowl experience for at least 10 years after they hosted.

This is a common fallacy....there have been several studies done that prove that hosting the Super Bowl has little relative economic effect (over having a normal home game). The overall costs of taxpayers subsidizing the stadium do not outweigh the economic benefits stadiums bring in.

 

[WooBadger18]

So why is this Super Bowl being played in New York? Was it because of 9/11 or because of the new stadium? Its sad that New York gets to host it before Chicago or Green Bay, the two oldest NFL teams.

I assume it's simply because it's New York

 

[istater7]

The Super Bowl should be as neutral as possible. Weather should not become a factor because it is too cold, windy, snowing, any ice, etc. You want the players to be able to perform at the highest level possible. I'm not saying they should all be played in domes, but just stick to warm weather cities as much as possible.

 

[VeloClone]

This is a common fallacy....there have been several studies done that prove that hosting the Super Bowl has little relative economic effect (over having a normal home game). The overall costs of taxpayers subsidizing the stadium do not outweigh the economic benefits stadiums bring in.

Which is why I said it helps offset the cost of the new stadium just a little. So there is the impact of having another home game plus a little more according to your study. That is more than building a new stadium to keep your team and not even getting a chance to host a Super Bowl. Then there is the advertising the city and metropolitan area get from all of the media coverage that comes with the Super Bowl.

 

[JohnnyFive]

The World Series is played outdoors even when East coast teams are in it in November. I don't see what the problem is.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I would think Denver, Green Bay, Chicago, Foxborough, Seattle, and Kansas City would make for great Super Bowl towns. They all have the stadiums for it (notice I left off, say, Cincinnati and Cleveland and St. Louis), and some of them are some of the most hallowed grounds in all of American sports.

The argument they can't do it in cold weather cities comes down to the game itself--there have been two Super Bowls in Detroit, one in Minneapolis (and another coming with the new stadium), and they were going to do Kansas City before a retractable roof bond fell through. Evidently it is okay for people to have a cold week, but not for anybody to have the risk of a cold/snow game.

I have to say, I think it is time for the northern part of the country to enjoy this, too. Some of the antiseptic facilities in the south (Tampa, San Diego, Miami, Dallas; not New Orleans, though--that place is rocking) have a fraction of the character, tradition, and fan-bases of some of these northern cities when it comes to Sunday football. College football rules in those lands. If the outdoors is good enough for playoff games in January, I don't see why it isn't good enough for the championship in February.

A true champion should be able to play in all conditions on all fields. I'm definitely for the neutral site tradition, but I'd like to see if say, next year, if San Francisco and Indianapolis (semi-random teams there) would button up and show some grit while playing at Lambeau for the world title. One of the amazing things about football to me is it is truly a game for all seasons--burning heat in the summer, the wonderful autumn, the "rainy" cold season, and the blustery winter--and all regions, with teams from Seattle to New England to Miami to San Diego. The game should reflect this variability, and a championship team should be able to handle it.

 

[VeloClone]

Ditka is ripping the cold weather Super Bowl.

Mike Ditka rips 'stupid' cold-weather Super Bowl in New York

Interesting considering he played in the 1963 NFL championship game in Chicago.

I guess I don't see how it is okay to play in the elements throughout the playoffs however you should never have to do it in the final game of the playoffs.