Blog Entry

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

Posted on: May 25, 2010 5:52 pm
 
When Congressman Steve Rothman (D-NJ) said the NFL made a "extraordinary and bold choice" in awarding the 2014 Super Bowl to the New York area he got it right. But then he characterized it as "the right choice," too, and there I'm not so sure. In fact, I'd have to object.

Look, I live in New York City so I'd like to see a Super Bowl coming here ... if, that is, it's played between May and October. But it's not. Having a Super Bowl at the Meadowlands in February makes about as much sense as holding the NHL's next Winter Classic in Tampa. I've heard owners talk romantically about having football played outdoors and their fond memories of the Ice Bowl, but there's one thing they didn't tell you and that is this -- THEY DON'T SIT OUTDOORS! They're in the climate-controlled comfort of a luxury suite where the room temperature is almost as warm as the seven-course meals that they're serving.

Spectators aren't so lucky. The ones going to the 2014 Super Bowl will pay upwards of $1,000 per seat to endure the elements -- and that could mean sub-freezing climate, snow, ice or freezing rain. Ah, yes, the great outdoors. There's a reason they invoked the 50-degree rule way back when, and it wasn't for the love of the great outdoors. Owners wanted to insure the best possible experience for fans and their teams, and playing a Super Bowl in a cold weather climate without a roof is not what they had in mind.

So why did this pass? I think owners like the novelty of the idea. I think they like the idea of the biggest game of the year played in the biggest city in the country, too. But more than anything, they like the idea of following their leader -- and make no mistake, commissioner Roger Goodell was leading the charge here because, as Rothman said, it's extraordinary and bold. He supported the idea, and owners support their commissioner. Simple as that.

So they're willing to take a risk, only this is one gamble that could backfire big time. On Super Bowl weekend this year Washington D.C. was paralyzed by over 30 inches of snow. Tell me what that would do to New York City. Or how about 15 inches. Or how about an ice storm like the one that hammered Atlanta for Super Bowl XXXIV. The NFL is not in the risk-taking business, but it just crossed its fingers and said a prayer with this vote. And what it's hoping for is one week of good weather.

Or is that good luck? They're going to need both.
Category: NFL
Comments
SportsHub
Since: May 9, 2010
Posted on: May 25, 2010 7:42 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: May 24, 2008
Posted on: May 25, 2010 7:36 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

The Superbowl should be played in a neutral arena.  While people may remember the "Ice Bowl" or the "Tuck game", having foggy and snowy weather doesn't tell us who is the better team neccessarily.  Another point, whichever group of over-the-hill-rockers they get to play half-time better be bundled up, lest their hearts give out because of the weather. LOL



Since: Mar 12, 2007
Posted on: May 25, 2010 7:34 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

Competitive edge goes to a cold-weather team if it is used to playing in cold weather climates. That means teams like Pittsburgh, New England, New York (both the Giants and the Jets), Chicago, Green Bay, Seattle will all have an edge in a Super Bowl played in the cold over a team like New Orleans, Tampa, Miami, Dallas, San Diego, or Atlanta.

So much for "neutrality".

The "romanticism" of playing in frigid temperatures is nothing short of overstated. It's written up by writers in press boxes who sit in their heated seats looking down on the field and saying, "Boy, I wouldn't want to be stuck out there! Those guys are made of stouter stuff than I am!" How many times do games in those adverse conditions end up as "memorable"? The Raiders/Patriots "Ice Bowl" wouldn't have been anything if it wasn't controversial (i.e. the "tuck" rule). And I'm sure millions of people don't want to see a game where the final score is 10-6 or 7-3. In an offense-driven league it makes the most sense to play in conditions where the weather won't mess up the experience (like it did when the Colts and Bears played in the rain. Nobody remembers that game had it not been for Peyton Manning winning Super Bowl MVP).



Since: Apr 11, 2008
Posted on: May 25, 2010 7:18 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

All this shows is New York gets what they want. Look at all the new or renavated stadiums Kansas City was told they could have the Super Bowl if they built a dome on the new Arrowhead. This is just opening pandoras box on this issue every NFL city should be given the biggest game in there city. The fans will come out to the game because it is the Super Bowl. In my biased opinion the Late owner of the Chiefs Lamar Hunt should have seen one at arrowhead for Gods sake he named the dam game but you give New York the game just because the built a new stadium so did about 10 other teams. The eagles fans now have a bitch as do the skins,Pats,Bears,Packers,Seahawks,Donkeys and the Steelers. This is true NFL  One way bullshit 



Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: May 25, 2010 7:05 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

Besides, who wouldn't want to see a Super Bowl played at stadiums like Foxborough, Soldier Field, or Lambeau Field?I wouldn't. It isn't fair. The Super Bowl is supposed to be played with neither team having an advantage, just two champions meeting for the right to be crowned the best. What if the Dolphins go 13-3, earn home-field, win two games and then have to go play the 9-7 Bears in New York? You've just handed the Bears an unfair advantage that they do not deserve.
Reverse it, and put the game in, say, Houston, and there's no advantage there. Both teams have good weather and play in that at least half the year. Why should the Dolphins be penalized because it doesn't snow in South Florida?



Since: Dec 16, 2006
Posted on: May 25, 2010 6:42 pm
 

played in the biggest city in the country?

Um, not quite. Last time I checked, The Meadowlands was still in New Jersey.

I'll be watching on TV, thank you very much.



Since: Jul 12, 2008
Posted on: May 25, 2010 6:29 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

If you ask me, I think having a Super Bowl in a cold weather city is way overdue.  When people look back at the most memorable playoff games, what is the common theme?  Cold weather.  Whether it is the Ice Bowl or the Tuck Rule game or even that blizzard game I had the pleasure of attending between the Packers and Seahawks, or the freezing cold game a week later between the Packers and Giants, people remember those games more than others.  I could also give as an example the game between the Eagles and Bears that was played in really foggy conditions.  Using the weather as an excuse to not hold the Super Bowl in certain cities is ridiculous.  Fans going to these games have a responsibility to wear the correct clothing in order not to freeze to death.  Also, wasn't the Colts and Bears game in Miami through a downpour?  Even warmer cities can have weather issues.  Besides, who wouldn't want to see a Super Bowl played at stadiums like Foxborough, Soldier Field, or Lambeau Field?



Since: Apr 26, 2009
Posted on: May 25, 2010 6:27 pm
 

Super Size Me: NFL Takes Big Gamble

im sorry but i dont buy the "its too cold" argument. look at the packers giants championship game from a few years back, the raiders patriots game with the tuck rule. you think snow or cold is going to stop people from going? no, its the super bowl


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com