Super Bowl Weather Chaos

[Spider-Dan]

The only thing better would be if they get fog or a blizzard so thick the TV cameras can't pick anything up.

PLEASE GOD THIS

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^ Maybe not.

But a lot of this is corporate stuff -- not actual fans.  Big money celebrities and corporate money and so on.  ...not your hardcore fan who wants to brave the elements.

Then let them stay home.  The game should be for the hardcore fans who are willing to brave the elements. 

If it was up to me I would institute the following policies:

1) Ban all indoor stadiums and artificial turf.  All football should be played outdoor on grass.  (yes, I know foxboro has artificial turf)

2) Winner of last year's superbowl hosts this years superbowl. (E.g. this year it would be in Baltimore)

[MikeO]

2) Winner of last year's superbowl hosts this years superbowl. (E.g. this year it would be in Baltimore)

Most cities aren't equipped to host the super bowl. (ie Buffalo, Green Bay, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Kansas City,...etc). Foolish idea

[MikeO]

The only thing better would be if they get fog or a blizzard so thick the TV cameras can't pick anything up.

They won't play the game in those conditions. They would move it to another day

[Dave Gray]

^ I'm fine with some of that, but I also live in the real world.

I think that like 80% of tickets should have the right of first refusal go to season ticket holders of the two teams playing.  But I also like money.

I think that you should put the Super Bowl into nice stadiums in cities that can meet the demand.  And nice weather is important.  Why send people to a blisteringly-cold shithole when you can be in paradise?  NY gets dark at 4 O'Clock and you can't drive anywhere.  You can literally go to the beach here right now.  You can (and do, during the Superbowl) have big, outdoor concerts that are attended.  You have a super bowl weekend where kids come, play sports and games, etc.  Media day is outside.

It just makes good business sense and is actually entertaining and enjoyable, which is the point of the whole thing to begin with.

I don't necessarily think it has to be Miami, but an outdoor stadium in the middle of a blizzard is just dumb.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Most cities aren't equipped to host the super bowl. (ie Buffalo, Green Bay, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Kansas City,...etc). Foolish idea

We aren't talking about hosting the Olympics (which was held in Lake Placid which is much smaller than any of those cities) we are talking about hosting a football game.  Any of those cities can handle that many tourists. 

[MikeO]

We aren't talking about hosting the Olympics (which was held in Lake Placid which is much smaller than any of those cities) we are talking about hosting a football game.  Any of those cities can handle that many tourists. 

Biggest sporting event in the world. If you think cities like Green Bay and Buffalo has the hotels to house all of these people you don't know what you are talking about. They don't. Not up for debate, they flat out don't. In Jacksonville they had to bring in ships the week of because they ran out of hotels so people could live/sleep on the ships for the week they had the game there. There are many NFL towns that are just too small and don't have the necessary number of hotels to host a week long event like the Super Bowl.

Sorry hoodie, you are 100% wrong!

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Greenbay arguable you have a point. 

However the second smallest NFL city is New Orleans (which hosted the superbowl recently) tied with Buffalo, every other NFL team is hosted in a larger metro area than NO. 

Jacksonville is only a hair larger than NO.  So the rest should not have a problem...

Greenbay would be doable but it would require a fleet of buses to shuttle people to Milwaukee.

(in millions)
:NYJ :NYG New York 19.0
:CHI Chicago 9.6
:DAL Dallas 6.3
:PHI Philadelphia 5.8
:HOU Houston 5.7
:MIA Miami 5.4
:ATL Atlanta 5.4
:WAS Washington D.C. 5.4
:NE Boston  4.5
:DET Detroit 4.4
:ARI Phoenix 4.3
:SF :OAK San Francisco/Oakland 4.3
:SEA Seattle 3.3
:MIN Minneapolis 3.2
:SD San Diego 3.0
:STL St. Louis 2.8
:TB Tampa Bay 2.7
:BAL Baltimore 2.7
:DEN Denver 2.5
:PIT Pittsburgh 2.4
:CIN Cincinnati 2.2
:CLE Cleveland 2.1
:KC Kansas City 2.0
:IND Indianapolis 1.7
:CAR Charlotte 1.7
:TEN Nashville 1.6
:JAC Jacksonville 1.3
:NO New Orleans 1.1
:BUF Buffalo 1.1
:GB Green Bay 0.3  (112 miles north of Milwaukee 1.5 M)

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Biggest sporting event in the world.

Not even fucking close. 

World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the World. Olympics is second. 

Superbowl might be third but a case could be made for Le Mans or Tour de France or Wimbleton etc. being 3rd.  Superbowl is in tier with multiple other sporting events all that fall well short of the top 2. 

[MikeO]

Not even fucking close. 

World Cup is the biggest sporting event in the World. Olympics is second. 

Superbowl might be third but a case could be made for Le Mans or Tour de France or Wimbleton etc. being 3rd.  Superbowl is in tier with multiple other sporting events all that fall well short of the top 2. 

In terms of media at the event and msot watched one day event I believe Super Bowl is first but whatever

[MikeO]

Greenbay arguable you have a point. 

However the second smallest NFL city is New Orleans (which hosted the superbowl recently) tied with Buffalo, every other NFL team is hosted in a larger metro area than NO. 

Jacksonville is only a hair larger than NO.  So the rest should not have a problem...

Greenbay would be doable but it would require a fleet of buses to shuttle people to Milwaukee.

(in millions)
:NYJ :NYG New York 19.0
:CHI Chicago 9.6
:DAL Dallas 6.3
:PHI Philadelphia 5.8
:HOU Houston 5.7
:MIA Miami 5.4
:ATL Atlanta 5.4
:WAS Washington D.C. 5.4
:NE Boston  4.5
:DET Detroit 4.4
:ARI Phoenix 4.3
:SF :OAK San Francisco/Oakland 4.3
:SEA Seattle 3.3
:MIN Minneapolis 3.2
:SD San Diego 3.0
:STL St. Louis 2.8
:TB Tampa Bay 2.7
:BAL Baltimore 2.7
:DEN Denver 2.5
:PIT Pittsburgh 2.4
:CIN Cincinnati 2.2
:CLE Cleveland 2.1
:KC Kansas City 2.0
:IND Indianapolis 1.7
:CAR Charlotte 1.7
:TEN Nashville 1.6
:JAC Jacksonville 1.3
:NO New Orleans 1.1
:BUF Buffalo 1.1
:GB Green Bay 0.3  (112 miles north of Milwaukee 1.5 M)

None of these numbers factors in hotels in the area. As I said, I have been to downtown Buffalo. Nowhere near enough hotels to host a super bowl. Same with Jacksonville (this is proven already, it failed when they held the game), Cincinnati, and other cities in the same boat. It's not the size of the city its the hotels in the area! New Orelans has hotels on top of hotels, so while the city may be smaller it is equipped to host large events like Final Fours, Super Bowls, Sugar Bowls, National Title games.

[Spider-Dan]

Honolulu has a population of <400K, but I think they probably have more hotels than Buffalo.

Location matters.

[MikeO]

Honolulu has a population of <400K, but I think they probably have more hotels than Buffalo.

Location matters.

It's a tourist city so I am sure they do have more hotels than Buffalo

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Downtown Buffalo, not enough hotels.  Add in all the hotels that cater to the Niagara Fall crowd that are largely vacant in February...more than enough.

Buffalo could host it...and it would be a huge boom to all the bed and breakfasts that normally sit ideal from mid-Oct to early-May. 

[MikeO]

Downtown Buffalo, not enough hotels.  Add in all the hotels that cater to the Niagara Fall crowd that are largely vacant in February...more than enough.

Buffalo could host it...and it would be a huge boom to all the bed and breakfasts that normally sit ideal from mid-Oct to early-May. 

Wouldn't come close to being able to hold it and it would be a disaster. Plus the stadium is an utter dump and couldn't come close to accommodating all the media.