UnluckyforSome

Maybe. That doesn't really square well with 1 of the Falcons talking about how it is a sleepy place to play after their shutout loss here though. It certainly could be different now, compared to then.

I wouldn't call it a set rotation, but there is a list of cities/venues that the game is assigned to, more frequently than others. New Orleans, Santa Clara, Los Angeles, Houston, Phoenix, Miami and Tampa. Las Vegas will join that list as well. Atlanta will host it's 4th Superbowl, coinciding with their newer stadium opening, and I would not be surprised if they become a more frequent host now. Jacksonville has had 1 game, and while they did not have the required hotel space, they docked cruise ships in the port to serve as floating hotels. The league has not awarded them with another game as it was not an ideal solution. Dallas was awarded the game when they opened their new stadium and suffered an ice storm and some logistical/infrastructure problems and the game has not returned.

A different kind of Philly Special.

Regarding the fan vote, that will almost always be the determining vote. Compare how many fans vote, compared to coaches and players. It's millions compared to thousands I would guess.

It is a popularity contest. The selection does have meaning though. It is also 1 of the criteria that is considered for the HOF. The game does not have any significance. The team hasn't been to the playoffs in nearly a decade. That's why they don't get primetime national coverage. To the victors go the spoils.

Thanks for participating.

I know, and I do not necessarily disagree. It's a top 30 tv market though, and its supported the xfl/usfl thing that's been there, and the history is what it is. Once the old lady died that Rams team was going back to LA. I can see them coming back up for a team, or more importantly, being a negotiating chip.

I don't understand what you are advocating for with this. No Probowl? No monetary reward? More money? Keep as is? Make them play? Change something up?

We as fans don't give a fug about it and know that it's a popularity contest. For players it's a significant work bonus.

The key word about Europe would be money, and would it be lucrative enough to justify the logistical headaches that would come along with establishing a division there. It would be a nightmare in a lot of ways. The next big thing to come about will be the 18th game. I always thought that having 1 game, now that there is an odd number of games, played at a secondary (neutral) location would be a good idea. Like a Panthers game at Columbia or Raleigh. But I am sure there would be difficulties pulling it off, and historically that hasn't made much financial sense. It probably is past that time as well though. I mention that because it is similar in some ways to a D-league. Again it all comes down to money and is it lucrative enough. The alternative leagues that try and make a run at it, never seem to last too long or be very compelling though.

It's about the cash payout, which is around $100,000, and the further earnings that can come from endorsements when they can add "NFL pro-bowler" under the name, and future contract earnings. Otherwise yes, no one wants to play in the game or gives a hoot about it.

If expansion happens it will be in North America. But by how many and suitable cities and markets would be challenges to overcome, among others. I do think at some point there could be a European league again, but not an NFL Europe-based division. The single games are proven money-makers without having to commit to a team.

It matters to the players, at the very minimum it matters to the players financially.

The Bears have the added incentive to do something because Soldier Field is the smallest venue in the league with a capacity of only 61,500.