2014 Super Bowl host down to Tampa & New York

[Dpantherman]

By IRA KAUFMAN | The Tampa Tribune

Published: March 22, 2010

Updated: 03/23/2010 06:00 am

ORLANDO - Two months before the league awards the 2014 Super Bowl to either Tampa Bay, New York or South Florida, the joint bid by the Giants and Jets continues to gather momentum.

Owners will decide on the 2014 site during the league's spring meetings in Dallas, where the Tampa Bay area is expected to be represented by a contingent of officials reminding owners of the region's glittering track record as a Super Bowl destination.

The NFL waived its Super Bowl weather requirements to accept a bid that would land the 2014 game in a new open-air stadium set to open next month at the Meadowlands complex in East Rutherford, N.J.

Miami has played host to two of the past four Super Bowls and the Tampa Bay area is considered New York's chief rival for the 2014 game, especially after Arizona dropped out as a suitor last month, citing economic concerns.

"We'll look at the presentations for all the cities involved and go from there," Falcons owner Arthur Blank said Monday as the league's three-day meeting began at a posh resort near SeaWorld. "Is having a Super Bowl in New York nuts? No, it's not.

"Let's keep in mind that people travel from all over the world to come to New York during the holiday season and are there for a period of time. Is it ideal in terms of weather - probably not. But there are enough merits to it that it should be considered."

The Tampa Bay area has played host to the NFL's showcase game four times and the next three Super Bowls are set for Dallas, Indianapolis and New Orleans.

The Super Bowl has never been awarded to an open-air facility in a cold-weather environment and many observers believe Commissioner Roger Goodell is privately lobbying owners to reward New York for building a $1.7 billion, 82,500-seat stadium just outside the Lincoln Tunnel.

"I don't have a vote and I can't even take a position with the ownership," Goodell said Monday. "I think it (New York Super Bowl) could be very attractive to the ownership and to the NFL in general."

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/mar/22/230600/new-york-bid-2014-super-bowl-gets-stronger/

[Nicbsbll2]

If it goes to New York, then that should open the door for every other franchise that isn't in Florida or Texas to being able to bid for the Super Bowl. It's not fair to say that New York is allowed to BID, not be rewarded, but actually bid for a Super Bowl because they are New York, but other cities aren't.

[theyhateme45]

I don't care about having the superbowl in Northern cities.... But please, no Superbowl in the snow. That's just a mess for the biggest game of the year.

[Dpantherman]

I don't care about having the superbowl in Northern cities.... But please, no Superbowl in the snow. That's just a mess for the biggest game of the year.

why is it that you can have an AFC or NFC Championship game in the snow, which decides who goes to the Super Bowl, but can't have a Super Bowl itself in the snow? if you don't want weather games, but all the playoff games on a neutral fair weather field. otherwise, have them any and everywhere.

[Swarly]

why is it that you can have an AFC or NFC Championship game in the snow, which decides who goes to the Super Bowl, but can't have a Super Bowl itself in the snow? if you don't want weather games, but all the playoff games on a neutral fair weather field. otherwise, have them any and everywhere.

because it's the biggest game of the year, and you don't want it to be sloppy as hell with people slipping and falling all over the place.

I'm surprised the NFL hasn't built a neutral field to host the Super Bowl every year.

[RedMage138]

why is it that you can have an AFC or NFC Championship game in the snow, which decides who goes to the Super Bowl, but can't have a Super Bowl itself in the snow? if you don't want weather games, but all the playoff games on a neutral fair weather field. otherwise, have them any and everywhere.

Because the Super Bowl is supposed to be on a neutral field while you earn the right to host playoff games in the regular season. Take the Packers-Cardinals game from this past year. Don't you think that game would have been a lot less entertaining and a lot more one sided had it been played at Lambeau with 10 inches of snow and 30 MPH winds? If a cold weather team plays a warm weather team in the SB and the weather is shitty, it gives the cold weather team an advantage and takes away from what the Super Bowl is supposed to be. I personally don't want the Super Bowl to be decided by weather and this is why the only cold weather cities that should be allowed to host it should be domes like Minnesota and Indy.

[theyhateme45]

Because the Super Bowl is supposed to be on a neutral field while you earn the right to host playoff games in the regular season. Take the Packers-Cardinals game from this past year. Don't you think that game would have been a lot less entertaining and a lot more one sided had it been played at Lambeau with 10 inches of snow and 30 MPH winds? If a cold weather team plays a warm weather team in the SB and the weather is shitty, it gives the cold weather team an advantage and takes away from what the Super Bowl is supposed to be. I personally don't want the Super Bowl to be decided by weather and this is why the only cold weather cities that should be allowed to host it should be domes like Minnesota and Indy.

:iamwithstupid:

There's your answer

[Nicbsbll2]

Weather is part of the game. If it's good enough to help decide the regular season and playoffs, then it's good enough to help "decide" the Super Bowl. Regardless of the weather, I promise you that in the Super Bowl the best team will rise to the top.

If they are afraid that cold weather will cause an unfair advantage, then they should remove all open air stadiums from consideration to prevent rain from doing the same thing.

[cookinbrak]

Silly mortals. It has nothing to do with the game itself, more with the people that spend extravagant amounts of money to be at the SB. Celebrities (and psuedo-celebrities) are not going to spend tons of money to go sit outside in below freezing temps. I actually hope they do it, just so it can fail horribly.