Kentucky Jet Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 03/25/2010 3:49 PM ET Graziano: Big Apple not so Super The Big Game in the big city would likely be a flop By Dan Graziano / SNY.tv The inside of the new Meadowlands stadium looks nice, but might not play as nicely for the Super Bowl teams in 2014. (AP) ORLANDO, Fla. -- I don't know, maybe I'm just a grouch. But I can't figure out why anybody would be hot to have the Super Bowl in New York. Alas, it was a big topic this week at the NFL's annual meetings. It'll be a bigger one in May in Dallas, when owners vote to decide where to hold the 2014 Super Bowl. The decision has come down to New York (East Rutherford, N.J., actually), Tampa or Miami, and the overwhelming feeling among NFL types is that the new Giants/Jets stadium in the Meadowlands is the runaway favorite. Nothing official yet or guaranteed, but the votes certainly seem to be leaning that way. I just don't get why. There are so many more negatives than positives associated with having the game up here, and while it may feel like spring these days it shouldn't be too hard to think back over the past couple of months and realize the biggest one is weather. It snows up here in the winter. The last few years, it's snowed a lot. Enough to make us wonder if the Earth has tilted in some new strange way and we're now getting weather patterns they used to get in Nova Scotia. The Super Bowl is played in early February. There's a pretty decent chance that if it's played in northern New Jersey, then it will be played in some bad weather. Best-case scenario on that day would be the sun shining, no snow on the ground and probably about 30 degrees. So, everybody has to cram into this nice new stadium and sit around for three hours freezing cold? The Super Bowl is dominated by shots of players shivering on the sidelines, wearing those big old capes and rubbing their hands in front of heat lamps? People can wax poetic about "football weather," but this is the biggest game of the year, played to decide the NFL champion, and it's supposed to be played in optimum conditions for that reason. They've had the Super Bowl in Detroit and in Minneapolis, but those games were played in climate-controlled domed stadiums. Once everybody made their way inside, the game was played in ideal conditions. Nobody could complain that the elements had anything to do with the outcome. I always thought that's why the league only played this game in domes and warm weather -- so that nobody could complain that the elements had anything to do with the outcome. The worse-case scenarios all have to do with the elements severely affecting the outcome, or at least the game-day experience. Extreme cold is possible, which could lead people not to show up, and a Super Bowl broadcast that features shots of empty seats. The NFL wants that? And of course, there is the snow. Rowdy fans have been known to throw snowballs onto the field up here. The NFL wants that? Finally, the worst-case scenario is a ton of snow. A blizzard. The kind we seem to get a couple of times a year up here. What if it snows two feet on Saturday night into Super Bowl Sunday morning? What if nobody can get to the game? What if it's snowing like crazy all day and they can't keep the field clear enough to play on it? Is the NFL really prepared to postpone a Super Bowl until Monday or Tuesday? Why would they even want to risk it? Sorry, I don't get this. I don't see why it matters to the owners of the Giants and the Jets that they get a Super Bowl in their new stadium. I don't see why it the affected chambers of commerce or tourism bureaus would see this as anything they'd truly need. I don't get why the league would want to take a chance that its signature event could turn into a weather-blitzed fiasco. Tampa and Miami sound like good place to have the Super Bowl. New Orleans. San Diego. Even Dallas and Indianapolis, the next two spots, are fine, mainly because they have roofs. This new stadium in New Jersey doesn't have a roof. It doesn't have good February weather. And it really shouldn't -- if you think about it -- have a Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boozer76 Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Can't say I disagree. Unless the Jets were playing, there's no chance I'd ever want to sit in the freezing cold to watch the Super Bowl. Throw in the fact the seats would probably be well north of a grand it's a definitive HELL NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeWillie Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Call me a "traditionalist", but I love the old films of NFL Championship Games being played in the cold. Hell, the Conference Championship Games are sometimes played in bad weather, why not the Super Bowl? Football's gotten too "plastic". I understand the mentality ... it's obviously all about the event and the money it generates... I just prefer the old days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boozer76 Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Call me a "traditionalist", but I love the old films of NFL Championship Games being played in the cold. Hell, the Conference Championship Games are sometimes played in bad weather, why not the Super Bowl? Football's gotten too "plastic". I understand the mentality ... it's obviously all about the event and the money it generates... I just prefer the old days. You can't compare the Conf championships to the Super Bowl, it apples and oranges. Conf championship stadiums are packed with fans of the home team who have a vested interest in their team and are willing to sit in the cold to see them win. It's very rare that a Super Bowl hosts the actual team that plays in the stadium. I don't know that it has ever happened. Most likely they need to attract businesses and people with alot of money to blow and convince them to sit out in the freezing cold and snow to watch the super bowl. It's just not practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelticwizard Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Unless they start making a nice big balloon to sit on top of the roof, a SuperBowl in a non-dome stadium is crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 It's a crazy idea. We have had several blizzards over the last few years. if we had blizzard conditions, or even the threat of such condtions, or cleaning up the aftermath, you could not get the crowds to the stadium safely. The NFL should play it's championship in as close to ideal conditions as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeWillie Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 You can't compare the Conf championships to the Super Bowl, it apples and oranges. Conf championship stadiums are packed with fans of the home team who have a vested interest in their team and are willing to sit in the cold to see them win. It's very rare that a Super Bowl hosts the actual team that plays in the stadium. I don't know that it has ever happened. Most likely they need to attract businesses and people with alot of money to blow and convince them to sit out in the freezing cold and snow to watch the super bowl. It's just not practical. Let me get this straight ... Does anybody on this board really believe that the Super Bowl wouldn't sell out if it were played in a cold weather city? Sorry, I ain't buyin' it. But let's just say that were the case because of the way tickets are distributed (to casual fans), with the real fans of both teams being, in most cases, shut out from attending. Wouldn't playing the game in the cold weather, theoretically discourage the casual fan from purchasing tickets, and open up more tickets for fans of those teams playing in the big game? You could make that argument. Either way, the stadium would be packed ... you could bet the house on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neckdemon Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 personally i think it would be awesome to see a superbowl played in a blizzard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 If NY is chosen and weather is crappy, it will be the last SB played in a northern area without a dome. The most boring games are those where both team struggle to make a FG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIGHT STALKER Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 If NY is chosen and weather is crappy, it will be the last SB played in a northern area without a dome. The most boring games are those where both team struggle to make a FG. Sometimes I wonder if the SB is actually about the "game" itself. As some have pointed it out in another thread similar to this one, money talks and a lot of money will be generated in the NY Met area. Personally, I would prefer the game be played under ideal conditions...and ideal conditions is not freezing temps and winds blowing snow from one end zone to another...not saying that would happen, but chances could be real good in that scenario to happen...especially in Feb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakeG Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 If NY is chosen and weather is crappy, it will be the last SB played in a northern area without a dome. The most boring games are those where both team struggle to make a FG. I see you are terrible at math too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 To think if the West Side stadium had been built there would be no question as to the 2014 Super Bowl being in NYC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 personally i think it would be awesome to see a superbowl played in a blizzard. That's what REAL football is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodWearsAGrayHoodie Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 It is not as much about the game as it is about the fans. The teams need to be able to play in adverse weather as even the warm/dome teams play road games in the cold. But the warm/dome teams fans don't watch road games in the cold. Jets fans who are STH know what the whether is like, live in the weather, own appropreate clothing, etc. Lets say the SB is Cards vs. Chargers...folks who may not have ever seen snow in their life and the coldest they have ever experienced is 45 degrees. Yeah, they will come to the game, but lets say the wind chill is -10, when the camaras pan the stadium at the end of the 3rd quarter it will be 3/4's empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damaged89 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Lets say the SB is Cards vs. Chargers...folks who may not have ever seen snow in their life and the coldest they have ever experienced is 45 degrees. Yeah, they will come to the game, but lets say the wind chill is -10, when the camaras pan the stadium at the end of the 3rd quarter it will be 3/4's empty. So these people are going to come all the way from the West Coast, drop thousands and thousands of dollars in order to travel to and attend the game, neglect to look at a forecast, and then dip out while the game is still in progress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 If NY is chosen and weather is crappy, it will be the last SB played in a northern area without a dome. The most boring games are those where both team struggle to make a FG. Did you see the part in the article that mentioned it looked like this was going to happen? Are you ready to admit that they didn't have to spend the money for a dome now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelticwizard Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Max, I just have to disagree with you here. The afternoon high temp for Florham Park on Feb 5, (taking a guess for the date), is 35 deg. Since the game starts at 6:30PM, we can assume the temperature will most likely be down in the high twenties at kickoff time. This is football's premiere event-look at all the debate and hoopla surrounding the halftime show-and you are going to play it in likely conditions like this? I can't read minds, if they vote to hold the SuperBowl in the new stadium, so be it. But I think that if they do so, there is an overwhelming chance that once the game is over, it will be considered a blunder by everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodWearsAGrayHoodie Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 So these people are going to come all the way from the West Coast, drop thousands and thousands of dollars in order to travel to and attend the game, neglect to look at a forecast, and then dip out while the game is still in progress? They will see the forecast and in addition to spending seveal thousand on travel and tickets they will also spend several hundred dollars on down parkas and long underwear fully intending to watch the entire game. But by halftime they will be too cold to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Did you see the part in the article that mentioned it looked like this was going to happen? Yes. Lots of things look like they will happen and dont. Are you ready to admit that they didn't have to spend the money for a dome now? Absolutely not. Why wouldnt you want the NFL combine in NY? What if the owners didnt have to charge PSLs because they could generate revenue year round with a roof over the stadium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 I see you are terrible at math too I see youre great at being a D nozzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.