sportsjabber.net

Basically, Super Bowls have, in the past, been held only in warm weather areas or areas that have Domes on their Stadiums. The vast majority of those being in warm weather areas. In fact, Twenty-six out of forty-four Super Bowls have been played in one of three locations: New Orleans, (nine times), the Greater Miami area (ten times), and the Greater Los Angeles area (seven times). Two other locations make up for another 7 games, San Diego (three times), and Tampa, (four times). That is thirty-three out of the current forty-four games.

Traditionally, the NFL does not award Super Bowls to stadiums that are located in climates less than 50°F unless the field is completely covered by a dome, or more lately, retractable roof. Only 3 Super Bowls have been played in Northern cities. A Super Bowl was awarded to Kansas City, but only conditionally, and when they were unable to raise all of the funds for the renovations to the Stadium, the Super Bowl was moved to another area. A similar carrot was dangled for the New York Jets, and retracted when the city and state could not agree on the funding for a retractable roof on West Side Stadium. Then later, in an apparent retraction of the cold weather rule, Meadowlands Stadium was chosen for the Super Bowl in 2014, despite the fact that it does not have a retractable roof.

There are other rules surrounding the choosing of a Super Bowl venue, of course, ie. size of the city and surrounding areas (there must be enough hotels, motels and restaurants willing and able to deal with the influx of visitors during a Super Bowl week), and the existing (although likely changing soon), rule that there must be an NFL team in the area of consideration. (I say that this rule is likely to change soon, because there has been a lot of talk about taking the Super Bowl to London, an area neither of warm weather nor having an NFL team).

OK….enough about the so-called rules that guide the decisions that surround a Super Bowl venue. We’ve seen enough to realize that most of the rules can be broken when chosen, especially when money or the rebuilding of a stadium is involved. This is especially true now that there is the possibility of taking our big game overseas.

I maintain that the Super Bowl is AMERICAN FOOTBALL HISTORY, and has been for XLIV (forty-four) years. Strangely enough, the name Super Bowl was introduced by Lamar Hunt as a temporary name, until a better could be introduced. As you all know, the name holds today. Super Bowl Sunday is considered a defacto American Holiday. I feel that taking the game outside of the USA just isn’t right.

But my question really involves the cold weather rule. Is it necessary? Would playing in the cold, or damp, or even snow stop any fans from showing up to the biggest game of the season? And, since every other game of the year is expected to be played under whatever conditions players find themselves in, from the thin air at Envesco Stadium, the questionable conditions at Arrowhead, the wind at Soldier field, the possible blizzards at Lambeau, to the heat at Cowboys Stadium if you play there early in the season. Anyway, you get the idea.

Players travel across the country and play in whatever conditions they find, realizing that in the next week, or the next, that someone will be traveling to their home, to play in their conditions. And if teams play with any degree of competence, stadiums fill. Period. Weather conditions do not matter one iota.

So, if teams play all year under questionable conditions, and stadiums fill regardless of wind, rain, heat or snow, why do we change the rules for the final game of the season? Why must we insist on warm weather areas to accommodate those teams that are not used to playing in snow? Of course it is POSSIBLE that it will snow on Super Bowl Sunday in a cold weather area, but even at Lambeau, there won’t be a blizzard every week!

I am here saying that it is necessary not for the football teams, not for the money raised, and not for the Super Bowl itself. As long as the city is big enough, and there is an NFL team in the area, I believe that they deserve the opportunity to host the big game. Since Super Bowl venues are awarded years in advance of the games themselves, there are no surprises. In a way, it would level the playing field.

And, in case you couldn’t tell, I am completely against the idea of taking the Super Bowl overseas. The Pro Bowl, perhaps, as it might encourage the people who have the honor of being chosen to remember that it IS an honor, and to show up. The Super Bowl, in my mind, for as long as there is a stadium willing and able to host it, belongs in NFL territory. I know that not all of my opinions are popular ones. I don’t expect them to be. This is, however, the way I believe it should be.

http://forums.sportsjabber.net/sjforums/showthread.php?t=55610