No Superbowl 2011 for You!

Chaldfont

First Post
No! Indy lost out to Dallas! Gee, I guess the ticket sales for 30,000 extra seats is pretty compelling...

At least we still get Gen Con.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Hardly odd - the NFL only likes warm climates for the Superbowl. Part of it is the owners like warm weather, but also the media does too, and tends to complain and/or have a more negative tone to the coverage when it's cold. Remember back when they had it in Atlanta, and there was a cold snap there? Whine whine whine from all the people covering the superbowl
 



Lewis526 said:
Don't both Detroit and Atlanta have domed stadiums?

Indeed they do, but many of the ancillary parties and such are traditionally held outdoors. When all the bigwigs who attend those events have to freeze their butts off, I'm sure they complain.

When Detroit first hosted the Super Bowl (1982, IIRC), it was a below-zero windchill on the weekend of the game. Yes, the game was indoors, but travel to the game was no fun. Probably part of the reason why it took 20+ years for the game to get back there.

Minneapolis has a dome, too, but I don't think they've ever hosted the Super Bowl.
 

I think out of 45 superbowls (including upcoming ones), 3 have been in cold weather cities. Detroit twice and Minneapolis once (I think in the early 90s or late 80s).

It's really because of the media circus that surrounds the game. It's a lot easier if the weather is nice, and reporters and such are in better moods. And the owners are probably not used to cold weather, as most people avoid it when they can afford to (plus many are elderly).

KC was supposed to get Superbowl 49 (2015? I think) but they blew it because it was contingent on getting taxes to improve their stadium, I think.
 



Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Remove ads

Top