Gillette Stadium apparently has a seating capacity of 68,756 – although they also have an SRO section, I think. If 70,000 is the SB requirement I’m surprised that Bob Kraft didn’t put in another 1500 seats when they built it; unless he figured that a bid was out of the question due to the climate.
Ever since this was floated as a trial balloon by the NFL, I’ve thought about it. The thing that bothers me that this is all about NYC, and that’s just bullshit. If it was a domed stadium, no problem. But it’s not, and there is no reason that a game as important as the Super Bowl should be played outdoors. Especially when you consider the cost associated with each ticket. It’s turned into an event, a corporate vacation, and something that is not for the average fan. It hasn’t been for decades.
To play the most important game of the season to a cold, outdoor venue simply makes no sense. So what’s the answer? All together now! MONEY!
Of course it’s money. That’s what everything always boils down to.
However,
If the NFL would go back to the idea of the Super Bowl being played in the stadium of the team with the best record in the game, then I’d be all for the Super Bowl being played anywhere. It seems to me that the potential to have a Super Bowl played in one team’s home stadium would be a tremendous motivational goal. I’m a Steeler fan, and I think a Super Bowl in Pittsburgh would be fantastic. It would also suck weather-wise, as the wind blowing off the river can get rather cold at night, and if you get some nasty rain, sleet, or snow, it could prove to be a nasty spectator experience. But so what? New Jersey in February is no picnic, and if the kickoff is 6:30 or so at night, it’s going to be cold. The game lasts over 4 hours now, so if the game isn’t close, the second half could see a half-empty stadium.
That’s why this bothers me so much. There is no other reason to have this game in a northern stadium except for giving the NYC metro area a game because, well… they are NYC. And that’s not a good enough reason.
As a fan, however, I’d love to see the Super Bowl played in the home stadium of the team that earned it through their play throughout the year. That would include New England, Green Bay, Buffalo… you name it. But if the NFL would never consider holding a Super Bowl in Philadelphia, why on earth is NY/NJ a viable location?
And before people tell me that there is so much to do in NY, the game is in NJ, and the stadium is approximately 7 miles away from Manhattan. Not exactly within walking distance. If a nor’easter comes crashing up the coast, people will be trapped where ever they happen to be staying. So instead of playing golf in Phoenix, they will be freezing their ass off in a hotel room in NJ.
No thanks.
Man, between here and PFT, I don’t think I’ve ever seen such sour grapes, baseless doomsaying, whining and flat-out ignorance about the NYC area.
Fortunately, this is going to end up being looked at a few years from now with a “Hey, remember how pantie-twisted people got when this was first announced? Man, talk about a bunch of Chicken Littles” attitude.
I am loving the idea. Of course, I’ve been saying for years that I want to see the Super Bowl played in Lambeau during a recreation of the Ice Bowl.
It’s football. Play in weather, ya wimps.
I disagree. I live in the NYC metro area, so I don’t have any “flat-out ignorance” about the area.
For me, it boils down to the hypocrisy. The NFL has been telling us for four decades now that the biggest game of the year must be played in either a great weather city, or a city with a dome (or both).
Now, the NY teams are getting a new stadium built for them, and they immediately get the next Super Bowl available. That’s the bullshit I’m referring to.
If I had a chance to go to Lambeau field and see the Ice Bowl, I’d do it in a heartbeat. I can sit outside and freeze for an afternoon or evening, especially if my team is one of the two playing. So I, for one, hope that the 2014 Super Bowl opens up the chance for the NFL to go back to the idea that the game can be played anywhere, and if they could tie that to the record of the participants, all the better.
But they won’t, and we all know it. (If I’m wrong, I’m happy to eat any and all crow thrown at me. I’d love to see a Steeler-Packer Super Bowl. Either city would be fine with me.
It’s football, not Bob Ross’ Joy of Painting. Football should be played outside. The AFC and NFC Championships are played outside, the Super Bowl shouldn’t be any different. It’s just another example of the sanitation of the game for prissy little fans who only like to see huge passing games.
Precisely why I don’t give a shit about the “fans” attending. I couldn’t care less if some scantily clad trophey whore can’t wear her Versace. Let her give the ticket to some drunk, 300 pound guy who is willing to lose his nipples to frostbite so he can show off his team’s colors in body paint.
I’m curious how you think it will make more money in a colder clime city than a warmer clime city.
New York seems the logical place to have a cold weather superbowl - obviously they have the transport and hotel logistics, they’ll have a new stadium, etc. I don’t really mind them favoring new york - unless it’s a one time special exception that’ll never happen again because the only place they’ll consider is NYC.
Still, it’d be awesome to have some bad weather games. Hell, I’d go as far as banning domes on new stadiums if I were king.
This is a video of the walk home from the stadium of probably what was my favorite game to watch ever, though, so clearly I’m a bit extreme in my preferences.
It’s not the wind and snow in that video, it’s the fact that they’re Browns fans. They’re probably trying to chew gum at the same time. 
You’re my new hero…
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Green Bay has as much capacity as necessary.
Did you read my entire post? Just curious. Because I agree with you and everyone else that believes that the Super Bowl should be like every other football game. Played outdoor and in the elements.
Hence, my use of the word hypocrisy. Try reading my two posts again. The NFL has been telling us for 40+ years that the game should have no elements as a part of the game. All of a sudden, the biggest game of the year can be played in a poor weather city. That’s bullshit. It’s no coincidence that NY/NJ is getting the first outdoor Super Bowl AFTER they built a new stadium. Apparently, the old stadium at the Meadowlands wasn’t good enough for a Super Bowl, but the new one is? Why is that? It’s outdoor, exposed to the elements, the weather will be bad… so what’s the difference?
I don’t believe I have to explain this, but the comment about money has nothing to do with warm weather vs. cold weather. It has everything to do with NY/NJ getting the money for a Super Bowl. I’m sure Philadelphia could use the influx of the millions that the Super Bowl brings. Or Green Bay. Or Pittsburgh. Or Cleveland. Pick a city. I’d be happy to freeze to watch the Super Bowl.
So even though it was a bad idea, because they’ve never done it before means they should have continued with that bad idea? At no time should they have changed it? Or perhaps when they finally decided to change it, they should have went with a run-down stadium and not a new one?
Honestly – I’m not seeing a single worthwhile argument from any of the anti-NY/SB contingent.
I don’t even view it as a NY angle anymore. The NFL has opened the floodgates, intentional or not. If the 2014 SB is hugely successful in spite of the weather, then not only will Goodell and company look like forward thinkers, the rest of us shmucks will be calling for more!
Win/Win!!
Holy Christmas… I’ll type slower.
Listen. It was a bad idea to take the Super Bowl away from the field that belonged to one of the two teams that were in the game.
I can’t speak for everyone, but the ONLY reason I’m against this game going to NY/NJ is because it flies in the face of everything the NFL has been telling their fans. If it was going ANYWHERE other than NY/NJ, then I’d be fine with it. I think there have been cold weather cities that have pushed for the Super Bowl in the past and have been basically been told “no dice” because of the potential of a bad weather championship game.
If, as **FoieGrasIsEvil **states
I see this win/win scenario a potential also. This would be my favored outcome. I just don’t believe it will ever happen, no matter how much the fans bitch and moan.
With all of the corporate sponsors, corporate money, and week-long corporate partying in a southern city, I imagine the pressure to keep the Super Bowl in climate friendly venues will be high. NY/NJ has a great advantage of being near one of the greatest cities in the world. But Philadelphia is about an hour + by train *south *of NYC, is also a great city with a lot to do, and it will never sniff a Super Bowl. Either will Baltimore with the Inner Harbor location. Washington DC? It’s never been considered, and Washington is a great city.
That’s just 3 cities on the eastern seaboard that would be potentially better sites than NYC simply for the weather, and each of the cities I mentioned could easily host a Super Bowl.
Here’s for hoping that **FoieGrasIsEvil **is correct, and the floodgates are open to other bad weather cities. I’d pay to see a championship game in Lambeau, Chicago… anywhere!
Well, they could just have Prince again. Being from Minneapolis, he’s surely put together a cold-weather band.
THis does not open the doors for other cold weather venues. THis is a case of the cache of NYC trumping the cold weather negatives. I’msorry Boston, Philly, Cincy, you don’t have close to that media presence and it factor. The NFL isn’t doing this because they want to expand to cold weather sites, they are doing it because they want to be in NYC. Full stop. I am not trying to be snarky, I am just calling it as I see it.
The NFL consistently denies its all-too-obvious NYC bias. I agree that NYC was selected because it’s NYC, but the NFL won’t admit that. If Chicago wanted to host, the NFL can’t say no just because it’s not New York.
Just to note that the Super Bowl, since its inception, has been held at a neutral, pre-selected site.
The famous “Ice Bowl” was the 1967 NFL Championship; that was before the NFL/AFL merger had been finalized. After beating the Cowboys for the NFL championship in Green Bay that day, the Packers traveled to Miami to play the Raiders (the AFL champs) in Super Bowl II.
Who are these enigmatic others who built the stadium for the Giants and Jets? Are you guys under the mistaken impression that this stadium was built with taxpayer money? Because it wasn’t. The stadium was payed for by the Giants and Jets.
No, you don’t. You believe it should be played in the home stadium of the team with the better record. That’s a completely different point. (Which I like, but will never happen because they need a huge amount of lead time to get the logistics set up. Not knowing which city you’ll need book 50,000 hotel rooms until two weeks before the game will never fly.) You made it very clear that you are against outdoor cold weather neutral sites. Which is why people have referred to your position as panty-waisted.
Even worse, you later say you’d be fine with it being in any cold weather outdoor neutral site except NY/NJ. Which is, IMO, stupid. The whole point of this exercise is to try it once and see how it goes. With that in mind, of course you go with the best shot for a good experience. NYC is the best shot for a good experience.
The hypocrisy you see doesn’t exist. It would be like crying hypocrisy when they played that regular season game in Mexico 5 years (or so) ago. It’s not hypocrisy; it’s trying something new out. Big difference.
If you put this game in any other outdoor cold weather neutral market, the odds would be slightly worse of having a great experience. In other words, putting it in NY/NJ first maximizes the chances of getting to do it again in other cold weather markets.
What reports are you watching? Goodell and the owners who voted for it have been repeatedly stating in interviews that NYC was selected specifically because it’s NYC. They cited the unique situation there as the primary reason: Two teams, new stadium, biggest market in the county, 9/11, the Mara family (who are largely responsible for the NFL’s revenue sharing model,) etc…
What they’re not admitting is that this will set a precedent hopefully allowing them to do this in other cold weather venues. That’s the elephant in the room that Goodell won’t admit but clearly wants.