Doc Posted May 25, 2010 Posted May 25, 2010 I was listening to Mike and Mike on the way to work and they were talking about this. Greenberg said he'd favor a NJ SB, while Golic (who played in the NFL) said no way. I found that interesting.
stinky finger Posted May 25, 2010 Posted May 25, 2010 I was listening to Mike and Mike on the way to work and they were talking about this. Greenberg said he'd favor a NJ SB, while Golic (who played in the NFL) said no way. I found that interesting. Of course. Greenburg is a Jets fan. The Jets are legit now. I get his stance. Golic surpises me. I figure he'd be in favor of playing in the muckety muck.
Maddog69 Posted May 25, 2010 Posted May 25, 2010 Sure. Why not? I'd love to see a Mud Bowl, a Snow Bowl and whatever else nature might throw into the mix. It's FOOTBALL! It should be played outside in the elements. I personally agree. The weather element is one of the things I enjoy most about football vs other sports. It doesn't matter what the weather is doing (within reason), the game goes on. Some of the most memorable games have been in disastrously bad weather. I think it would be great to see a game with snow. I think the Superbowl locatioin should simply rotate amongst the 32 teams. Every NFL city should get a chance to host the big game so they could show off their city on national TV and reap the benefits of the supposed financial windfall from hosting it. Why should that benefit be reserved for Florida and California teams (for the most part). I know it is a corporate schmoozefest and I know that the weather would potentially cause trouble with their annual Halftime shows featuring some washed up Rocker or Motown act, but I still think rotating the game amongst all of the NFL cities would be great.
stinky finger Posted May 25, 2010 Posted May 25, 2010 I just always think back to people making crazy old Ralph after votign agaisnt the CBA. The man, at 90, is more with it than most people in their "primes." Maybe true. Except when it comes to putting a winning product on the field. I am keeping an open mind to the new staff, mind you.
Mr. WEO Posted May 25, 2010 Posted May 25, 2010 Maybe he didn't understand it? Certainly likely. Like the new overtime rule.
Beerball Posted May 26, 2010 Author Posted May 26, 2010 If I were the Rooney family I'd be pissed. Why didn't Heinz field get a SB?
clearwater cadet Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 With the support the Bills need from the state, and are going to need in the future they should do anything to help out.
uncle flap Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 I personally agree. The weather element is one of the things I enjoy most about football vs other sports. It doesn't matter what the weather is doing (within reason), the game goes on. Some of the most memorable games have been in disastrously bad weather. I think it would be great to see a game with snow.I think the Superbowl locatioin should simply rotate amongst the 32 teams. Every NFL city should get a chance to host the big game so they could show off their city on national TV and reap the benefits of the supposed financial windfall from hosting it. Why should that benefit be reserved for Florida and California teams (for the most part). I know it is a corporate schmoozefest and I know that the weather would potentially cause trouble with their annual Halftime shows featuring some washed up Rocker or Motown act, but I still think rotating the game amongst all of the NFL cities would be great. great idea. i also want to mention that the argument that the super bowl shouldn't be influenced by weather is bogus. every other game has the potential for less than ideal conditions, including the conference championships. and what about late-season games with playoff implications that are played in a blizzard? as evidenced in this thread and elsewhere on the board, some of the most memorable super bowls (and games in general) have been played in notable weather. you wanna play the pro bowl in hawaii or cali or fla every year? fine.
TheLynchTrain Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Who cares? He's going to be dead by then anyways
agardin Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 great idea. i also want to mention that the argument that the super bowl shouldn't be influenced by weather is bogus. every other game has the potential for less than ideal conditions, including the conference championships. and what about late-season games with playoff implications that are played in a blizzard? as evidenced in this thread and elsewhere on the board, some of the most memorable super bowls (and games in general) have been played in notable weather. you wanna play the pro bowl in hawaii or cali or fla every year? fine. I totally agree, rotate it through the league and let everyone have a chance to put on a great show. It would be a nod to all of the fans in every city that supports their teams year in and year out. I know the game is more for coporate sponsors than the average person and that would likely remain the case. The SB is at a point where it is it's own force and the TV,Coporate sponsors and everyone else will turn up if you held it in a corn field in Iowa. The CFL used to hold the Grey Cup in indoor stadiums until recently, they started rotating it and playing some of the games outdoors and it would seem everyone loves it. It is mighty cold in November in Regina but it brings the game back to the elements in which the game was meant to be played. Then again, if I were commissioner I would ban all domes.
hamtenp Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 If you can afford to go to the Superbowl, you should not be cribbing about the cost. Going to a Superbowl anywhere is expensive. So hypothetically if Buffalo ever goes to a Superbowl , whether it is played in NY or anywhere else, the well to do Buffalo fans who decide to go, can afford it anyways. No big deal. If you cannot afford to go, fry up your chicken wings at home, and enjoy the game. Why? They'll never hold a SB in Buffalo. And the odds of the Bills making the SB in 2014 are slim at best. I'd be curious to hear Ralph's reasoning. As you said, he's been right about league issue more then he's been wrong.
Albany,n.y. Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 If you can afford to go to the Superbowl, you should not be cribbing about the cost. Going to a Superbowl anywhere is expensive. So hypothetically if Buffalo ever goes to a Superbowl , whether it is played in NY or anywhere else, the well to do Buffalo fans who decide to go, can afford it anyways. No big deal. If you cannot afford to go, fry up your chicken wings at home, and enjoy the game. But if you win the ticket lottery & get a ticket at face, plus you can drive to the game, it becomes a lot more affordable. Winning the ticket lottery makes the game a lot more affordable. When the Bills played in Pasedena, Petrino won the ticket lottery, we got supersaver flights & we split everything in 1/2 & brought the entire weekend, including the game, in for around $750 each.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 If I were the Rooney family I'd be pissed. Why didn't Heinz field get a SB? Agreed. The Steelers are probably the franchise that has added the most value to the league. I always found it a joke that cities like Phoenix and Tampa got Super Bowls, when those teams for years did nothing to benefit the league. You should reward teams and cities that have added value to the league by putting up a quality product year after year.
rockpile Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Since when? Really, have you seen this team play in bad weather lately? PTR Corrected: Have you seen this team play <cut> lately?
rockpile Posted May 26, 2010 Posted May 26, 2010 Would you really want to see the Super Bowl played in weather like in the Bills/Dolts game? Have you seen my new avatar?
Thoner7 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 This sets the stage for Boston and Seattle to host as well I would think. They have newer stadiums and havent been eligible before. IF the Bills ever build a new stadium, we may have the opportunity too. They have held it in detroit multiple times, why not Buffalo?
Mr. WEO Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 This sets the stage for Boston and Seattle to host as well I would think. They have newer stadiums and havent been eligible before. IF the Bills ever build a new stadium, we may have the opportunity too. They have held it in detroit multiple times, why not Buffalo? Where would 60,000 visitors stay? What would they do?
JohnC Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Where would 60,000 visitors stay? What would they do? They would go to Toronto and party.
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 This sets the stage for Boston and Seattle to host as well I would think. They have newer stadiums and havent been eligible before. IF the Bills ever build a new stadium, we may have the opportunity too. They have held it in detroit multiple times, why not Buffalo? People hated the Jacksonville Super Bowl so I highly doubt they will ever consider Buffalo. Of course, Detroit and Minny have hosted SBs so who knows.
BB27 Posted May 27, 2010 Posted May 27, 2010 Ralph has always said the Super Bowl should be played in good weather conditions. He doesn't think weather conditions should affect the championship game. Interesting because the Bills are one of a handful of teams that might benefit from a wintry Super Bowl. Yeah, this team plays great in bad weather
Recommended Posts