FightForOldDC21 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 says a reason why washington never gets a super bowl is because of the terrorist attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsMEaWin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 next it will be high milk prices.....please!!!!! I bet they have one in New York once that stadium is finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 i think it is more because it is too cold here. I would rather go a superbowl in LA, or San diago , not DC or NY. Super bowls are more for parties. No way they should put it in a cold whether place again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsMEaWin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 i think it is more because it is too cold here. I would rather go a superbowl in LA, or San diago , not DC or NY.Super bowls are more for parties. No way they should put it in a cold whether place again. That is exactly why there is noone showing up at these damn New Years Eve events in New York Huh. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 That is exactly why there is noone showing up at these damn New Years Eve events in New York Huh. LOL super bowl parties have a lot of stars. Stars like going to warm places. No debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 What a bunch a crap. Threat of terrorism eliminates DC but NY stays in the running? I can't think of any city/region that is more secure from a terrorist strike than Washington DC. I walk to work from the Metro stop every morning and every so often the most powerful man on the planet (and probably the #1 target of terrorists) drives by in a motorcade. Does ESPN really think DC doesn't know how to handle the highest level of security? If the Super Bowl itself is a target, I'd feel much more secure with it being held in a city accustomed to a high level of security (DC,NY etc) rather than a place like Jacksonville. It's got to be weather concerns not terrorists that is keeping DC from getting a Super Bowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsMEaWin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 super bowl parties have a lot of stars. Stars like going to warm places. No debate. Hmmm stars don't show up to New York.....on New Years at that.....I think there is a debate there. JMOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flexxskins Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Pardon me if I am wrong, but hasn't Washington been denied several times even before 9/11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsMEaWin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Pardon me if I am wrong, but hasn't Washington been denied several times even before 9/11? You are absolutely correct. The NFL has their heads where the sun don't shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefPowhatan17 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 It's a weather related issue. The SB is about revenue and having a SB in DC, where the Stadium is out in the middle of no where doesn't help the marketing.:logo::logo::logo: Plus: We don't have the real deal big screens at the stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsMEaWin Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 It's a weather related issue. The SB is about revenue and having a SB in DC, where the Stadium is out in the middle of no where doesn't help the marketing.:logo::logo::logo:Plus: We don't have the real deal big screens at the stadium. Hence Detroit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsD Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 No way, if the Jets built that stadium in Manhattan they would have gotten a SB. It's because we don't have a dome or jumbotron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I liked how Lamar Hunt even said the conference championship games should be played on neutral sites too. Kind of negates the regular season don't you think. You play for that advantage. Maybe if the Chiefs actually got to one he'd feel differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Detroit comes with ten times the amount of terrorism concerns that DC ever would. Points: 1. Water- much more water to cover near the stadium than in DC 2. Canadian Border- Much more security measure needed to ensure that the bad guys don't make it into the city up to months before the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frunobulax Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 i think it is more because it is too cold here. I would rather go a superbowl in LA, or San diago , not DC or NY.Super bowls are more for parties. No way they should put it in a cold whether place again. I think that Super Bowls should be held in any NFL team's city. If these overpaid Cliff Beefpiles can't handle a little climatic adversity, then they shouldn't be playing. The same goes for all the media wussies as well. "Oh, dear! Does this town have any good upscale restaurants?" "There aren't enough clubs here to suit my taste for the night life." "The hotels here suck." Please... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Shot Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 i don't care where the superbowl is as long as the Washington Redskins are playing in it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Seriously, a Superbowl here would suck Take me somewhere where its warm, lots of parties and hot girls It should probably only be in LA, Pheonix, New Orleans and Miami Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no1fanofno21 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 What a bunch a crap.Threat of terrorism eliminates DC but NY stays in the running? I can't think of any city/region that is more secure from a terrorist strike than Washington DC. I walk to work from the Metro stop every morning and every so often the most powerful man on the planet (and probably the #1 target of terrorists) drives by in a motorcade. Does ESPN really think DC doesn't know how to handle the highest level of security? If the Super Bowl itself is a target, I'd feel much more secure with it being held in a city accustomed to a high level of security (DC,NY etc) rather than a place like Jacksonville. It's got to be weather concerns not terrorists that is keeping DC from getting a Super Bowl. DC always gets the raw deal, NY is home to where the NFL headquarters are, oh and didnt NY get 9 home games this year. The NFL is letting the super bowl be in NY cause they werent good enough to get the olympics. FNY. :gaintsuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_good_brotha Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I disagree with keeping the Super Bowl only in warm areas. These guys playing are professionals. If weather concerns them so much, they should find another career. Besides the weather here hasn't really been that cold this year. Just 2 days ago it was around 65 degrees outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basileus777 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 There are no football teams in NY, both the Jets and Giants play in New Jersey. The Meadowlands is not exactly a great place for a superbowl, why exactly does NY have a chance at a superbowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 super bowl parties have a lot of stars. Stars like going to warm places. No debate. yes, Detroit is tropical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunPortisRun Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Super bowls need to be in Domes. Who would want to sit in rain and watch a game if the majority of the fans have little interest in the teams playing? If Philly and the Bills are in the superbowl in zero degree weather, I would be watching it on TV. I'm not going to pay high ticket prices to sit in the rain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praise_gibbs Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 There are no football teams in NY, both the Jets and Giants play in New Jersey. The Meadowlands is not exactly a great place for a superbowl, why exactly does NY have a chance at a superbowl? Where is Buffalo? Canada? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmw2301 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Washington is a little to north, the weather could be bad. Can't see the superbowl here anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dent19 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 next it will be high milk prices.....please!!!!!I bet they have one in New York once that stadium is finished. there not going to build dome in nyc... says a reason why washington never gets a super bowl is because of the terrorist attacks we dont have a dome. and jan-feb is normally ice cold outside.. has there ever been an outside cold weather SB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.