Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Washington Post: Snyder: "Washington deserves a Super Bowl"

MattFancy

By MattFancy
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

JeffSchmeff

JeffSchmeff

Posted
Posted
Yup, got 17 years left on the lease. My personal prediction, based on nothing, is that 7-8 years from now we'll hear grumblings of a new stadium at the RFK site and a new place will go up within 12 years

Regardless of how long the loan is for, it could be bought out and sold to land developers. I've heard that land is valuable to real estate developers, and if it was in Snyder's best interests to sell and try to build a stadium in DC for a Superbowl or to support an Olympics, I think he'd do it. He keeps using that "we have a lease" argument as an effective no comment IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Titaw

Titaw

Posted
Posted
My opinion has always been the same

The Superbowl should ALWAYS be in the sunbelt

Miami, Tampa, New Orleans, Arizona, LA, San Diego

blah blah blah, chicks in bikini's, blah blah blah

blah blah blah blah

SHF you made the most valid point, BTW this ^ is what I read!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsfan1311

Skinsfan1311

Posted
Posted
Sigh.

Oh well, I'll live with a crappy stadium if we start winning :)

That's what we did at RFK.

RFK was a crap stadium.

Only the winning, (and tailgating), made it bearable. Dont' get me wrong, I loved RFK, because we kicked a lot of ass there, but the stadium was pretty bad.

We had some pretty bad seasons there too..

(not pointing you out D28...just using your post to hold up as an example for the folks who pine for good ol' RFK)

To those complaining about FedEx: WINNING seasons will make it a blast ;)

Give us a SB!

Hail!

This^^^^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HOF44

HOF44

Posted
Posted
That's what we did at RFK.

RFK was a crap stadium.

Only the winning, (and tailgating), made it bearable. Dont' get me wrong, I loved RFK, because we kicked a lot of ass there, but the stadium was pretty bad.

People really do romanticize RFK because of all the great memories. The stadium wasn't much, it was muti-purpose stadium of the era, like the Vet, Riverfront, etc. The team and the fans made it what we remember now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MurrayH81

MurrayH81

Posted
Posted

From my memory, what made RFK special (other than the performances by the team) were:

1. Flexing seating levels when the fans got rowdy, the shaking was awesome.

2. Noise level that could be acheived via fans alone.

3. Relatively innexpensive ticket prices led to having real fans there, not the "wine and cheese" crowd we see today.

4. Tailgating.

5. Panorama of historical buildings in the backdrop.

6. Easy Metro access.

No effort was taken to replicate any of those things at Fed-Ex field. Instead, the focus was on maximizing revenue.

I would also say that at this point, I am still not of the opinion that Snyder deserves to be able to host a SB. He needs an imporved track record in being an owner, and ensuring the fans (who are his customers) have a great experience at a more reasonable cost before he gets his payday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rumple_Stiltskin

Rumple_Stiltskin

Posted
Posted

fedex is not that bad of a stadium...then again i was sitting about 10 rows up in the LL (yellow seats) at the 50 yard line...the only complaint I have is trying to get around..i its like a sardene in a can trying to get through the crowd, even when i was up in the club level....the restraunts were full, i ended up at hooters sitting with my son in my lap at a table of a family i didnt know....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TD_washingtonredskins

TD_washingtonredskins

Posted
Posted

With the cat being out of the bag now, I think all major, longtime NFL cities should at least be considered. Why not reward the cities that have been NFL hubs for decades with a Super Bowl regardless of what the average high temperature is in February?

Cities like Green Bay, Washington, Kansas City, Denver, Philadelphia, San Francisco and/or Oakland, etc. deserve the right to host a Super Bowl if they want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
I think your opinion sucks.

:silly:

The Superbowl should ALWAYS be about football. Not chicks in bikinis, parties and weather. Football.

Well, you'll be disappointed to know that football is about money, and then money, and then more money, and then maybe football.

And FedEx is in a lousy location for a Super Bowl. People want to party in Landover Hills before and after the game? Yeah man,, no thanks. People want to catch the orange line downtown? Probably not, especially since you still have to drive on some major highways to get there, then park in New Carrolton... go thru SE....

The Super Bowl is in warm weather cities because of the two week party that comes along with it. (This is also why there's a two week wait between the championships and the Super Bowl) There's millions and millions of dollars at stake, and many cities have a better layout for the game, meaning ease of transportation from the stadium to the party sites.

As far as the elements go, I am with the purists who say that football is an outdoor game and the elements are a factor whether they like it or not. I am firmly against the suggestion of moving to all dome venues because of the weather. Football is about being able to overcome adversity, and sometimes that means weather.

Besides, how many of you flip on the Denver game or a Steelers game and see it snowing and say "ALRIGHT! This is going to be GREAT!"

We all do, because we all know that interesting weather makes for interesting wrinkles in the game. Who cares if it's sloppy? remember all the turnovers and freaky plays the rain caused in the IND/ CHI game? How much fun was that? I had a blast watching that game. And what do you know,, the finessé dome stadium Colts beat the Chicago friggin BEARS in bad weather. And soundly. Talk about opposite impressions!

Other than capacity, FedEx just isn't very fan-friendly for an event like the Super Bowl.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MattFancy

MattFancy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
With the cat being out of the bag now, I think all major, longtime NFL cities should at least be considered. Why not reward the cities that have been NFL hubs for decades with a Super Bowl regardless of what the average high temperature is in February?

Cities like Green Bay, Washington, Kansas City, Denver, Philadelphia, San Francisco and/or Oakland, etc. deserve the right to host a Super Bowl if they want to.

As cool as it would be to have the Super Bowl in Green Bay, there's no way that could happen. What is there to do in Green Bay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TD_washingtonredskins

TD_washingtonredskins

Posted
Posted
As cool as it would be to have the Super Bowl in Green Bay, there's no way that could happen. What is there to do in Green Bay?

Well, I'm not saying every city should be guaranteed one. I'm just saying that every city should be considered. This year, for example, the vote came down to NY/NJ, Tampa, and Miami (I think). At some point, I think most of the cities I mentioned should at least be included in that stage of the vote...for lack of a better phrase, they should be "on the table" to host.

If the voters find reasons why it wouldn't work, that's fine. Hell, I bet they will never go back to Jacksonville from what I read about that Super Bowl and it's in Florida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazy Levi

Crazy Levi

Posted
Posted
I can't support a SB in DC. I can understand $nyder wanting the revenue, but I don't want to deal with the gridlock and having to see/hear other teams fans walking around town in there garb.

Keep it in a warm place..

You haven't been to many Skins games lately have you? 20-50 percent of the crowd is generally wearing the opposing team's jersey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conn

Conn

Posted
Posted
The ONLY way DC gets a SB is with the new stadium, which I'm about to post a leaked diagram of in the other thread. It is AMAZING.

What are you talking about here? You never posted whatever this is in any other thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stophovr6

Stophovr6

Posted
Posted

Other than capacity, FedEx just isn't very fan-friendly for an event like the Super Bowl.

~Bang

I don't actually care that DC gets it, and I get the money thing. I'm just tired of it being an excuse to party in Florida and I agree with you on the weather.

Edit* And if it's really only about money, how the hell did Detroit get the gig? Pity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedSunday

RedSunday

Posted
Posted
We're stuck there for years to come anyways as the loan for it isn't paid off. Might as well put some money into it now that the cost of new HD Jumbo screens are reasonable. I can see Dan putting some money into FedEx each offseason to try to improve the game day experience since we're going to be there for a long time.

It's just not that but you are right , the infrastructure that was built for FED EX requires that the Skins stay for at least 8 more years unless DS wants to buy it out but if he did he couldn't afford the new place and one condition would be the sale of the old stadium (who would buy it).They have built Metro stops,housing ,a new Mall all becuase of that stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...