Didnt see that one. Usually the pampered that pay $1400 per ticket want it somewhere warm. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2010/05/new-york-super-bowl-2014-nfl-awards/1 I'm ok with the northern cities getting the big game.
If the Giants / Jets / Pittsburgh were in it... you'd see the most absurd scalped ticket prices ever!!!!
It's actually going to be at the Meadowlands in East Rutherford, New Jersey. Be prepared. Lock your stuff up now.
I thought the NFL wouldn't have a Superbowl where cold/snow could adversely affect the outcome. This is a mistake IMO.
this is how football is meant to be played...in any weather...games like the NYG vs Packers or Pats vs Raiders and the tuck rule make the games memorable in weather... go GMen!!
Plenty of NFL Championship games were played in adverse conditions "back in the day". What is more epic and memorable, playoff/title games like the Packers v Giants or the Packers v Cowboys Ice Bowl where its waaaaaay below zero, or a game played in Miami where its 82?
It's about time. Football is played in all weather, no reason why they can't play the super bowl in a northern climate. Because the fans might be too cold? Screw them, if they are football fans they wouldn't care. All cities should be able to host the big game, do it on a rotating basis.
Great. Come January 2014 not only do I get to hear everyone talk about football and look at me like I'm from Mars when I tell them I don't like it, now the game itself is going to invade my city.
The game should be played in the following cities and to hell with the weather its football. -Washington,Baltimore,Green Bay,Chicago,New York, Kansas City, etc. If your city has a lot of football history you deserve a superbowl in your town, period.
I'm all for football in the elements, but NY in February is ridiculous. It could be -30F. Weather is guaranteed to be a factor in that game. It would cease to be about who is the best team in those conditions. If northern cities want a SB, build a dome.
