Which Super Bowl site makes the best host city?

February 02, 2010

South Florida has it all
Mike Berardino

Sun Sentinel

I'm tempted to say New Orleans, which has hosted the Super Bowl nine times (second on the all-time list) and, even post-Katrina, still does big events like no other town. There is, after all, only one Bourbon Street. Just ask John Matuszak and the old-school Oakland Raiders.

Once-sleepy Arizona is coming on strong as a game site, thanks to that gorgeous new stadium in Glendale, and Tampa is deserving of a fifth crack at the big game. San Diego has the best weather, but the stadium is a dump.

In the end, the answer is obvious.

When you take all factors into account - location, weather, convenience, nightlife, infrastructure and, yes, facililty (sorry, Roger Goodell) - how can any place compete with South Florida?


Give Detroit some love
Sam Farmer

Los Angeles Times

The best Super Bowl city is Detroit.

You see, 99 percent of the people watching the Super Bowl are watching it on TV from another locale. Frankly, they don't care that you can get a great dinner at Joe's Stone Crab in Miami, or that you had Café du Monde beignets for breakfast in New Orleans, or that you got a tee time at Torrey Pines in San Diego. All they care about is that it's a good and entertaining game.

So considering the local revenue the Super Bowl generatesand the boost to the hometown economy, why not stage the game in cities that could use it most? When it comes to cities with NFLteams, there's no more depressed economy than Detroit, a city so dependent on the declining fortunes of theauto industry.

What's the best Super Bowl city? The city that the Super Bowl is best for.


Miami a feel-good venue
Dan Pompei

Chicago Tribune

What makes the ideal Super Bowl city?

It has to be someplace you can count on really nice weather. It has to be a city that can handle crowds in terms of its roads, airport, restaurants and bars. It has to be someplace with a big central area where people can congregate and party.

And it helps if it has a modernstadium with all the amenities.

The closest to filling all of those qualifications is Miami. Sun Life Stadium isn't the best, but it's better than many. Coming to Miami just makes people feel good.

Many might say New Orleans is better, but you can't count on golf weather there in February. Tampa isn't bad, nor is Phoenix. And San Diego would be best of all if it had a decent stadium.


San Diego fits the bill
Mike Bianchi

Orlando Sentinel

Why is this even a debate? Why wouldn't you hold the Super Bowl every year in America's cleanest, most beautiful city - an idyllic setting in a region that has perfect weather year-round? I'm talking about San Diego, which aptly describes itself as "America's Finest City."

This place is more beautiful than Marilyn Monroe in "Some Like It Hot." San Diego has it all: great weather, happening nightlife, sugary beaches, scenic mountains, spectacular golf courses. It has everything Los Angeles has - except the traffic, smogand TMZ.

This is a city that can fulfill every desire Super Bowl revelers might have. You can party American-style in the famed Gaslamp District or Latin-style just across the border in Tijuana.

Besides, what better place to bring the circus to town than a city with a great zoo.


Discuss this story and others in our talk forums Most recent sports talk forum topics:

More sports talk forums: Orioles | Ravens | Pro Sports | College | Lacrosse | High School | Outdoors
Note: In-story commenting has been temporarily disabled due to technical issues. We are working to correct the issue and will bring back this feature in the future. In the meantime, please use our talk forums to discuss stories.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.