2011 Superbowl Logo (partial)

[Mings]

Indianapolis has a very decent nightlife if you look in the right places. Stick with downtown (some are a lot better than others) or go up to Broad Ripple.

If you say Indy is boring, its because you didn't explore the city. I used to think it was boring to, until I opened my mind up.

[njmeadowlanders]

Well don't forget, Kansas City was awarded a Super Bowl contingent upon them getting that split-roof project with the Royals done...

And for the record, the Super Bowl promised to the Jets for their West Side Stadium which never happened was awarded to Miami, so they'll have it right around the corner in SB XLIV...

[Lee.]

Indianapolis has a very decent nightlife if you look in the right places.

Precisely. Like Chicago.

[andrewharrington]

Chicago has a huge nightlife. You can tumble out of a cab blindfolded and find an awesome place to eat/drink/hang out within a block.

I think the Super Bowl should be rotated to all the cities. The revenue it brings a local economy and the work the cities do to prepare for the game makes the metropolitan areas so much nicer. A Super Bowl in a place like Cleveland could bring the city a little bit closer back to its once-rich heritage.

[Guest]

You thought the sportswriters bitched when they had to go to Jacksonville? Wait until they have to spend early February in Buffalo! All cities are not created equal. The Super Bowl really should be limited to a specific rotation.

[whitedawg22]

I'm sure places like Indianapolis, Buffalo, Kansas City, and Green Bay would have excellent nightlife and lots of medium-sized city charm if you were to go visit. However, the question is whether there is ENOUGH nightlife, space, hotel rooms, transportation infrastructure, etc. to host 70,000 visitors at once without the place turning into a gridlocked hellhole. While you may know great bars and nightspots in Indianapolis, I really doubt there are enough of them to handle a crowd of that size.

This was seen in the Jacksonville SB - fine city by all accounts, but it just can't handle that many visitors at once and keep them entertained.

[VitaminD]

I think some people are losing the point.

The NFL is a business, first and foremost.

As such, they do what they do with an eye on their sponsors, who deliver them truckloads of money annually.

I am sure that every NFL city has some nightlife, and there are parts of every place that would be worth seeing. But we're not talking about you, me and a group of friends hitting the bars and clubs for a night on the town. We're talking about wining and dining multimillionaires who run the multibillion dollar corporations that have made the NFL flush with cash. We're talking about all of the beautiful people who flock to these events, to see and be seen. We're talking about media and functionaries from all over the world showing to cover and be a part of the biggest sporting event in the United States.

Don't be offended if the NFL (or many of the rest of us) doesn't think [insert your city here] is hip or trendy enough to be worthy of the Super Bowl. I'm sure you could have a good time in almost any city in the country. But it's not about the average person, or even the season ticket holder. The NFL is pandering for the suits. The suits want to be entertained where it's warm, and the pretty girls can wear bikinis (or less). They want to party at the very hottest nightclubs and eat at the very best restaurants. They want to be among the beautiful people and play the part of VIP to the very last. And which cities do the best jobs of this? The cities that have the weather and the economy that is largely centered around tourism and hospitality: South Florida, New Orleans, Southern California, Arizona. Sorry, Detroit, Jacksonville, Indianapolis... Orchard Park... Boston; it's nothing personal.

[jerseyfla]

Florida (minus Jacksonville). Just my personal opinion.

I don't know why everyone keeps bashing Jacksonville's hosting of Super Bowl XXXIX, sure Jax is a midsized military driven market (ala San Antonio) that didn't have a lot of lodging and nightlife plus that year the weather was not as cold as, if the Super Bowl would've been played there in January 2003, it was in the 30s in the upper 2/3rds of the state that week. I think the sportswriters were expecting "Tourist Weather" like Miami, Orlando and Tampa but Jax doesn't get too warm in February just like San Francisco. But Alltel Stadium is a fantastic stadium that doesn't have too many frills, The Bud Zone was nice addition to the stadium and it shows by the fact that Jax was chosen to host the ACC Championship game for the first few years and also they host the Gator Bowl and the Florida-Georgia Game.

Plus, I find it bulls*** that Miami got awarded a Super Bowl 3 years after this one when there was really nothing majorly wrong with Houston, Atlanta (luxury boxes), Jacksonville (not enough hotels, mild weather), or even San Diego (old Stadium) hosting the game.

[speedy]

I think some people are losing the point.

The NFL is a business, first and foremost.

As such, they do what they do with an eye on their sponsors, who deliver them truckloads of money annually.

I am sure that every NFL city has some nightlife, and there are parts of every place that would be worth seeing. But we're not talking about you, me and a group of friends hitting the bars and clubs for a night on the town. We're talking about wining and dining multimillionaires who run the multibillion dollar corporations that have made the NFL flush with cash. We're talking about all of the beautiful people who flock to these events, to see and be seen. We're talking about media and functionaries from all over the world showing to cover and be a part of the biggest sporting event in the United States.

Don't be offended if the NFL (or many of the rest of us) doesn't think [insert your city here] is hip or trendy enough to be worthy of the Super Bowl. I'm sure you could have a good time in almost any city in the country. But it's not about the average person, or even the season ticket holder. The NFL is pandering for the suits. The suits want to be entertained where it's warm, and the pretty girls can wear bikinis (or less). They want to party at the very hottest nightclubs and eat at the very best restaurants. They want to be among the beautiful people and play the part of VIP to the very last. And which cities do the best jobs of this? The cities that have the weather and the economy that is largely centered around tourism and hospitality: South Florida, New Orleans, Southern California, Arizona. Sorry, Detroit, Jacksonville, Indianapolis... Orchard Park... Boston; it's nothing personal.

Very well said. Bravo my good man, bravo.

[KevinMcD]

There is NO WAY Buffalo/OP could host a Super Bowl, they would have people staying in Rochester & in the Falls. The stadium is only approx. 3 mins from my house and there is only 1 hotel for more than 100 people closer than the city. The city is a nice small sized city but does not have the convention space, hotel rooms, or public transportation. OP can only reached by car or bus. The only subway in Buffalo runs probably 10 miles? along Main St., Downtown. There is a pretty good nightlife but only downtown. There are local bars around the stadium but not enough for 75,000+ visitors. If they ever develop the waterfront Buffalo would be a great city. But still it does not have the type of stuff for a Super Bowl. Plus the No Fun League won't have a game outside in the cold. So no Superbowl for Buffalo/Green Bay/Cleveland.

[meetthemets]

I'm sure places like Indianapolis, Buffalo, Kansas City, and Green Bay would have excellent nightlife and lots of medium-sized city charm if you were to go visit. However, the question is whether there is ENOUGH nightlife, space, hotel rooms, transportation infrastructure, etc. to host 70,000 visitors at once without the place turning into a gridlocked hellhole.

No one wants travel through 18 feet of snow and sit in sub-freezing temperatures in early February to watch the Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with the nightlife in those markets.

[Cola]

Indianapolis has a very decent nightlife if you look in the right places. Stick with downtown (some are a lot better than others) or go up to Broad Ripple.

If you say Indy is boring, its because you didn't explore the city. I used to think it was boring to, until I opened my mind up.

That is enough to tell me the nightlife sucks. If you have to look that hard my friend, it sucks. I know every city has it's hidden gems and local spots, but it isn't that serious. Either you've got it or you don't.

Besides, we know how to party in the South.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

Everyone keeps talking about how cold it is Indy and how a Super Bowl shouldn't be in the cold.

....Isn't Lucas Oil going to be indoors?

Anyway, Mitch Daniels can go suck an egg for all I care. Jackass.

[andysoccer12]

Nice logo, much better than XLI or XLII

[tommytimp]

[No one wants travel through 18 feet of snow and sit in sub-freezing temperatures in early February to watch the Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with the nightlife in those markets.

Detroit did okay, the weather there could have been a gamble. (Of ourse a cold-weather city will never get the game without a dome.) The city fathers did their best with the whole "winter carnival" thing, but obviously our corporate overlords want to walk around in shorts, while their arm candy rented for the week lounges poolside in bikinis.

27,000 hotel rooms, am I correct? That's the threshold?

[SHoUP]

Why not have the Super Bowl in Los Angeles every year, so they make up for not having a franchise there?

[ReginaCanuck]

I find it fairly ironic that it's raining in Miami tonight.

[jkrdevil]

Florida (minus Jacksonville). Just my personal opinion.

I don't know why everyone keeps bashing Jacksonville's hosting of Super Bowl XXXIX, sure Jax is a midsized military driven market (ala San Antonio) that didn't have a lot of lodging and nightlife

Well I guess your right, besides not having those necessary things and having all the traffic problems Jacksonville did a fine job hosting.

[fufkin]

I think the rotation for the Super Bowl is going to be limited for the time being to Tampa (2009), Miami (2010), Phoenix (2008), Atlanta, New Orleans and Houston. San Diego is probably out unless they build a new stadium.

[illinirox1]

[No one wants travel through 18 feet of snow and sit in sub-freezing temperatures in early February to watch the Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with the nightlife in those markets.

Detroit did okay, the weather there could have been a gamble. (Of ourse a cold-weather city will never get the game without a dome.) The city fathers did their best with the whole "winter carnival" thing, but obviously our corporate overlords want to walk around in shorts, while their arm candy rented for the week lounges poolside in bikinis.

27,000 hotel rooms, am I correct? That's the threshold?

Detroit did do an okay job, but of course, the week of the Super Bowl and Winter Blast it rained and temperatures went over 40 degrees.

I agree with the general consensus that the NFL caters to VIPs and warm weather cities get the nod most of the time. I'm sure any city could put together a good show for the Super Bowl, but in the end they wouldn't generate enough revenue/ celebrity cameos for the NFL compared to Miami, Atlanta, et al.