Kraft wants to bring the Super Bowl to New England

[MoLewisrocks]

Scottsdale AZ is 20 miles from Glendale, AZ.
Boston is 22 miles from Foxboro.

I was at SB42 and most of the action was in Scottsdale and Tempe. Glendale is called Gundale by the locals and is in the middle of nowhere. There was a pig farm near the stadium. There was also an outdoor mall across from the stadium but that was it.

If youve never been to Dallas its huge and actually 3 cities: Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington.

Driving time to Foxboro in the middle of the night in June is <40 minutes. Drive time to Gillette during the week or on game day let alone in inclement weather is exponentially greater because of the limited access via Route 1. And any travel in the greater Boston area during what for the rest of us is a normal work week is a nightmare scenario under the best of circumstances and not remotely like traveling around Scottsdale-Tempe-Glendale which as I recall in itself was an issue the media harped on incessantly that week.

Not to mention the stadium only holds 68K. Most of the new and domed facilities hold 80-100K.

Businesses in Dallas who geared up for this event are going to be devastated when all is said and done. And that was due to a freak weather event that happens there once in a blue moon... Events like that aren't freaks here, they are the norm. Hell, here they are considered minor seasonal inconveniences. This week there are parking bans in force throughout the area because feet of snow over the last couple of weeks have overwhelmed public works departments. Even mass transit has been impacted. Not to mention the airports. New York/Jersey has the potential to be a debaucle, Foxboro/Boston/Providence has the potential to be a natural disaster. Detroit was a miserable pain in the ass, as Indy may be, but at least they had domes going for them if you can get there or get into them, as does Dallas.

Boston/Providence/Foxboro in February is a destination sane folks long to get away from, not flock to.

 

[upstater1]

Quote from Upstater1 i the Rodney Harrison interview thread:

Kurt, you seriously aren't aware that Rush called the Patriots Communists for coming out as a team? It's not political to point out that Rush Limbaugh thinks the Patriots are Communists. It's a fact!!

Really now!

Plus, you misunderstood what I meant by wrong road (my fault I wasn't clear). I didn't mean politics was the wrong road, I meant the interpretation of global warming. They don't call it "Local Warming" do they?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Sorry Upstater1 for making fun of your religious faith

 

[PatsDeb]

Scottsdale AZ is 20 miles from Glendale, AZ.
Boston is 22 miles from Foxboro.

I was at SB42 and most of the action was in Scottsdale and Tempe. Glendale is called Gundale by the locals and is in the middle of nowhere. There was a pig farm near the stadium. There was also an outdoor mall across from the stadium but that was it.

If youve never been to Dallas its huge and actually 3 cities: Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington.

It really doesn't compare because of the bottle neck known as Route 1. It is a rinky dink 2 lane road that is the only access to Gillette. It would be a nightmare to hold a SB there and expect everyone to drive to the game. The train line to Foxboro from Providence and Boston would have to be upgraded in a major way, and there would have to be shuttle buses to the stadium from outlying areas. Who is going to pay for that? The NFL? They should, but I doubt they will. Then they'd have to pray that there wasn't a blizzard the day of the game, because even us New Englanders can't operate normally if there is a blizzard going on. It's too much, logistically.

 

[Wolfpack]

Personally I think the whole "SB is a huge boon to the local economy" is a big lie. It benefits a select few, and is more than offset by higher costs paid by taxes.

Do you have any sort of evidence to support this contention? Fact is it's 100,000 people coming into the city for a few days. People gotta eat. People need a place to sleep. That alone is a pretty big influx. Why do you think the Boston Convention Center does handstands to try and get some national association to use their facilities?

Yes, I do realize the SB has been held in Detroit, Indy, MN, etc. From all accounts I have read the reaction was less than favorable and the amount spent by visitors was far less than in warmer locales - meaning it was more likely the local economy was hurt rather than helped by the event.

I'd be interested in seeing your references for that.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Maybe the NFL should just start and end the season a full month or two later. To me the old concept of a football season finishing up just before it started snowing was great.

Sorry, I grew up in New England. It starts snowing long before the football season ends.

It's not. February in Florida is about 60° in the day, about 50° at night (which is when the game is played). That sounds like perfect football weather to me. If you've ever vacationed there during that time of year you would wish you waited another six weeks; it's not remotely close to beach weather when the SB is played.

Again I must apologize for growing up in New England. For me perfect football weather is 20 degrees, blustery and flurries in the air. I was so happy that a domed stadium here in New England was never seriously considered.

 

[Wolfpack]

I wonder if he is wising up now? I doubt it; there is too much money and prestige at stake. But these Eskimo Bowls are not good for fans. Who wants to go to NYC/NJ at this time of year; it is disgusting enough in the warm weather but downright hostile now.

The Ice Bowls threaten the whole mystique and aura of Super Bowls; it is supposed to be a week-long party and celebration not a teeth-chattering game of survival. Even for the living-room-bound viewers such as myself it is much more enjoyable watching the silliness in say New Orleans than gray-skies-gray-suits-black-snow of NYC.

This pretty much represents what I feel is everything that is wrong with the Super Bowl. Call me crazy, but tI think the Super Bowl should be about crowing the champions of the National Football League. I don't think it should be about a week long party.

If you wanted a week long party, go to Mardi Gras. Leave the Super Bowl to those of us that want to watch championship caliber football.

 

[Wolfpack]

Scottsdale AZ is 20 miles from Glendale, AZ.
Boston is 22 miles from Foxboro.

I was at SB42 and most of the action was in Scottsdale and Tempe. Glendale is called Gundale by the locals and is in the middle of nowhere. There was a pig farm near the stadium. There was also an outdoor mall across from the stadium but that was it.

If youve never been to Dallas its huge and actually 3 cities: Dallas, Fort Worth and Arlington.

+1. People don't seem to understand geography. They think "the game is in Arlington, so the hotels in Dallas must be within 15-20 minutes of the stadium."

You could be staying in Dallas and be further away from the Arlington stadium than Providence is to Foxboro.

 

[Wolfpack]

Driving time to Foxboro in the middle of the night in June is <40 minutes. Drive time to Gillette during the week or on game day let alone in inclement weather is exponentially greater because of the limited access via Route 1. And any travel in the greater Boston area during what for the rest of us is a normal work week is a nightmare scenario under the best of circumstances and not remotely like traveling around Scottsdale-Tempe-Glendale which as I recall in itself was an issue the media harped on incessantly that week.

Not to mention the stadium only holds 68K. Most of the new and domed facilities hold 80-100K.

This is what I consider to be the most legitimate reason to avoid Foxboro, but let's not overstate things. The Superdome is not much bigger at 72,000. Qualcomm is not much bigger at 71,000. A lot of those venues expand for the Super Bowl and I think some smart engineer could figure out a way to a several thousand temporary seats to Gillette.

Businesses in Dallas who geared up for this event are going to be devastated when all is said and done. And that was due to a freak weather event that happens there once in a blue moon... Events like that aren't freaks here, they are the norm.

Ya, and that's why we know how to take care of such events. We got 20+ inches of snow and major thoroughfares were fine within a day or so. Dallas gets a little ice and the entire city is paralyzed for a week.

 

[Wolfpack]

It really doesn't compare because of the bottle neck known as Route 1. It is a rinky dink 2 lane road that is the only access to Gillette. It would be a nightmare to hold a SB there and expect everyone to drive to the game.

That's why they would make park & ride to take a bus mandatory, which wouldn't be the first time for a Super Bowl.

The train line to Foxboro from Providence and Boston would have to be upgraded in a major way, and there would have to be shuttle buses to the stadium from outlying areas. Who is going to pay for that? The NFL? They should, but I doubt they will. Then they'd have to pray that there wasn't a blizzard the day of the game, because even us New Englanders can't operate normally if there is a blizzard going on. It's too much, logistically.

They wouldn't need to upgrade any train service. That's silly. The league would arrange for shuttles (which they have done in the past). A blizzard or icestorm or whatever on the day of the game is a legitimate threat in several of the venues the NFL has selected in the past.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Driving time to Foxboro in the middle of the night in June is <40 minutes. Drive time to Gillette during the week or on game day let alone in inclement weather is exponentially greater because of the limited access via Route 1. And any travel in the greater Boston area during what for the rest of us is a normal work week is a nightmare scenario under the best of circumstances and not remotely like traveling around Scottsdale-Tempe-Glendale which as I recall in itself was an issue the media harped on incessantly that week.

Not to mention the stadium only holds 68K. Most of the new and domed facilities hold 80-100K.

Businesses in Dallas who geared up for this event are going to be devastated when all is said and done. And that was due to a freak weather event that happens there once in a blue moon... Events like that aren't freaks here, they are the norm. Hell, here they are considered minor seasonal inconveniences. This week there are parking bans in force throughout the area because feet of snow over the last couple of weeks have overwhelmed public works departments. Even mass transit has been impacted. Not to mention the airports. New York/Jersey has the potential to be a debaucle, Foxboro/Boston/Providence has the potential to be a natural disaster. Detroit was a miserable pain in the ass, as Indy may be, but at least they had domes going for them if you can get there or get into them, as does Dallas.

Boston/Providence/Foxboro in February is a destination sane folks long to get away from, not flock to.

And, for all of those reasons, I think it is absolutely delicious that Kraft is now tweaking the NFL by suggesting wintry Foxboro as a Super Bowl destination. I'm amazed he kept a straight face as he suggested it.

I don't know Bob Kraft, but I can't imagine that he isn't doing this to get under the skin of the NFL's New York establishment, as well as that of his friend Jerry Jones who is also his "friendly rival" for leadership among NFL owners.

As soon as I heard that Kraft was one of the biggest supporters among the owners of the Mara/Johnson/Goodell effort to bring a Super Bowl to the icy Meadowlands, I knew it was only a matter of time before he put the league in the position of having to say no to his personal request for a SB in Iceboro, Winter-storm-setts.

As someone who thinks that there are "turnings within turnings within turnings" in an operation as politically complex as the NFL, I'm sure there is something big that Bob will want in exchange for quietly dropping the idea and not putting his fellow owners on the spot by having to vote for what he knows is a silly idea, for all the reasons you articulate so well.

What fun!

 

[Wolfpack]

As someone who thinks that there are "turnings within turnings within turnings" in an operation as politically complex as the NFL, I'm sure there is something big that Bob will want in exchange for quietly dropping the idea and not putting his fellow owners on the spot by having to vote for what he knows is a silly idea, for all the reasons you articulate so well.

Seems to me like he's stockpiling favors. All he needs is 23 other men to go along. Maybe you get 8 who simply like the idea on merit, another 8 who owe you a favor, and then scramble to get the rest you need to just go along to get along. If the NY/NJ Super Bowl is successful, I predict he'll make his move during the first Super Bowl location vote following it. If the NY/NJ Super Bowl is a disaster, then he won't pursue it.

 

[chicowalker]

Wolfpack, despite rarely agreeing with you on the political board, I wholeheartedly agree with you here in terms of the football aspects of the Super Bowl.

Are there economic ramifications for the league re where they hold the game? Of course. But as a fan, I really don't care about that.

I've been to several Super Bowls, and while the nightlife and weather slightly affect the experience, it in no way has factored into my decision to go. And, frankly, the only place where it was really all that good was New Orleans. Jacksonville was a hole; we stayed in Orlando because of the lack of flights and hotel rooms, and going out after the game was curtailed by the traffic and how big the city is. Houston had packed bars, every place decent was charging an outrageous cover ($100?!) and an early closing time, and the stadium wasn't exactly convenient. Glendale had things spread out over a huge area, with bars that were packed in the more centralized locations.

When watching on TV, I could care less about whether the people are warm or what they're wearing (I really hope the comments made on that note were tongue in cheek)

As for the game, when did perfect conditions become a pre-requisite for a good football game? If anything, I'd like to see snow or rain so that dome teams don't have an advantage. (Yes, I'm probably biased -- but I think I can objectively say that ideally the super Bowl winner would be a team that has proven it can defeat good teams in good conditions and bad.)

When I want to take a vaction, I'll take a vacation. When I want to go to the Super Bowl, it's not a vacation.

Plus, maybe having the game in a place that isn't a vacation spot (not that they require that as things stand) could lead to more real fans going. I realize this is getting into the economic realities for the league, but personally, I got pretty tired the 2 games where we actually had good seats of having to try to ignore the people who were upset because we were standing and cheering so much. Imagine that, being excited about plays at the Super Bowl...

 

[PatsDeb]

That's why they would make park & ride to take a bus mandatory, which wouldn't be the first time for a Super Bowl.
They wouldn't need to upgrade any train service. That's silly. The league would arrange for shuttles (which they have done in the past). A blizzard or icestorm or whatever on the day of the game is a legitimate threat in several of the venues the NFL has selected in the past.

Have you taken the train? It would not be silly to upgrade it. It could be used by the Patriots and Pats fans long after the Superbowl left town as a legitimate alternative to the nightmare that is Route 1 every Sunday. As it is now it is a rickety single track that the train has to go about 2 miles an hour on after it gets by the Norwood commuter rail track. No platform when you get off. They would need to add a platform and a second track so they could run multiple trains to the game. The Pats themselves should have done this a long time ago, but I am sure the expense keeps it from becoming a reality.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Have you taken the train? It would not be silly to upgrade it. It could be used by the Patriots and Pats fans long after the Superbowl left town as a legitimate alternative to the nightmare that is Route 1 every Sunday. As it is now it is a rickety single track that the train has to go about 2 miles an hour on after it gets by the Norwood commuter rail track. No platform when you get off. They would need to add a platform and a second track so they could run multiple trains to the game. The Pats themselves should have done this a long time ago, but I am sure the expense keeps it from becoming a reality.

It's one thing to build a stadium without direct taxpayer money but an owner spending his cash upgrading public transportation ain't gonna happen. Pay tens of millions (minimal) to upgrade the train and then lose the parking $? Don't think so. Kraft is not worth close to a billion by making those negative return business decisions.

 

[PatsDeb]

It's one thing to build a stadium without direct taxpayer money but an owner spending his cash upgrading public transportation ain't gonna happen. Pay tens of millions (minimal) to upgrade the train and then lose the parking $? Don't think so.

Hmm. The Krafts should think about this. Maybe they should try to get the state to pay for some of it. Foxboro, on non-game days, could actually be a legitimate commuter stop. They already have all the parking lots which sit there empty except on game or concert days. The problem would be making sure people who aren't going to the game or a concert are out of there on event day.

People would take the train to Patriot Place and the Hall of Fame on non-game days. Probably too unworkable, but the Krafts have a lot of things sitting there doing nothing (i.e. a train stop, bad as it may be at present, and loads of parking areas) for probably more than 300 days a year.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Do you have any sort of evidence to support this contention? Fact is it's 100,000 people coming into the city for a few days. People gotta eat. People need a place to sleep. That alone is a pretty big influx. Why do you think the Boston Convention Center does handstands to try and get some national association to use their facilities?

The NFL strongarms cities in ways that cannot be compared to conventions the BCC hosts. I know somebody that works for a region's tourism board that has told me about some of the demands they make to even consider that city's bid; it borders on extortion.

Super Bowl economic impact of $400 million? That's super-inflated, scholars argue

"The NFL is not in the business of giving us $400 million every year," Porter said. "They're in the business of telling us they're giving us $400 million every year so we'll give them things."

Economists say the NFL-sponsored studies look at the "gross" spending by Super Bowl visitors but not the "net" effect.

"All they do is add and multiply," Porter said. "They never subtract and divide."

Also, with Super Bowl attendees spending much of their money with national hotel and rental-car chains, most of the influx is going to corporations headquartered elsewhere, such as Hilton, Marriott, Hertz and Avis.

"The airfare being spent on American Airlines isn't ending up in (the host city)," said Craig Depken of the University of North Carolina-Charlotte. "A lot of it is being repatriated (to corporate headquarters)."

I'd be interested in seeing your references for that.

Study: Economy lessens Super Bowl economic impact | Tampa Bay Business Journal
The economic impact in Detroit was less than that of any other recent SB city - even that of Jacksonville. People are going to want to spend less time in a colder city than in a warmer one.

Bad weather 'devastating' to Super Bowl's economic impact for Dallas-Fort Worth | Super Bowl XLV News - Sports News for Dallas, Texas - SportsDayDFW
The Dallas area is projecting to have far less money spent than they had anticipated - due entirely to poor weather.

Economist says 2009 Super Bowl will have little economic impact on Tampa | Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Sarasota | WTSP.com

USF economist Phillip Porter says we've never been able to discern any economic impact.

Porter a USF professor helped in the research in newly published article in the Southern Economic Journal. Porter points to evidence. For example Tampa has hosted three super bowls.

If you take the average sales tax revenue the year before and the year after each Super Bowl in Tampa and compare it to the game year it is virtually the same.

That 's true for 1984 where the average January sales tax in the year before and the year after was $481,664,100 while the January sale tax for 1984 Super Bowl year was $ 472,265,700.

In1991 the average January sales tax in the year before and the year after was $734,605,750 and the sales tax for January 1991 the Super Bowl year was $720,206,300

And 2001 the average January sales tax in the year before and the year after was $1,392,283,772 compared to January 2001 the Super Bowl year its was $1,440,387,270.

Porter has research that shows the same thing in every city that hosts the Super Bowl, but he says city officials who are into the hype of the game never do their due diligence. Porter says they don't check the NFL figures which he says are based on fantasy.

He adds the fact they don't do that and keep touting the NFL numbers saying we need the Super Bowl with its $400 million economic impact is beyond belief.

Super Bowl's Economic Impact May be Super Inflated - DailyFinance

"The debate over economic impact has been going on in the academic literature for about twenty years," says Craig Depken, an associate professor of economics in the Belk College of Business at UNC Charlotte, in an email. "Generally speaking the economics literature has found little evidence to support the idea that mega-events such as the Super Bowl or the Olympics generate the net economic impacts predicted by event promoters/advocates."

"The studies [saying there are big benefits from the Super Bowl] are just guesses, not studies," says Porter. "While there is a lot of money being spent there is no opportunity for the city to grab it."

Sorry, I grew up in New England. It starts snowing long before the football season ends.

Again I must apologize for growing up in New England. For me perfect football weather is 20 degrees, blustery and flurries in the air. I was so happy that a domed stadium here in New England was never seriously considered.

I grew up in New England too. When I think "football weather" I think of a crisp cool late autumn day. If you think of colder weather when you hear that term that's fine; that's your opinion. Regardless, if all else is equal I can guarantee that far more people would prefer to watch a game in forty or fifty degree weather than in twenty degrees and windy weather though.

 

[Wolfpack]

Wolfpack, despite rarely agreeing with you on the political board, I wholeheartedly agree with you here in terms of the football aspects of the Super Bowl.

Well it's nice to see you're learning! This forum makes for strange bedfellows. When up here in the football side, I find my self agreeing very often with.... wait for it.... DarrylS.

When I want to take a vaction, I'll take a vacation. When I want to go to the Super Bowl, it's not a vacation.

Plus, maybe having the game in a place that isn't a vacation spot (not that they require that as things stand) could lead to more real fans going. I realize this is getting into the economic realities for the league, but personally, I got pretty tired the 2 games where we actually had good seats of having to try to ignore the people who were upset because we were standing and cheering so much. Imagine that, being excited about plays at the Super Bowl....

+1. I would like to see the Super Bowl become more about football and less about the glitterati.

 

[furley]

I like the idea of every city which has a NFL franchise their fans should experience what it's like to host a Super Bowl at least once. In my opinion, it's unfair when politics get in the way of bringing a Super Bowl to a "cold weather" city early in the year. The Super Bowl doesn't have to be played under ideal condition to be a Super Bowl.

Boston... I mean Foxborough, should get its turn. Especially, if the residents of Foxborough are okay with the notion. And doesn't the Super Bowl bring in outside dollars for that host city? But for those that can't afford to attend, just to walk around and absorb the atmosphere on game-day can be just as fun for some. Hello? Patriots Place.

 

[Wolfpack]

Have you taken the train? It would not be silly to upgrade it. It could be used by the Patriots and Pats fans long after the Superbowl left town as a legitimate alternative to the nightmare that is Route 1 every Sunday. As it is now it is a rickety single track that the train has to go about 2 miles an hour on after it gets by the Norwood commuter rail track. No platform when you get off. They would need to add a platform and a second track so they could run multiple trains to the game. The Pats themselves should have done this a long time ago, but I am sure the expense keeps it from becoming a reality.

Please let me rephrase: I think it may very well be a great idea to upgrade public transportation in the entire greater Boston metropolitan area and Massachusetts Bay region. But that's just a general observation. I think they could easily figure out a way to get people to the stadium on game day.

This isn't like the Red Sox where you work until 5:00 then need to get to Fenway by 7:00. If you're going to the Super Bowl, that's pretty much your entire day. There's no reason you couldn't leave early enough to make it in plenty of time for kickoff no matter what the traffics situation.

 

[Wolfpack]

The NFL strongarms cities in ways that cannot be compared to conventions the BCC hosts. I know somebody that works for a region's tourism board that has told me about some of the demands they make to even consider that city's bid; it borders on extortion.

I'd bet that in this case the truth, as so often happens, in somewhere in between. $400 million may be an exaggeration, but I think $40 million is a bit too low. Even if you assume 50,000 people descend on the area (and that's a ridiclously conservative estimate - I am sure the actual numbers are higher) then that comes out to $800 per person.

I just don't see any expenses incurred by the government that make this prohibitive. You mentioned security. Well, an awful lot of those policemen you see at ball games are bought and paid for by the team, not the city or state. And discounted hotel rooms? Whuh-huh? Try booking a hotel room in Indianapolis next February and tell me what kind of "discount" you get.

Furthermore, you're contradicting your own logic. You're trying to say there is no big impact to a Super Bowl, but you're also saying tht Dallas was "devastated" by the bad weather. Well which is it? If there no great economic boom to a Super Bowl, why would bad weather be so "devastating"?