Denver Hosting A Super Bowl May Not Be Too Far Fetched

I don’t normally agree with Mark Kiszla of the Denver Post when he talks shop, but his most recent article had my head tilted and heart sparked.

"Once in our lifetime, the greatest sporting event in America needs to be played in the best sports city in the country.Bring the Super Bowl to Denver. – Mark Kiszla (Denver Post)"

The reason why Denver was never considered by the selection committee is because Sports Authority Field at Mile High doesn’t have a roof. Look no further than the snow storm rolling in this weekend for proof that Denver can be downright nasty in the wintertime. Which celebrities and high rollers paying for a couple grand for a Super Bowl ticket want to get their Rolexes smeared with snow?

That’s the question though. Who does the NFL want to cater to?

Super Bowl stadiums are comparatively quiet during the big game. That’s because fans of the two teams playing generally can’t afford the pricey tickets. Look at the conference championship games. The atmosphere is ten times more thrilling than the Super Bowl. Those games are playoff games on steroids whereas the Super Bowl is the league’s money making event.

Back to the Super Bowl in Denver. The NFL made an exception for the big game being played in a cold weather city in 2014. The Super Bowl will take place at the $1 billion MetLife Stadium in the Meadowlands. No roof, just a bunch of blankets for the big game that year. The weather may be a factor in the game, it may not be. Does it really matter if both teams have to deal with the same elements? The weather is dealt with all season long through the conference championship games. Why not make it consistent and let the cards (or snowflakes) fall where they may.

You might say a 10-6 Super Bowl score wouldn’t be exciting. I’m guessing the winning team wouldn’t feel that way. The true football fans will enjoy the game regardless of points accrued. The NFL should cater to these fans. They are the bodies in the seats during preseason games all across the league. It’s these people that are checking out NFL.com in May when little is going on.

The Super Bowl needs to have some authenticity injected back into it.

"Super Bowl sites are evaluated by a six-person committee that currently includes Indianapolis Colts owner Jim Irsay, the host of this year’s event, as well as representatives from the Cincinnati Bengals, Detroit Lions, Philadelphia Eagles, Chicago Bears and Buffalo Bills. Hey, it snows in all those cities, doesn’t it? – Mark Kiszla (Denver Post)"

Denver should be considered a viable Super Bowl site. The city is ready to host. Try getting into Gillette Stadium four hours before a game off of Route 1. It takes hours. Access to Mile High is great with many different entrances. The stadium is close to a thriving downtown life. I can’t think of a better backdrop with the Rocky Mountains to the west.

If it snows, so be it. If it’s 60 degrees and sunny, well, that could happen too.

Broncos president Joe Ellis said that while having the Super Bowl in Denver would be great, it’s time/resource consuming to make a bid.

"There’s a lot of money invested on the come to bid on this game and not win it. I know our fans are more interested in the team spending money to acquire good players for the Broncos rather than spending money to acquire the Super Bowl for Denver. And we agree. – Joe Ellis to the Denver Post"

Perhaps one day Denver will host the greatest week in football of the year. Until then, the city’s team will work to get back there.

Make sure to follow Predominantly Orange on Facebook and on Twitter.