TWIOT: Super Bowl Goes North Jersey

Just a note, I've been a bit strapped for cash this week, so I didn't get the new STP album. So your review will have to wait a week.

Anyway, in case you've been living under a rock for the last week, or you're Amish (in which case, WHAT ARE YOU DOING ON THE COMPUTER, ANGUS?), the big news in football was that the NFL awarded the Super Bowl to a cold-weather city with an open air stadium for the first time in the game's history. That city, unsurprisingly, is New York, although the nitpickers and anal-retentive critics of the move will shout "IT'S NOT NEW YORK, IT'S NEW JERSEY!" Either way, the biggest media market in the country and possibly the most influential one in the world finally gets a chance to host the big game.

And honestly, I think it's about damn time.

I'm clearly not alone in thinking this. Hell, KSK has been dedicated to smacking down people who say this is a terrible move for the last three days. However, if this is the only out-of-mainstream blog you read, then you'd think that reactions to the move were like the NFL decided to host the game on a remote ice floe on Baffin Island. Why? Because the cold weather will drive interest away from the game! Oh no! Not cold weather at a football game! Because none of the most iconic games in NFL history were played in the elements... oh wait.

In a time before the Super Bowl was even ideated, the NFL Championship was decided in the elements on the home field of the team that earned that advantage in the regular season (WHAT A NOVEL CONCEPT!). In perhaps the most famous game ever, the "Ice Bowl" between the Green Bay Packers and Dallas Cowboys, fans came out and braved -40 degree wind chills to watch one of the most historic games in the NFL ever. Just recently, classic cold weather games integral to the league's lore, including another classic in Green Bay, where the Giants defeated the Packers in a NFC Championship Game overtime classic for the right to play (and eventually defeat) the then-undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl. As I recall, Lambeau Field wasn't anywhere near in danger of not selling out In fact, the stadium was packed to the gills despite the harsh weather, and let's face it; Green Bay winters usually make New York winters look like spring in Rancho Cucumonga.

Braving the elements is not new to football fans, but the sad truth is, real football fans are in the minority of people who get to be at the game itself. The other two groups include corporate fatcats who get their seats as a perk for advertising and the journalists themselves. Notice that it's the latter of those two groups that's pitching the biggest bitch-fit about having to fweeze theiw wittle toes off. Nawww, ain't that a shame. Except it's not.

I'll tell you the reason why Mike Florio and Peter King and all these other corporate "journalists" who really aren't journalists (especially Florio, whose main method of reporting news is by copying what Adam Schefter or Jay Glazer report without credit) are bitching; they're dicked out of an expense-account paid vacation to San Diego, Houston, South Florida or Tampa-St. Pete. They don't get to sun while the rest of their colleagues who don't get to go to the game freeze. For the most part, the guys who are pitching the biggest fit about this have their home office in New York, or at the very most, they have to drive in from Boston or DC, not much of an excuse to vacation at all. They obviously can't vocally complain for that reason. So why bitch about New York when a northern-city Super Bowl isn't exactly a new idea? Well, Minneapolis, Indianapolis and Detroit all have domes, but New York? ZOMG!!!!1 OPEN AIR!!! NO 1 WUNTS 2 C A GAME IN SNOW~!!`111! Convenient built-in excuse. However, let's take a look at some facts here:

• Southern city =/= good weather. Remember Super Bowl XLI? Bears/Colts? The game was played in MONSOON conditions. I'm pretty sure that most people would rather be chilly than get doused from head to toe in a rain storm


• According to the National Weather Service, there's a 10 percent chance of rain on any given February Sunday in Florida, whereas the chance for snow in New York on a similar day? Four percent.


• What New York lacks in weather, it more than makes up for in shit to do during the week. Of potential host cities, only Miami and New Orleans stack up to NYC.

There are drawbacks, for sure. For example, the little-guy journalist, the guy who has to pay his way to cover the Super Bowl out of his own pocket, is defintely affected because of higher cost of living in NYC. Let's face it, shit is more expensive in NY than most places in the country. However, depending on how far away, it might be cheaper to travel to NY than it would be to South Florida or California. Plus, Miami has an expensive reputation as well. Secondly, New York is a crowded area with nightmarish travel conditions to begin with. The swarm of people that a Super Bowl comes with would just exacerbate things.

I feel that the plusses far outweigh the minuses. New York has a ton to offer to outweigh the potential weather-related boogeyman, and if there's any city that can offer a test-run for an open-air, Northern Super Bowl, it's the Big Apple. However, I'll be very disappointed if New York is the only location of its kind to get a Super Bowl. I think places like Boston, DC, Denver and especially Philadelphia (yeah, I'm biased... so shoot me) could offer rich Super Bowl experiences if given the chance. I hope the League figures that out, because a Super Bowl in Philly or Denver, in a true football city with great atmosphere and history, would totally outweigh any lure of sun, beaches or mild weather that lesser cities such as Jacksonville or San Diego would offer, no matter what Peter King or Mike Florio would say.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!