Skip to content

Bisciotti's doomsday scenario: Blizzard could postpone Super Bowl

Baltimore Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti is opposed to New York hosting a Super Bowl, and he’s presenting a doomsday scenario for what a New York winter could mean for America’s biggest sporting event.

“I’m not sold on it,” Bisciotti said. “The idea of cold weather certainly doesn’t scare us. The idea of a two-foot snowstorm does. After what we’ve been through in Baltimore in the last three months, you really have to wonder if logistically it’s possible the darn thing could get postponed. I don’t think you could get people into the Meadowlands, 70,000 people into the Meadowlands, in a two-foot snowstorm in New York.”

True, it’s theoretically possible that a blizzard could postpone the Super Bowl. It’s also possible that a blizzard in Detroit or Minneapolis could have made it impossible for 70,000 fans to get to the domed stadiums that have hosted Super Bowls in those cities. And it’s possible that a blizzard in Baltimore could postpone the AFC Championship Game. Does Bisciotti also think the Ravens shouldn’t be permitted to host postseason games?

For that matter, it’s possible that an earthquake could postpone a Super Bowl in California, or that severe storms and flooding could postpone a Super Bowl in Florida. There’s no place on earth that’s immune to a natural disaster.

These doomsday scenarios about weather affecting the Super Bowl are getting ridiculous. Football always has been and always will be played outdoors in bad weather. There’s no reason the Super Bowl should be any different.

Permalink 116 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories
116 Responses to “Bisciotti's doomsday scenario: Blizzard could postpone Super Bowl”
  1. PFTwhinebag says: May 25, 2010 9:46 AM

    Who Cares!!!!!!
    Oh no i’ll have to watch it the next day, what will i do. I hope it does just for all the non football fan rich losers that go to the game anyway

  2. downwithdansnyder says: May 25, 2010 9:47 AM

    The AFC championship game is not awarded to a city, but earned on the field. Big difference.

  3. downwithdansnyder says: May 25, 2010 9:49 AM

    “For that matter, it’s possible that an earthquake could postpone a Super Bowl in California, or that severe storms and flooding could postpone a Super Bowl in Florida. There’s no place on earth that’s immune to a natural disaster.”
    Seriously? How often does heavy snow fall in NY vs. the occurance of life postponing earthquakes or flooding? Your logic is flawed. Just as your point about AFC championship game. Over all not a very good post.

  4. AllThat says: May 25, 2010 9:50 AM

    Why don’t we just let an earthquake in New Jersey knock down the new stadium and the Jets & Giants play at Yankee Stadium.
    That would be nice.

  5. Ryan_Mack says: May 25, 2010 9:51 AM

    I think Florio and MDS should have a kickboxing match to decide whether to play in NYC or not.

  6. Stillerz says: May 25, 2010 9:52 AM

    Ravens are afraid to play a primetime game away from M&T Bank. They made that perfectly clear last year when they sent a personal request to the league to not schedule their game in Heinz Field for primetime. Don’t worry Bisciotti, you wont be playing in February anyways…

  7. Tomcalimontana says: May 25, 2010 9:52 AM

    Forget what could happen. According to weather.com, the average high temperature in East Rutherford on Feb. 2, the day the game likely would be played, is 37 degrees. At night, when the game would be played, the average temperature is 22.

  8. BaltimoreSports says: May 25, 2010 9:52 AM

    Florio you kinda missed the point on this. The Superbowl isn’t your average 70,000 fan game. You have to take into account that there is several tens of thousands of others who are also in the area on business. Of all the thousands of people most of them are probably out of town in hotels spread across the entire metro area. Their transportation would be severely hampered.
    A Superbowl under a blizzard could happen but it would be a disaster. This is exactly the logic the NFL has used for years in only selecting warm weather cities or at the minimum domes.

  9. wrath4771 says: May 25, 2010 9:54 AM

    The Super Bowl should be different because it’s really the one time weather should have no effect on a game. Otherwise we should be havng Super Bowls in Green Bay and Buffalo. Really no one wants to hear that the only reason why New England beat Dallas in the Super Bowl is that New England is use to playing in bad weather and Dallas is a dome team. For as much lamenting as there has been here about how unfair the OT rule is, this should be pretty obvious to you guys.

  10. irishsamurai says: May 25, 2010 9:57 AM

    he is not saying anything hat isnt true,its a bad idea,but i am all for it,i hope they win the bid and it is such bad weather and makes ffor one of the worst bowls ever and all that money will be wasted,if this happens why not have a seattle superbowl,or a green bay superbowl. I am so sick of new york getting preforential treatment,move the draft too,sick of hearing new jersey jet fans for 5 hours on draft day

  11. netdawg says: May 25, 2010 10:00 AM

    It’s not about the GAME anymore… It IS all about the TV revenues so that experience needs to be top notched and have lots of contingency plans in the event the game is a suck-fest

  12. Actlikea2yrold says: May 25, 2010 10:00 AM

    Duh. It all sounds good to do it up north, but it makes for a taking the biggest game of the year and subjecting it to sub-par play. Can you imagine a fog game for superbowl, billions of people watching a TV of nothing but fog, or even a blizzard game. Its stupid, I am all for weather should be a factor in games, but the superbowl? I dont think so. I thought Detroit fixed this problems with having a game up north when the weather they had during that time was so crappy, there wasnt a great turnout for all the things surrounding the superbowl that year.

  13. Bob says: May 25, 2010 10:00 AM

    “For that matter, it’s possible that an earthquake could postpone a Super Bowl in California, or that severe storms and flooding could postpone a Super Bowl in Florida. There’s no place on earth that’s immune to a natural disaster.”

    It’s about probability. The probability of a snowstorm postponing a NY Super Bowl is greater than an earthquake doing it to a Calif. Super Bowl or storms and flooding doing it in to a Fla. Super Bowl because snowstorms occur every year. Snowstorms only happen in winter, but they happen frequently in the northeast. Guess what time of year they play the Super Bowl? This past year, the whole northeast was pretty much snowed in Super Bowl weekend and the couple of days after that.

  14. NYBearsFan says: May 25, 2010 10:00 AM

    MDS, nice!
    I’m happy that PFT is allowing both sides of the arguement to come out here!
    Play the game where it’s supposed to be played!

  15. shallowfan says: May 25, 2010 10:01 AM

    You do realize it’s the money riding on the super bowl right? Probably more money and media coverage than any other sporting event on earth. Do you really want to take the chance and mess the game up by purposely putting it in a venue that likely could have a “natural disaster”?
    Would you host the super bowl in a stadium built on a fault crack that is known to cause an earthquake every Feb? No, because that would be stupid…
    There is a lot riding on the game going off without a hitch and you are putting it in harms way intentionally by hosting the sb in cold weather open air stadium.

  16. Wick says: May 25, 2010 10:02 AM

    I’m with Bisciotti. Playing a Super Bowl in Pasadena virtually guarantees an optimal venue. Florio’s squeak about an earthquake possibility is absurd. One potentiality is very likely – one is absurdly unlikely. To compare them as if they’re equals is ludicrous.
    By contrast, playing a Super Bowl in early to mid-February in New York/New Jersey virtually guarantees very shitty weather …….. something that compromises what the teams have been doing for 95% of their games.

  17. Slow Joe says: May 25, 2010 10:03 AM

    The Super Bowl is different. It’s a spectacle. There’s a halftime show, pregame hype, etc. It’s an international event broadcast all over the world. Plus, it is supposed to be a neutral site with neutral field conditions.
    It would be an embarrassment to the NFL all over the world if it got snowed in. This is such a dumb idea.

  18. Flyingelvislogosucksbringbackpatpatriot says: May 25, 2010 10:03 AM

    Who cares? The 10 thousand or so real fans will make it come hell or high water, The celebrities and corporate big wigs will stay in their hotels. Like I said, who cares?

  19. QJ1984 says: May 25, 2010 10:05 AM

    I guess you and your collegues need to get on the same page. There is an article down the page that explains why the Superbowl in NY is a bad idea.
    And anyway, for you to compare playoff games to the Superbowl is insane. All the playoff games COMBINED do not generate the revenue or television audience that the SB does. AND if all doesnt look clear for a playoff game, the NFL can very easily plan a backup site for the game because it isnt decided where those games will be played until late in the season. You can not do that for the Superbowl because the Superbowl is planned years in advance. There is just to much revenue to be lost for the league and the city that worked its butt off to win the bid. And its not just about the game. Its about the parties and other events that the host city gets to have in honor of the Superbowl.

  20. BigMacAttack says: May 25, 2010 10:06 AM

    http://passingonthegame.blogspot.com/2010/05/praying-for-miracle-ny-superbowl.html

  21. JimmySmith says: May 25, 2010 10:06 AM

    Why is it a diaster? Most of the corporate dollars that are spent are prior to the game itself, if it snowed two feet, most of the corporate fatcats would sit it out in the comfort of their hotel rooms.
    Who cares if they actually attend the game, the NFL has their money, isn’t that the bottom line?

  22. QJ1984 says: May 25, 2010 10:07 AM

    @Stillerz
    Isnt it your turn to babysit your QB, so he doesnt go rape another girl and be suspended for the rest of the season? STFU

  23. DasBoot504 says: May 25, 2010 10:08 AM

    wrath4771: +1

  24. Bwa Ha Ha says: May 25, 2010 10:09 AM

    What about that 12/21/12 stuff, won’t we be in the middle of the apocalypse or something by then?

  25. east96street. says: May 25, 2010 10:09 AM

    wrath4771 says: “Really no one wants to hear that the only reason why New England beat Dallas in the Super Bowl is that New England is use to playing in bad weather and Dallas is a dome team. For as much lamenting as there has been here about how unfair the OT rule is, this should be pretty obvious to you guys”
    Actually, Dallas has to play two games a year, one of them usually late in the season against NY and Philly. Plus, being in the NFC, they would most likely have to face a NFC Central opponent either in the regular season or in the playoffs. It is highly unlikely the way the schedule works that Dallas could get to the Super Bowl without being able to play in bad weather. They face it every year on the road. If they can’t play in all kinds of weather, then why do they deserve to be Champs? This is not an indoor league. I can’t stand Dallas, but I will give Jones credit for one thing – he does understand the game is played in bad weather and Dallas teams, traditionally, have large O lines and sturdy RBs to make sure that they can play in bad weather.

  26. Spungy says: May 25, 2010 10:09 AM

    A Superbowl in a blizzard would get the highest ratings of all time.

  27. JoeFlaccosUniBrow says: May 25, 2010 10:09 AM

    @Stillerz: Your team will be lucky to reach .500 this year with Raplesburger out as much as he will be.
    Bisciotti is thinking about revenue. This man is a pure business man. He knows that the NFL can lose a ton of cash if that game is not played on the date and time it’s supposed to. No company is going to pony up 3 mill for 30 seconds if it’s not on Primetime Sunday. If it gets pushed back even 1 hour, they will get sued so fast. Think of all the SB parties that go on and the licensed apparel that will sit in boxes because no one is taking to the streets.
    Bisciotti is pure business and a great owner. That’s why he is in only 1 press conference per year. Football people make football decisions. Business people make business decisions.

  28. punt99 says: May 25, 2010 10:10 AM

    # irishsamurai says: May 25, 2010 9:57 AM
    he is not saying anything hat isnt true,its a bad idea,but i am all for it,i hope they win the bid and it is such bad weather and makes ffor one of the worst bowls ever and all that money will be wasted,if this happens why not have a seattle superbowl,or a green bay superbowl. I am so sick of new york getting preforential treatment,move the draft too,sick of hearing new jersey jet fans for 5 hours on draft day
    He may not be saying anything that is not true, but his logic is flawed. To compare something that has a very small chance to some that has a reasonable chance of happening is something I would expect from a child/ I mean, with the logic here, it would make sense to go to vegas and bet your life savings on the roulette table, as either you’ll hit your number or you won’t, but the odds are similar, right MDS?
    I have never bashed the people who write on this site, but this is just a bunch of crap.

  29. 2Good says: May 25, 2010 10:11 AM

    @ Stillerz
    I agree with you. I lost all respect for the Ravens when they started crying about playing night games in Pittsburgh
    And no, I am not a Steelers fan!

  30. east96street. says: May 25, 2010 10:11 AM

    irishsamurai says: “I am so sick of new york getting preforential treatment”
    Yeah, 9/11 was really “preforential” treatment. Keep working on that GED!!!

  31. ItalianArnyGuy says: May 25, 2010 10:11 AM

    Belichick cheats and Big Ben rapes……er I mean rocks

  32. Stahi Columbia says: May 25, 2010 10:11 AM

    He’s right when it comes to the 2-3 foot snowstorm.
    But if it’s a 2-3 INCH snowstorm? That’s a damn flurry, play on.

  33. Pudge Heffelfinger says: May 25, 2010 10:13 AM

    Snow in NJ in Feb is guaranteed. It’s not a matter of “if” or “when” it’s a matter of “How many feet?”.
    Those other weather events are not guaranteed.

  34. aec4 says: May 25, 2010 10:15 AM

    Your first argument about the cold weather teams with domes made perfect sense.
    The others did not. Here’s why:
    1) The Super Bowl is more than just a game, so postponing it is not really an option. If the AFC Championship game needs to be played on a Monday or even Tuesday due to snow, while a big pain and not a good thing, it’s doable.
    2) The likelihood of a blizzard is far greater than the other scenarios.
    I think a Super Bowl in a cold weather city is terrible…. in particular one without a dome. I didn’t think of the reasons the Ravens owner thought of, I just think the game is an event, and not a game.

  35. Jagdbaer says: May 25, 2010 10:15 AM

    Not a big fan of the “Blizzard Bowl” happening in Jersey. All you need is another President’s Day Blizzard 2003 and everyone will remember why Super Bowls aren’t held in cold weather, non-domed stadium based cities.

  36. TrueFan says: May 25, 2010 10:15 AM

    BaltimoreSports – Florio didn’t write this post.

  37. jerseykingpin says: May 25, 2010 10:17 AM

    The average snowfall for East Rutherford for the whole winter is 10″ . Pppl are talking about the big stroms they had in South Jersey up to 2 feet one strom we got up north was 3″ and the other one nothing

  38. yem123 says: May 25, 2010 10:18 AM

    difference is that the likelihood of a blizzard is higher in NY…. and no dome to stop the snow!!!!! hopefully Giants stadium comes with Zamboni machines….

  39. xxxsixeightxxx says: May 25, 2010 10:18 AM

    IF this happens and cold weather is not a factor anymore then rotate the Superbowl between every cold weather NFL city, Not just NY. They arent any better than any other NFL city despite what every cocky, rude NYer will tell you.

  40. NFL4EVER says: May 25, 2010 10:19 AM

    Would rather see a Super Bowl played in Baltimore or Washington ahead of NY-NJ.

  41. Michael LaRocca says: May 25, 2010 10:23 AM

    A work stoppage could postpone the Super Bowl an entire year. I’m a total NFL junkie, but I really wouldn’t be bothered by the break.

  42. xxxsixeightxxx says: May 25, 2010 10:23 AM

    Have fun payin $2,000+ a seat to sit in 22 degree weather.

  43. joetoronto says: May 25, 2010 10:24 AM

    PFTwhinebag says: May 25, 2010 9:46 AM
    Who Cares!!!!!!
    Oh no i’ll have to watch it the next day, what will i do. I hope it does just for all the non football fan rich losers that go to the game anyway
    ==========================================
    Do you even know where the the NFL gets most of its money from?
    It’s called TV. If the game is unwatchable, for whatever reason, it’s a big time problem.
    whinebag is right.

  44. ignoringthehaters says: May 25, 2010 10:26 AM

    Another thing they need to consider is that the SB should be played on Saturday as opposed to Sunday. The majority of folks party for the SB and it sucks donkey to have to get up and go to work. But seriously, man up and play in the snow you big babies

  45. BigOx says: May 25, 2010 10:26 AM

    Ravens are afraid to play a primetime game away from M&T Bank. They made that perfectly clear last year when they sent a personal request to the league to not schedule their game in Heinz Field for primetime. Don’t worry Bisciotti, you wont be playing in February anyways…
    ————————————
    @ Stillerz
    Uh, the Steelers also voted against New York hosting a Superbowl…..

  46. Stillerz says: May 25, 2010 10:34 AM

    Why doesnt the NFL ever ask the fans for their opinion on these things?

  47. BleedGreen says: May 25, 2010 10:39 AM

    And a hurricane could postpone it in Florida. How often to blizzards happen? On average, it snows over 3″ what? Once a year? Maybe twice? If the Eagles could clear out the stadium with THREE EFFING FEET of snow in time to play the 49ers, I’d hope to god that NYC could clear it out in time for the Super Bowl.

  48. rk_21 says: May 25, 2010 10:43 AM

    east96street. says:
    May 25, 2010 10:09 AM
    Actually, Dallas has to play two games a year, one of them usually late in the season against NY and Philly. Plus, being in the NFC, they would most likely have to face a NFC Central opponent
    ————————————————-Lol at a reference to a non-existent division of Football.

  49. phillyfan03 says: May 25, 2010 10:47 AM

    “These doomsday scenarios about weather affecting the Super Bowl are getting ridiculous. Football always has been and always will be played outdoors in bad weather. There’s no reason the Super Bowl should be any different.”
    totally agree, since when is football played by a bunch of girly men?

  50. wvugrad00 says: May 25, 2010 10:48 AM

    the last Super Bowl in Miami was played during a monsoon

  51. SeriousRadio says: May 25, 2010 10:49 AM

    I have detested anything to do with Baltimore since they refused a new stadium for the Colts back in ’82, and economically forced them to move to Indy. Then the city gave everything ( and more) that the Colts originally asked for to the Browns/Ravens – a team that they stole from another city. Who cared what the jealous Ravens owner has to say – he has a vote but otherwise STFU.

  52. Duck Fallas says: May 25, 2010 10:49 AM

    Yes, up north we get snow in February. That does not necessarily mean that:
    1) It will be snowing the day of (or couple of days prior to) the game.
    2) Every occurrence of snow automatically means over 1′ of accumulation.
    It’s football for chrissake! Why don’t they just institute rain delays while they’re at it?

  53. ItalianArnyGuy says: May 25, 2010 10:50 AM

    they should play the super bowl here in the Burgh where the field is crap and the fans are drunk! and what would a post from me be without mentioning that Belichick is a cheater.

  54. rk_21 says: May 25, 2010 10:54 AM

    Flat out the Super Bowl in any cold weather city is a dumb idea. Yeah I like the fact that the game would be played in some colder “true football” elements. I think the issue really boils down to new stadiums equatring to automatic Super Bowl bids. The rights to host a Super Bowl has been the driving force behind new NFL stadium construction for the last decade. LA/Minny/Oakland/San Fran, do you want to host a Super Bowl? Build a new stadium and we’ll come to you. Houston, Indy, Dallas, Detroit all wanted to get new stadiums and the NFL gives them a Super Bowl. Now New York is getting a new stadium so they are supposed to get the big game. In the next 5-7 years I think 4 new stadiums (LA, Santa Clara, Minny or Oakland, and possibly/unlikely Atlanta) will get built and they will all have Super Bowl bids to follow.

  55. salty says: May 25, 2010 10:55 AM

    Ray Lewis could stab someone during the superbowl too! Although he’d be cleared and the game would go on….

  56. DirtMcGirt24 says: May 25, 2010 10:56 AM

    Last time I checked, NFL games in my lifetime have only been postponed in the South. Didn’t the Texans lose a game when their roof was damaged? Games were moved up a few hours for snow this past year for a regular season game in Baltimore and Philly for snow, but I suspect the entire fan base would be in NYC on Super Bowl weekend, which is a 5 mile trip supported by direct rail access.
    It’ll never get snowed out, just like no other NFL game ever has.
    But brownie points to all the anonymous internet posters worried about the owners money when said owners are about to vote in support of the game in NYC. Methinks the guys with the money know more about the money side of it than the clowns here. But I’m sure they appreciate your concern.

  57. realitypolice says: May 25, 2010 10:56 AM

    True, it’s theoretically possible that a blizzard could postpone the Super Bowl. It’s also possible that a blizzard in Detroit or Minneapolis could have made it impossible for 70,000 fans to get to the domed stadiums that have hosted Super Bowls in those cities.
    =====================
    Wrong, stupid. Those stadiums are right downtown, which means the out of town big wigs, which are all the NFL cares about, could still get to the game. As I have stated ad nauseum on other posts, the Meadowlands is a half hour away from Manhattan where everyone will be staying on a good day. It would be next to impossible in a blizzard.
    And snow clearance obviously isn’t the problem in a dome that it would be in the Meadowlands.

  58. realitypolice says: May 25, 2010 11:02 AM

    jerseykingpin says:
    May 25, 2010 10:17 AM
    The average snowfall for East Rutherford for the whole winter is 10″ . Pppl are talking about the big stroms they had in South Jersey up to 2 feet one strom we got up north was 3″ and the other one nothing.
    ==================
    You’re a liar. On February 10th, North Jersey got almost 20 inches of snow on February 26th and over 10 inches on February 10th. (Based upon recorded snow falls in Bergen County, NJ)
    Nice try.

  59. Bob S. says: May 25, 2010 11:04 AM

    BleedGreen
    How often to blizzards happen? On average, it snows over 3″ what? Once a year? Maybe twice?

    huge nor-easters occur a few times every single winter – all its a lot more than just cleaning the seats. airports are closed. roads too. and for such a game most fans are coming from elsewhere. but also – why should a team built for winter conditions have the edge over a dome or southern weather team?

  60. notoriousbri says: May 25, 2010 11:11 AM

    wow how horrible is this post? Talk about arguing for 1 side. Worst comparisons and logic I have seen in quite awhile.
    Conference Championships are earned by the highest seed to advance to that game.
    Super Bowls are awarded to a city by the super bowl committee.
    I dont care either way where its played, if the NFL wants to risk the weather than its up to them , but to throw earthquakes and floods into the mix as possibilities and compare them to the possibility of snowfall in the month of February on the east coast is just STUPID.
    Michael David Smith report to Florio’s office immediately and turn in your pocket protector and number 2 pencil.. I wanna hear Florio do his best Vince McMahon “You’reeeeee FIREEDDDDDDDDD!!!!”

  61. Slow Joe says: May 25, 2010 11:11 AM

    And a hurricane could postpone it in Florida.
    ==========================
    Hurricane season doesn’t begin until summer, brainiac. There are no threats of inclement weather in Florida in February. It doesn’t even start lightning until June.

  62. jimicos says: May 25, 2010 11:13 AM

    Didn’t they have a snowstorm in Louisiana right around the time of Super Bowl 31? I had a friend who went to that one, and I thought she said they got a few inches of snow and they shut down the entire interstate system. People down there have absolutely no idea how to drive in snow. And of course they don’t have the equipment to clear roads.
    Personally, I’d love to see Super Bowls played in northern outdoor sites. You’d get a lot higher percentage of actual football fans attending the game–as opposed to the rich snobs who can afford the tickets.
    And weren’t some of the NFL’s greatest games played in bad weather? Obviously, the Ice Bowl comes to mind. I worked with a guy who was at that game. The “tuck rule” game between the Raiders and Patriots comes to mind as well.
    I’d be curious to see if there’s actually a correlation between winning percentage and weather extremes. You’d expect cold-weather teams to beat warm-weather/dome teams in cold weather but does it actually happen? This whole backlash over northern SB sites is centered around one team having an “unfair advantage” over the other. But is there any proof of it?

  63. ppdoc13 says: May 25, 2010 11:14 AM

    @seriousradio – back at you STFU. We in Baltimore don’t care what you think. And if you are in Baltimore do us all a favor and leave.

  64. Duck Fallas says: May 25, 2010 11:15 AM

    A team built for winter conditions should have the edge over a dome or southern team because they prepared themselves better. Fairness has nothing to do with choosing Super Bowl locations, and to pose warm weather teams as disadvantaged victims is just sad.

  65. Evan2442 says: May 25, 2010 11:17 AM

    Why do the writers on here continue to blow stories way out of proportion? Biscotti isn’t talking of a “DOOMSDAY” scenario, give me a break. He’s talking about the logistics of having a large event during a snowstorm- and he’s right, it’s very tough. I was in Baltimore the weekend they had a giant snowstorm and it was very tough to drive around and really even leave the house. They had to move the game back a few hours, the fields were taken care of, but were obvioulsy not in the best of conditions. And of course, you had to feel for the Bears who couldn’t fly into Baltimore on their normal schedule and flew in the day of, and clearly, were nowhere near game-ready (probably because they suck). Biscotti’s point is that the Super Bowl is no “normal” game, there are so many variables and things that need to be dealt with and a delay from the weather could result in some bad situations. Should every city get a chance to host a championship? In theory, yes. But he’s right, it could turn into a dicy situation. You’re talking about issues with travel/travelers, media, teams, freezing cold, TV times/commercials in jeopardy, etc. Which in the end could result in a lot of headaches for teams/fans and a loss of $ for the NFL. This isn’t a doomsday, he’s just stating the facts. Don’t blow it all out of proportion and make Biscotti to be some Nastrodamus- he’s actually one of the best owners in the game.

  66. dontaedachamp says: May 25, 2010 11:25 AM

    @serious radio: your way off dummy

  67. RavensChick says: May 25, 2010 11:28 AM

    2Good says:
    May 25, 2010 10:11 AM
    @ Stillerz
    I agree with you. I lost all respect for the Ravens when they started crying about playing night games in Pittsburgh
    Uh, Stillerz and 2Good, the Ravens requested a HOME prime time game because the Ravens had played the previous TWO YEARS on primetime in Shitsburgh. It’s called taking turns, which the two of you probably had a hard time doing when you were children.
    Now go back to playing with you Ben “The Rapist” action figure.

  68. NarDawg says: May 25, 2010 11:29 AM

    Nonsense. When was the last time a blizzard postponed an NFL game? I understand about the festivities, but those are never affected for winter Olympics, why should some pnky-waving chablis-drinking pansy dictate he doesnt want his nose to get cold? Screw them. Play it in the north. Why should cold-weather teams be the ones to have to adjust?

  69. heartstl says: May 25, 2010 11:31 AM

    Blizzard is too busy with World of Warcraft to postpone the Super Bowl.

  70. JoeFlaccosUniBrow says: May 25, 2010 11:32 AM

    @SeriousRadio
    Ursay was a drunken douche who wanted to move the team to Indy anyway. That is the excuse he used after he drove that once proud franchise into the ground. No one went to the games because he was the owner. Much like what you saw last year in Washington. People could not give away the tickets in DC. Why do you think Snyder finally handed the reins to someone competent?
    At least his son is a good person. He knows how much of an A-hole his dad was.

  71. east96street. says: May 25, 2010 11:32 AM

    rk_21 says: “Lol at a reference to a non-existent division of Football.”
    Sorry. Been watching football for forty years. When I started, there was a NFC Central. Old habits die hard. I still call Heinz field “Three Rivers” and Gillette Stadium “Foxboro” from time to time. Doesn’t change the fact that the argument about weather conditions means a “superior” team loses is incorrect.

  72. WNYhell5 says: May 25, 2010 11:34 AM

    Don’t you guys pick on ESPN for their commentators not being on the ame page?

  73. MikeT says: May 25, 2010 11:42 AM

    Also, don’t forget attacks by molemen and invasion by aliens for worst case scenarios. After all, both of these could seriously affect the kickoff time for the Superbowl. And God forbid the aliens and molemen team up together!

  74. DC_Bengals_Fan says: May 25, 2010 11:45 AM

    “BleedGreen says: May 25, 2010 10:39 AM
    And a hurricane could postpone it in Florida.”
    So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

  75. finsbooyah says: May 25, 2010 11:48 AM

    - Your average football fan cannot afford tickets to the Super Bowl
    – Forget about competitive advantages… Adverse weather will cause sub-par performances (for both teams) in one of the most anticipated annual events in the United States
    – The argument for natural disasters is laughable. It’s about probability. The chances of a snowstorm when the temperature is 30 – below are VERY high. The chances of an earthquake or flash flood on any given day is almost non-existant. Pull your head out of your ass, MDS.
    -The Super Bowl is meant to be played on a neutral site, where no team has an advantage. Home-Field advantage in all other playoff games is earned during a season’s worth of games.
    There, I just debunked all your reasonings. A Super Bowl in New Jersey (yes NJ, not New York) is a terrible idea. And this is coming from some one who lives about 30 miles away from the Meadowlands

  76. salty says: May 25, 2010 11:51 AM

    All of you saying bisciotti is a smart businessman by his comments about SB – wrongo! A blizzard canceling SB would mean TONS of TV coverage , especially when game is finally played. Plus man the F up and play in the cold… Jeez this is freaking football, stop being a BMore pansy!!! (destroyed some BMore guys the other day in flag football… They were whining about the cold weather… WTF)

  77. east96street. says: May 25, 2010 11:51 AM

    realitypolice says: “You’re a liar. On February 10th, North Jersey got almost 20 inches of snow on February 26th and over 10 inches on February 10th.”
    He said “average” snowfall. RIF. Nice try.

  78. dbs0011 says: May 25, 2010 11:52 AM

    If a blizzard postponed the Super Bowl, would that be a bad thing? It’s a doomsday scenario because that’s the way very rich men think. Heaven forbid an event with billions of dollars in advertising revenue tied to it would be postponed. Doomsday, I tells ya. I hope NY/NJ gets the SB and it’s a freakin’ whiteout. How awesome would that be? Being from CLE I’ve never had a rooting interest in the game anyway.

  79. hineswardcriesafterfumbling says: May 25, 2010 11:53 AM

    I just saw a doomsday movie where the New York/New Jersey area got hit with a few feet of snow in February. It blew my mind. The creativity of some people is astounding. Snow! In New York! In February! I’m just thankful it was only a movie.

  80. tonyinmd says: May 25, 2010 11:57 AM

    Super Bowl in cold weather sucks and is a terrible idea. Nobody likes it except owners who know they would likely get one and get another huge payday. The fans in general don’t want it, the players in general don’t want it and all the business ment with money who want to do outdoor activities don’t want it.

  81. sukit says: May 25, 2010 12:05 PM

    Let it snow! Finally a game worth watching. I am tired of seeing the track meets that are the superbowls today. I would like to see some snow, blood, grit, and DEFFENSE.

  82. sukit says: May 25, 2010 12:06 PM

    sorry defense.

  83. dannylaruso says: May 25, 2010 12:16 PM

    salty says:
    May 25, 2010 10:55 AM
    Ray Lewis could stab someone during the superbowl too! Although he’d be cleared and the game would go on….
    —————————————————-
    Thank you for that completely up to date and relevant comment….
    I think the reason the owners are allowing a superbowl in new york are because they want the floodgates to open up and every team will be able to host a superbowl. They’re great economic stimulators for the city. I’m for it.

  84. ham1 says: May 25, 2010 12:24 PM

    Conspiricy.
    NY gets whatever it wants, including a Norleans “home game” in NY after Katrina. What BS.
    NY sucks.

  85. davoider says: May 25, 2010 12:28 PM

    I love all the people complaining about how a cold weather super bowl would be unfair to dome teams unfamiliar with the conditions. How then, is it fair for dome teams to play in the Super Bowl when their entire team is built around perfect weather? No small market team in a cold weather environment can afford to build expensive domes, so why should they then not be able to play in an environment their team is built around?

  86. DocBG says: May 25, 2010 12:34 PM

    someone needs to start grinding up midol and mixing it in with MDS’s food, he’s really starting to get overly whinny. do you need some milk, a nap perhaps, maybe you just want to be held by your momm?
    Grow up, who cares if the superbowl is held in NY or not, as other posters have pointed out, a majority of the people there are interested in the game, its more of a status symbol for them than anything else. the championship games are EARNED not awarded like the SB, so drop your comparison there, and same thing with the earthquakes and hurricanes which happen at 1/100th the frequency of a blizzard in the northeast.
    btw, i couldn’t care less if the its in new york or anywhere else (someplace other than florida would be nice for a change) but MDS is nothing but a little crybaby in this article and its sickening.

  87. davoider says: May 25, 2010 12:35 PM

    Finsbooya – “The Super Bowl is meant to be played on a neutral site, where no team has an advantage. Home-Field advantage in all other playoff games is earned during a season’s worth of games.”
    The superbowl is already a competitive advantage for every dome team in existence. Teams such as the Saints and Colts are built around high flying pass games, styles that don’t work in adverse weather. (Hence the domes they play in)
    Smaller market teams in cold weather areas can’t afford domes, thus can’t build their team in a similar fashion and still be successful. Therefor these dome and warm weather teams have a competitive advantage each and every season knowing the SuperBowl will be played in perfect conditions. In this league, thanks to the new rules, will always favor offense in perfect conditions. Reducing the chances of teams built to play in real football conditions (I.e. actually playing defense and running the football) by a considerable margain.

  88. Dave says: May 25, 2010 12:45 PM

    “You’re a liar. On February 10th, North Jersey got almost 20 inches of snow on February 26th and over 10 inches on February 10th. (Based upon recorded snow falls in Bergen County, NJ)”
    We got a storm a few days before the Super Bowl last year. Where I live in Central NJ got 20″ while my friend 25 miles to the north in Newark got about 1.5″.

  89. BigSuede says: May 25, 2010 12:46 PM

    Seriously- are people really going to fork out 2 grand to sit in 28 degree weather???? Is that going to be fun for ANYONE? Well I guess the new york owners get a couple million- and that is really all that counts right?

  90. Dasmol says: May 25, 2010 12:48 PM

    It should only be played in fair weather cities.
    As finsbooyah said, the bad weather causes sub-par performances. And even though I enjoy watching a good defensive game, I want to see points getting scored.
    That’s not even getting into tourists not wanting to trod around in snow to experience the hosting city.

  91. jerseykingpin says: May 25, 2010 12:55 PM

    Godell knows what’s the is weather here . The NFL HQ is in NY and he’s all for it so

  92. Strick says: May 25, 2010 12:55 PM

    MDS said: “These doomsday scenarios about weather affecting the Super Bowl are getting ridiculous. Football always has been and always will be played outdoors in bad weather. There’s no reason the Super Bowl should be any different.”
    Excellent. Couldn’t have said it better.

  93. finsbooyah says: May 25, 2010 1:00 PM

    davoider, I see your point but the advantage is MUCH different. This you can still play defense in a dome against a high octane passing offense. But if that offense is forced to play the Super Bowl in a blizzard, the very thing that got them to the big game would be rendered useless. That is a TRUE disadvantage.
    Also, there is absolutley NO competitive advantage when the game is played in warm weather cities that don’t have domes, such as Miami, San Diego, Tampa, Jacksonville. Hell, you can even throw Oakland and San Fran in the mix.

  94. 90ragtop says: May 25, 2010 1:13 PM

    Baltimore Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti is opposed to New York hosting a Super Bowl…
    ***********************
    And here I always thought that a Bisciotti was some kind of European cookie…

  95. Slow Joe says: May 25, 2010 2:07 PM

    So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
    LOL!
    Here’s the interview with Roger Goodell after the NY/NJ Super Bowl gets approved:
    Goodell: “…and we are pleased to bring the Super Bowl to New York!”
    Reporter: “But won’t you be cold watching an outdoor game in New Jersey in February?”
    Goodell: “No, not at all. My ass will be in a luxury box.”

  96. jimicos says: May 25, 2010 3:01 PM

    finsbooyah says:
    May 25, 2010 11:48 AM
    – Your average football fan cannot afford tickets to the Super Bowl
    ————————-
    Doesn’t it stand to reason that prices would be a lot lower if all the big money pansies stay home?
    ————————-
    finsbooyah says:
    May 25, 2010 11:48 AM
    – The argument for natural disasters is laughable. It’s about probability. The chances of a snowstorm when the temperature is 30 – below are VERY high. The chances of an earthquake or flash flood on any given day is almost non-existant. Pull your head out of your ass, MDS.
    ————————-
    The chances of a snowstorm when the temp is 30 below are VERY LOW. Check the weather history and find the last time they even had 30 below temps in that area.

  97. jimicos says: May 25, 2010 3:03 PM

    WNYhell5 says:
    May 25, 2010 11:34 AM
    Don’t you guys pick on ESPN for their commentators not being on the ame page?
    ————————-
    Where is the ame page? And why should ESPN commentators be on it?

  98. THE godfather says: May 25, 2010 3:07 PM

    DC_Bengals_Fan says:
    So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
    And America keeps getting dumber and dumber.

  99. DirtDawg55 says: May 25, 2010 7:26 PM

    When Biscoitti said “snowstorm” I’m thinking he wasn’t talking about the weather. What he meant was something akin to making it rain, except with powder and not money and because of that no New Yorker or NFL football player or owner for that matter, would be able to get to the game. Because they were too busy indulging.
    By the way, as for all of you probability experts out there, isn’t it interesting that an earthquake did interrupt the World Series, did it not? Of course, foul weather did too, and most recently.

  100. Rex Grossman says: May 25, 2010 7:28 PM

    The theory of teams playing better in the cold because they’re “used to it” is a made up retarded idea that casual fans use to “talk sports”. Eli Manning doesn’t develop certain special skills because he plays in cold weather on the weekend more than some other teams. To Eli it will be cold as shit, to Tony Romo it will be cold as shit. Neutral.

  101. sandy70 says: May 25, 2010 7:32 PM

    2Good says:
    May 25, 2010 10:11 AM
    @ Stillerz
    I agree with you. I lost all respect for the Ravens when they started crying about playing night games in Pittsburgh
    And no, I am not a Steelers fan!
    ————————————————–
    If requesting that the Ravens not play a night game on the road against their biggest rivals after having done so 3 of the previous 4 seasons is crying, then I am left to conclude that you are either:
    a) an internet tough guy who would need a change of diaper were the same circumstance ever befall your team of choice (since you claim not to be a Steelers fan)
    or
    b) a fan of a team that only gets to play in prime time because the league mandates they do so at least once per season.
    Either way, your respect is irrelevent to anyone but yourself.
    *******************************************
    THE godfather says:
    May 25, 2010 3:07 PM
    DC_Bengals_Fan says:
    So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
    And America keeps getting dumber and dumber.
    ————————————————–
    I agree, especially since the quote you reference went right over your head and proves your ignorance to true comedy.
    For the cave dwellers among us:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q47bpOCTcaY&feature=related

  102. golongboyee says: May 25, 2010 11:11 PM

    Stillerz – LOL, I guess you are inferring the Squealers WILL be in the playoffs???? Now THAT is funny……..now get back to your post in the grocery aisle, your Wal-Mart shift is about to start.

  103. golongboyee says: May 25, 2010 11:15 PM

    Rex Grossman = moron.
    Obviously you have never played the game because you know ABSOLUTELY nothing about which you speak. One certainly CAN be used to cold weather and develop a “tolerance” for it just as someone can be conditioned to play in hot weather.

  104. golongboyee says: May 25, 2010 11:19 PM

    Strick – if you weren’t such a dumbass, you might realize the issue ISN’T with the weather inside the confines of the stadium. It has more to do with individuals getting there……..does this makes sense moron????

  105. golongboyee says: May 25, 2010 11:26 PM

    SeriousRadio = seriously misinformed moron!!!!!

  106. FordPSD60 says: May 25, 2010 11:29 PM

    Even though Jersey just had record snowfalls it doesn’t get a lot of snow. Blizzards are rare. NFL fans complaining about the weather. Unbelievable. I suppose tailgating in the south is suspended when the temps drop to 69 degrees. This is pro football. Not golf.

  107. golongboyee says: May 25, 2010 11:29 PM

    ignoringthehaters, ever heard of the concept TAKING A DAY OFF!!!!!.or don’t they give days off to janitors anymore????

  108. realitypolice says: May 26, 2010 12:54 AM

    east96street. says:
    May 25, 2010 11:51 AM
    realitypolice says: “You’re a liar. On February 10th, North Jersey got almost 20 inches of snow on February 26th and over 10 inches on February 10th.”
    He said “average” snowfall. RIF. Nice try.
    ==================
    No he didn’t, you blowhard a**hole. Here it what he said, you illiterate waterhead:
    Pppl are talking about the big stroms they had in South Jersey up to 2 feet one strom we got up north was 3″ and the other one nothing

  109. Oti says: May 26, 2010 12:14 PM

    The NFL is the only major sport where the game is not played on the field of the team that earned it. The NFL is only about money now and really could care less about the history or the integrity of the game. Each year the NFL becomes more entertainment (like the news) and less about the games and the teams. Give the game to the city of the team with the best record, and 1/2 the tickets to each team’s fan base (season ticket holders). It’s a sad commentary on today’s game that the true fans of the final 2 teams will probably never to get to see their team play in a superbowl. The NFL could care less abut the average fan; all it sees are dollar signs……..

  110. Occam says: May 26, 2010 5:11 PM

    THE godfather says:
    “So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”
    “And America keeps getting dumber and dumber.”
    Godfather: Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. Remember: Knowledge, is good.

  111. Rex Grossman says: May 26, 2010 5:17 PM

    golongboyee – Never played the game? I played football in the 7th and 8th grade you pothead. In the Midwest. Where it’s cold. Need some more credentials? I didn’t develop or evolve into some kind of ice man that never gets cold and has balls of heat. Fact.

  112. jimicos says: May 26, 2010 7:33 PM

    Rex Grossman says:
    May 26, 2010 5:17 PM
    golongboyee – Never played the game? I played football in the 7th and 8th grade you pothead. In the Midwest. Where it’s cold. Need some more credentials? I didn’t develop or evolve into some kind of ice man that never gets cold and has balls of heat. Fact.
    ————————-
    Of course not. No one has “balls of heat”. In fact, sperm cannot live at 98.6 degrees. Sperm get cooked at that temp. That’s why your scrotum has a muscle that contracts to bring the nuts in close when cold and expands to allow the balls to swing freely when warm. The optimal temp for sperm storage/production is around 94 degrees. That’s why wearing tighty whities results in low sperm count. You’re cooking your boys.
    /random human sexual biology fact of the day.

  113. jamaltimore says: May 26, 2010 7:50 PM

    stillers and all the rest of the baltimore schedule makers.
    the only place the ravens should be afraid of meeting the steelers is in a Janitor’s closet with state troopers guarding the entrance.
    I think there was a icestorm in Atlanta for a recent superbowl and the logistics where kinda screwed up but the game was PLAYED inside so all went well for most of the folks who watched at home. Not sure you could say the same thing if the game was outside. Not really opposed to the idea of a coldweather superbowl just not sure why it should be PLAYED IN NEW JERSEY at TEAM that claims NO NFL TEAMS

  114. n0hopeleft says: May 26, 2010 11:08 PM

    Let me help you out. I own a Giants school bus.
    We will get the f**k in there. Snow or not.
    WE MAKE IT HAPPEN!
    Dont believe me? Get at me!
    myspace.com/gmenbus

  115. moezilla says: May 27, 2010 7:40 PM

    I thought the whole purpose of PFT was to post Viking/Packer/Brett Favre articles and then sit back and watch the verbal war ensue.
    Here’s to you….
    Occam says:
    May 26, 2010 5:11 PM
    THE godfather says:
    “So what? Did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?”
    “And America keeps getting dumber and dumber.”
    Godfather: Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son. Remember: Knowledge, is good.
    Is there one of those LOL, ROFL terms for dropped my laptop, fell off the couch, broke my wrist and pissed myself laughing???
    Holy Shit!!! Whoaaaa…..

  116. The Upsetter says: May 28, 2010 5:29 PM

    I don’t care about the comfort of the fans or the logistics of transportation. What I care about is the unbelievable advantage given to the northern outdoor teams. Its so completely obvious!
    And for those who say football is meant to be played in the cold, I say BS! Are you saying that football shouldn’t be played in the south where most of the talent comes from? Are saying that a dome team like The Saints doesn’t play “real football”. BS!
    It would be a shame for any team and their fans to suffer a let down in the SB simply due to weather. As a Saints fan, I know that they didn’t experience bad northern weather the whole season. Not in the regular season, not in the playoffs. Why? Because they’re a southern team and they earned home field advantage.
    The point is is that there’s a strong possibility that a team could play the most important game of the year, for which they EARNED A TICKET TO, and have to play it in a snow storm. Something they have no experience in. Due to a geographical circumstance they’d be punished.
    Leave weather out of the equation when deciding the champ!
    It sucks!!!!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!