How MetLife Stadium scored Super Bowl 2014, bringing the big game to N.J.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

from article:


The bidding specifications for this year’s Super Bowl, obtained by The Star-Ledger, mandated tens of millions in expenses that would be borne by whoever won the honor of hosting the game. The 127-page document outlined everything from the minimum size of the stadium (the NFL mandates a seating capacity of at least 70,000, after an allowance of 3,000 seats for camera and production locations), to power and lighting needs.

It required the stadium and all parking be made available rent-free to the NFL, which controls 100 percent of all tickets and luxury suites. It wanted evidence of at least 19,000 "top-quality, full service rooms contracted for the NFL and NFL-related groups" with firm and binding advance commitments.

It also required the formation of a host committee with an executive director, a full-time staff of event and marketing professionals, and the ability to raise $18 million or more to fund and manage major events. (It would eventually cost more than $70 million.)

And it required a climate-controlled domed stadium "if the historical average daily temperature over a 10-year period in the host city on the week of the game is below 50 degrees" — a mandate that needed agreement from the owners to at least a one-time exception before a cold-weather Super Bowl with a view of the New York skyline was even possible.

full article - interesting
http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2014/01/how_metlife_stadium_scored_super_bowl_2014_bringin g_the_big_game_to_nj.html

[Dzone]

Good article. I assumed a lot of it had to do with the Mara family being leaders of the NFL since its inception. Didnt know that Woody was so involved. I liked what they said a bout a snow super bowl being more romantic and memorable. They may have a point, just so long as the broncos win. lol

[Joel]

The "how" is the 32 owners agreed the NFL should pay back one of them for spending a few $100 million (or rather, getting a host city to spend most of it) on an expensive, luxury-skybox-filled stadium with state-of-the-art technology (yet somehow WITHOUT a ROOF, which hasn't been state-of-the-art since cavemen.) In other words, the same way most recent SBs were awarded.

At least NFL insiders got 19,000 top quality full service rooms: For the fans. ;)

[Tned]

The "how" is the 32 owners agreed the NFL should pay back one of them for spending a few $100 million (or rather, getting a host city to spend most of it) on an expensive, luxury-skybox-filled stadium with state-of-the-art technology (yet somehow WITHOUT a ROOF, which hasn't been state-of-the-art since cavemen.) In other words, the same way most recent SBs were awarded.

At least NFL insiders got 19,000 top quality full service rooms: For the fans. ;)

Do you just copy and paste this in all the threads or have you memorized it?

[Joel]

Do you just copy and paste this in all the threads or have you memorized it?
More the latter. I was amused at the insinuation the expense of free stadium parking somehow burdened the host owner, as if they don't keep the bulk of stadium receipts and the price of the CHEAPEST SB seats weren't still well over $1000 each despite precipitously FALLING the last few days.

Unless they've changed it, the one thing NFL owners don't split 32 ways is the gate. I concede I haven't checked whether that applies to SBs, but if not—even if we skip concessions, programs, foam fingers and commemorative SB souvenirs, and just count the cheap seats—how does $1000X70,000 work out for the Giants and Jets in ONE game they aren't even PLAYING?

Good old fashioned cold weather football for the love of the game and its history; sure.... ;)

[MOtorboat]

Super Bowl ticket revenue goes to the league, not the host teams.

Conspiracy averted!

[Tned]

More the latter. I was amused at the insinuation the expense of free stadium parking somehow burdened the host owner, as if they don't keep the bulk of stadium receipts and the price of the CHEAPEST SB seats weren't still well over $1000 each despite precipitously FALLING the last few days.

Unless they've changed it, the one thing NFL owners don't split 32 ways is the gate. I concede I haven't checked whether that applies to SBs, but if not—even if we skip concessions, programs, foam fingers and commemorative SB souvenirs, and just count the cheap seats—how does $1000X70,000 work out for the Giants and Jets in ONE game they aren't even PLAYING?

Good old fashioned cold weather football for the love of the game and its history; sure.... ;)

You should read more and post less and what you do post will become much more intelligent.

Why not do a little research when you don't know something, rather than just making shit up and stating it as if it's a fact.

[Joel]

Super Bowl ticket revenue goes to the league, not the host teams.

Conspiracy averted!
A source would've been nice, but the Dallas Morning News had one: http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/super-bowl/local/20110203-how-cowboys-owner-jerry-jones-found-a-way-to-profit-on-super-bowl.ece Short form: Super Bowls are an exception to the "host team keeps the gate" rule, although stadium concessions are an exception to that exception. Correction noted and accepted though.


You should read more and post less and what you do post will become much more intelligent.

Why not do a little research when you don't know something, rather than just making shit up and stating it as if it's a fact.
Not making up anything: It IS documented fact host teams keep the gate. You're right I should've researched MORE facts to find out if the SB's an exception, because it is, so I was wrong. In future I'll be more diligently careful.

[MOtorboat]

A source would've been nice, but the Dallas Morning News had one: http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/super-bowl/local/20110203-how-cowboys-owner-jerry-jones-found-a-way-to-profit-on-super-bowl.ece Short form: Super Bowls are an exception to the "host team keeps the gate" rule, although stadium concessions are an exception to that exception. Correction noted and accepted though.


Not making up anything: It IS documented fact host teams keep the gate. You're right I should've researched MORE facts to find out if the SB's an exception, because it is, so I was wrong. In future I'll be more diligently careful.

I didn't need a source. It's in the above article. You should have read it.

[Joel]

I didn't need a source. It's in the above article. You should have read it.
It says the NFL controls all the tickets, not that it gets all the revenue. The league distributes tickets to all players and owners, so it CONTROLS each and every one; does it make a dime off any?

I saw nothing in the OP article saying the NFL gets all the REVENUE and shares it between all 32 teams, but won't dispute it if it's there.

[MOtorboat]

It says the NFL controls all the tickets, not that it gets all the revenue. The league distributes tickets to all players and owners, so it CONTROLS each and every one; does it make a dime off any?

Really?

Jesus you are stubborn.

[Joel]

Really?

Jesus you are stubborn.
Often, yes, but this is about making assumptions on limited data, which I'm told is Very Bad.

[MOtorboat]

Often, yes, but this is about making assumptions on limited data, which I'm told is Very Bad.

You know what the word control means right? For ****s sake, the writer probably didn't think he would need to explain what that meant in such minute detail to ward off conspiracy theories.

You were wrong. The article said so, and it looks like a 10 second Google search proved it so. Give it up.

[Joel]

You know what the word control means right? For ****s sake, the writer probably didn't think he would need to explain what that meant in such minute detail to ward off conspiracy theories.

You were wrong. The article said so, and it looks like a 10 second Google search proved it so. Give it up.
Um... I said I was wrong and you were right, which ought to be enough since that was the issue. It doesn't mean "control"="exclusively retains all revenue from." Assumptions based on failure to research are no more justified for one person than any other, and being right about the main point doesn't mean they can't be wrong about something else.

Tell ya what: Before this (further) descends into another one of THOSE threads, you take the last word (if you like) and we can all get on with our lives.

[Tned]

Um... I said I was wrong and you were right, which ought to be enough since that was the issue. It doesn't mean "control"="exclusively retains all revenue from." Assumptions based on failure to research are no more justified for one person than any other, and being right about the main point doesn't mean they can't be wrong about something else.

Tell ya what: Before this (further) descends into another one of THOSE threads, you take the last word (if you like) and we can all get on with our lives.

This might be a good time to research "last word" since every other time you've used the phrase you have come right back and continued defending/rationalizing your wrong position.

[Krugan]

This thread had a chance before it went all, pissing match.

Congrats :)