This week in the NFL, the big news was the reveal of the hosts of Super Bowl L and LI. Being the offseason, naturally it has become a discussion point, because we as fans crave something to debate. It's way too soon to talk predictions, so let's discuss Super Bowl hosts...
New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft had this to say about the Patriots possibly hosting the big game:
"We would love, one day, to hold it here if it's a good experience," (Source)
Location is an issue for Gillette. It's also an issue with Super Bowl's in Arizona, with Glendale being approximately a half hour away from Phoenix. With Foxboro being far away from Boston, it doesn't make too much sense. It makes more sense in Arizona simply because their facilities are better.
Frankly, the competition is just too good for Gillette Stadium to compete with. As Pats fans, we love Gillette. Photo's like the one above are amazing. But look at previous hosts like NOLA, Indy, Texas (Dallas and Houston) and Arizona. All are established host cities, with track records for hosting good Super Bowls.
Then you've got places like San Fran, Atlanta and Minnesota. Designing great looking new stadiums, with modern facilities, they'll all be looking to host future Super Bowls. Then of the cold weather stadiums, you've got New York, and I think places like Seattle have a better shot of hosting, with the incredible atmosphere they can generate. Heck, even LA, with no NFL team, are working on the "Build it, and they will come" strategy, so they could become prospective hosts.
So, it looks unlikely Boston will get its shot at hosting the Super Bowl while Gillette is still our home. But do we really want it? Gillette is still a new stadium, opening in 2002, we're settled in it. We don't want to be spending a load of cash to build a new stadium just to host the Super Bowl. As Mr. Kraft said, I'd rather be playing in it than playing host to it.
As usual, well said Bob!
I'm on Twitter, you can find me @BrendanAnnely