Greg from Cleveland writes: If the Super Bowl is awarded to New York, it opens up the notion of other "cold-weather" cities to bid on the big game. Which stadium in the AFC North do you think would have the best chance of landing the big game?
That's an interesting question, Greg, because it appears the NFL is open lately to awarding Super Bowls to cold-weather cities.
Nothing against Detroit. But if the Motor City can host a Super Bowl, why not Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Cleveland or Cincinnati? New York could be the next cold-weather city in line for the big game in 2014.
But, honestly, I don't see the league awarding a Super Bowl to the AFC North any time soon.
For starters, Ford Field in Detroit has a roof. Super Bowl XL was not a cold-weather game, it was merely hosted in a cold-weather city. There's a big difference.
New York will be open, but the city has plenty of good things going for it. First, it's New York City-- a large metropolis/media market that can handle just about any major event. Second, the stadium is brand new. AFC North teams cannot provide those two amenities.
But if I had to pick one AFC North city with the best (albeit small) chance of hosting a future Super Bowl, it would be Pittsburgh. In my opinion, Pittsburgh is a very good "event city." The town also has a rich football history and recently did a great job of hosting the Stanley Cup Finals and NFL Kickoff Weekend against the Tennessee Titans.
But for now, having a Super Bowl in Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati or Baltimore is probably a pipe dream. So don't hold your breath, AFC North fans.