Denver Broncos blog, news and rumors


[hype it up!]
[Share with Yardbarker]

Published on 11/29/2012 at Thu Nov 29 07:00.
Tagged: ,,,,,,,,,,.

The 2016 Super Bowl will mark the first time since 1976 that the game’s number does not include the Roman numeral “X”.  In four years, the fiftieth Super Bowl in league history will take place, creating an awkward situation for the NFL in trying to market Super Bowl “L”.

Two years later, Super Bowl LII will be on deck and the Denver Broncos would like to host it, according to the Denver Post.

“One goal that NFL fanatic Denver Mayor Michael Hancock has for his city is to one day bring a Super Bowl to the Mile High City, and steps are being made to do just that.

“The Denver Broncos and Visit Denver in late August submitted an application to the National Football League’s Super Bowl Advisory Committee to bid to host the Super Bowl in 2018, 2019 or 2020.”

‘”We will pursue it along with Visit Denver,” Hancock said in a meeting with The Denver Post editorial board on Wednesday. “I think Denver would be head and shoulders above any other city to compete to host a Super Bowl.”‘

Denver is one of seventeen NFL cities that have never hosted a Super Bowl. Would you like to see Denver host a Super Bowl?  Before answering in the comments below, consider tbis:  Of the 20 teams that have played host to a Super Bowl since the playoffs expanded to its current form in 1990, only three have qualified for the playoffs

  • Big_Pete

    I think it would be AWESOME to have a superbowl here. Quick question though…. as a season ticket holder, would I automatically get a ticket? I doubt it, but just curious.

    Also, our city would be perfect. We have a good highway infrastructure, we have a dedicated drinking section of downtown, we have skiing, parks, lakes, hiking, etc for the “visitors” that come with hosting a superbowl.

    Altitude wouldn’t be an issue as each team would have a few weeks to adjust, plus, we aren’t as huge as NYC, so having a superbowl here would feel as if the superbowl was here, instead of hosting a superbowl in NYC and having it just another thing to do because it’s such a huge city anyways.

    As for the “only 3 teams have made the playoffs in the same year their city has hosted the superbowl” thing, I’m not worried about that. The NFL tends to be cyclical, so who knows where we’ll be in 6-8 years anyways, AND, the majority of superbowls are played in San Diego, Miami, and New Orleans… history shows us that those teams generally suck, so the chances of one of those 3 teams making the superbowl in the year they don’t suck are slim. I know New Orleans has been good the last 3 years, and San Diego from 2006-2010, but those are really the exceptions. Before that, when was S.D, N.O, or Miami any good? Get my drift? Indy didn’t have Peyton when they hosted it, so you can throw that stat right out the window. Dallas has underperformed the last decade, so you can’t rely on that stat for superbowl hosting teams.

    I do think hosting a superbowl for a “playoff contender” adds extra pressure, but if that team can’t handle that pressure, then there is no way they’ll ever handle the pressure of the playoff system with a shot at the superbowl anyways. Therefore, hosting a superbowl *should* have no bearing on the team’s play.

  • areferee

    Other than pure happenstance, there is no connection between hosting a Super Bowl and having your local team qualify for the big game. No connection!

    Therefore, because the precedent has already been set for “cold weather” venues being accepted to host the game, Denver should host the game for all the same reasons any other city is chosen. The fan base, the city infrastructure and the stadium are ALL of Super Bowl quality.

    The threat of poor weather in Colorado in February is certainly no greater than New York or New Jersey… and many football purists… myself included, prefer the world’s finest game being played outdoors in the elements anyway.

    Regardless of the year, Denver should definitely be selected to host the Super Bowl. Besides… the “Duke” can provide all the dignitaries with a new car.

  • Big_Pete


    Plus, we have so much stuff to do if the weather is bad. I mean, snow may mean a sloppier superbowl (but probably not seeing they’ll tarp the shit out of the field until pregame warmups), but snow means skiing in the mountains. If you’re in NY or NJ and it’s snowing, you’re just miserable. If it’s snowing in Denver, hell, you got world class skiing to do! That’s why I think the elements should be much less of a negative factor in allowing Denver to host the big game.

  • areferee

    Season ticket holder’s chances are greater in the “lottery” system they use. Go here for a complete answer to your question, Big Pete.

  • herc_rock

    It would be awesome.

    If it snows in New York next year though it’ll be a long shot.

  • TheTroglodyte

    Right on aref!

  • Big_Pete

    Yep. The weather has to be PERFECT in NYC for the NFL to even consider Denver or any other cold weather place as a possibility.

  • Jon Broncos Heath

    Which is dumb.

    Football is one sport that plays in all weather (save lightning)…

  • Big_Pete

    I agree whole heartedly. Unfortunately, the Commish and competition committee don’t agree. They seem to think that if you have the Broncos vs Atlanta in the superbowl and it’s in NYC with snow, the Broncos will have an unfair advantage because we are use to it….

    Well, isn’t that backwards philosophy the same as saying that if it’s Broncos vs Atlanta and it’s in a dome that Atlanta would have an advantage cause they’re a dome team!

    It’s just stupid, archaic, and ignorant logic expressed by the NFL

  • areferee

    Isn’t that their name? No Freaking Logic?

  • areferee

    (And we can even put snow tires on all the cars… hehehe)

  • Doom92

    Pete if you get tickets you have to take me with you ;-)…lol