The League

THE QUESTION

Home-Field Advantage At the Super Bowl?

Should the Super Bowl no longer be played at a neutral location?

Posted by Emil Steiner on January 26, 2009 12:00 PM
FROM THE PANEL

Home-Field Would be Advantageous

The NFL is so successful now it can afford to do the right thing.

Posted by Emil Steiner, on January 26, 2009 1:19 PM

The Spectacle, Not the Game

That's why we'll remember more about Janet Jackson's performance in Super Bowl XXXVIII than we will Tom Brady's.

Posted by Dan Levy, on January 26, 2009 12:45 PM

Neutral Site Is Better

The Super Bowl is half football game, half entertainment spectacle. Such things go over much better in climates conducive to comfort.

Posted by Doug Farrar, on January 26, 2009 12:33 PM

Home Work to Be Done

Money and marketing are higher priorities to the NFL than home-field advantage.

Posted by Zach Leibowitz, on January 26, 2009 6:19 AM

FEATURED COMMENTS

LegallyMurphy: The only way this would work is if you made the Super Bowl a best of 3 series. I think that would be great, but we'd end up playing football...

TomfromNJ1: Re the comment by LegallyMurphy Actually, it could end just where it is now because there are 2 weeks we could eliminate. Drop the bye wee...

cardman25: I am surprised that this has not been proposed yet. Best of 3, home field for the better record and I agree with Tom drop the bye weeks. Sea...

Make a Comment  |  All Comments (4)

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company