Snyder: Washington deserves a Super Bowl
IRVING, Tex.--Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder said here Tuesday that D.C. deserves to host a future Super Bowl.
Snyder and the other owners are scheduled to vote during their one-day spring meeting to award the 2014 Super Bowl, possibly to the New York area. Snyder said during a midday break in the meeting, held at a Dallas-area hotel, that Washington should get a Super Bowl, whether or not New York is awarded the 2014 game.
"I think Washington should get one, no matter what," Snyder said. "It is the nation's capital."
The owners are to vote Tuesday afternoon on the 2014 game. The other bidders are Tampa and the Miami area.
The New York area is regarded by many observers as a strong favorite to get the game. The 2014 game is the next Super Bowl without a host city already assigned. Next year's game is to be in Dallas, followed by Super Bowls in Indianapolis in 2012 and New Orleans in 2013.
The league allowed the New York bid to proceed by waiving its usual requirement that a potential Super Bowl host city with an outdoor stadium have an average temperature of at least 50 degrees at that time of the year.
A vote in New York's favor Tuesday potentially could lead other cities, such as Washington, to examine the possibility of hosting a future Super Bowl. But some owners seemed to regard this as a one-time-only maneuver tied to the size of the New York market and the construction of a new stadium for the Giants and Jets.
The 2014 game would be played at that stadium, which is scheduled to open next season and is located at the Meadowlands in East Rutherford, N.J.
By
Mark Maske
|
May 25, 2010; 2:44 PM ET
| Category:
Redskins
,
Super Bowl
Save & Share:
Previous: On cold-weather Super Bowls |
Next: Super Bowl awarded to New York area
Posted by: thomasuras | May 28, 2010 9:29 AM
Snider has put a face on the redskins as "anti fan" the first to charge for visitors to mini camp ,suing fans to who cant afford their tickits after reselling their tickets a action that was banned for fans. I dont see snider ever getting a SB hes not the face the NFL wants.Skins fans are the only fans that would put up with this the NFL wont
Posted by: thomasuras | May 28, 2010 8:49 AM
uh, the ban on signs has been removed along time ago. when 9/11 happened the redskins and giants ask then about hosting a superbowl on the east coast near where everything happened, the nfl said no. so that shows the nfl is more about money then anything else. they were asked about waiving the rule for 9/11 and was told no, but now that the giants/jets spent all that money on a new stadium they waived the rule so the new jersey jets/giants can sell the boxes out. money money money...screw american patriotism, unless of during the course of screwing it you can make alot of money. i understand why the nfl has the rule to try and keep the game on level playing fields, but either drop the rule, or enforce it. dont change it to soot the team that just built the new stadium....
Posted by: snyper94z28 | May 26, 2010 10:15 PM
with the current sign ban in effect I cant see how anyone would be considering Fed X field for a SB . That's just not normal
Posted by: thomasuras | May 26, 2010 6:58 PM
Dan is right, A SB here would be great!
Posted by: Badwisky | May 26, 2010 4:18 PM
"Washington deserves a Superbowl."
And Snyder deserves a punch in the cherries.
Posted by: diesel_skins_ | May 25, 2010 8:52 PM
I understand Landover Rd. being an eyesore to SB higher ups...guess the roads in Jersey leading to that new stadium are top fllight also...
Posted by: pentagon40 | May 25, 2010 6:10 PM
Shut up midget...You saw the debacle that was this past February with 'Snowpocalypse'. This town can't handle 2 inches much less 2 ft. of snow. Shut up and direct all questions to Bruce.
Posted by: kahlua87 | May 25, 2010 5:39 PM
I wouldn't trust Snyder to run a Super Bowl party, much less an entire Super Bowl.
Posted by: Randy_Hawkins | May 25, 2010 5:10 PM
More importantly, why hasn't Washington been a venue for NCAA men's basketball tournament?
Posted by: justsayin | May 25, 2010 4:59 PM
If they liked you, Dan, you might have a shot. Too bad, eh?
Posted by: muddapucker | May 25, 2010 4:32 PM
Landover, MD has got to be the absolute worst, most depressing locale of any NFL stadium. Can you imagine the selection committee driving down Landover RD...hmmm what a nice place to host a Super Bowl! Look at all the fine dining establishments.
Posted by: nativedc | May 25, 2010 4:31 PM
To be honest Philly and Bmore deserve it more than DC and NY. DC and NY stadiums are too far from their host cities
Posted by: doesntmatter | May 25, 2010 4:24 PM
Put a roof on it!
Posted by: ceefer66 | May 25, 2010 4:14 PM
Is there a more desolate, depressing town than Landover, MD? A Super Bowl in Landover?
Are you kidding me?
Posted by: nativedc | May 25, 2010 4:06 PM
I'm all for an outdoor venue that is not in Miami, or some other warm city that always seems to get the revenue and the benefits of hosting Superbowl week.
Nothing wrong with hosting a Superbowl in a cold climate. I'm sick and tired of always seeing the same cities year after year.
Posted by: Jotas | May 25, 2010 3:58 PM
Maybe after you change the team name.
Posted by: jckdoors | May 25, 2010 3:39 PM
^ This
Posted by: RichinVA | May 25, 2010 3:35 PM
first we deserve an owner who knows his place. i.e. let management and coaches do their jobs.
Posted by: icebluekoolaid1 | May 25, 2010 3:34 PM
"If you build it, they will come"
If Snyder builds a new stadium in DC (NOT Maryland) with state of the art crap and all the fancy fixins that the new mega stadiums have now, then DC will have it's Super Bowl.
Posted by: jgarrisn | May 25, 2010 3:27 PM
Shut up Snyder.
Posted by: dbunkr | May 25, 2010 3:23 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
thats one way to get a winning team to maryland