2014 Super Bowl

**izzyindetroit** · May-20-09, 12:28 PM

Karsch and Anderson on 97.1 The Ticket just proposed that Mayor Bing should try to get a bid together for the 2014 Super Bowl. Currently the only two cities who are currently bidding for that year are Tampa Bay, FL who hosted the SB last year and London, England. With only two cities bidding they were suggesting that the Mayor would have a good chance to bring a Super Bowl back.

The downside is that the city would have to front $20,000,000 in order to bid for the Bowl.

**iheartthed** · May-20-09, 12:35 PM

What would Detroit get out of hosting the Super Bowl?

**GREENTROIT** · May-20-09, 12:35 PM

The next time the SB is back in Detroit is when they build a new stadium. Theres no way they're coming back to Ford Field.

And Detroit would get tons of benefits. Huge amounts of money, full hotels, full restaurants, tons of exposure to their city... it's basically a week long profit making advertisement. If you do it right.

**izzyindetroit** · May-20-09, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

What would Detroit get out of hosting the Super Bowl?

Economic investment and growth.

**iheartthed** · May-20-09, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by izzyindetroit

Economic investment and growth.

You mean Detroit has already used up all of the economic investment and growth from the one it hosted 3 years ago?

**HazenPingree** · May-20-09, 12:55 PM

the economic investment and growth from the super bowl is negligible - especially when compared to how much a city must spend to actually win a bid for such an event.

this doesn't mean I am opposed to bidding on the event, but one shouldn't host it because they are expecting the city to make a profit from it...

**rjk** · May-20-09, 01:08 PM

When Detroit got the SB a few years ago they were the only city in the running as they were told they were going to get the SB. All the city had to do was meet the criteria set up by the NFL.
Detroit simply can't compete against TB as they'll get a lot of extra points on weather alone.

It would be pointless to spend money and put a bid together. The city should just wait for the NFL to tell them they can have another SB. My guess is that it won't be happening anytime soon.

**GREENTROIT** · May-20-09, 01:12 PM

Andy, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one...

While its impossible to get an exact number, estimates on how much impact Super Bowl XL in Detroit estimated range between $215 Million to $400 Million. That is very significant profits, especially to the service sector. Tax revenues were probably $50 Million of that. We aren't talking about some middling event, this is the worlds biggest sporting event and lasts between 1 and 2 weeks. Here's a study to back me up [[which estimated Detroit would make $372 M from the 2006 event):

http://www.tracer2.com/admin/uploade...expert0301.pdf

--- I still don't think we have a shot in hell of hosting another one...

**mbr** · May-20-09, 01:15 PM

Was there ever a detailed analysis of the true costs and benefits of the super bowl after the fact? I know some groups threw a lot of estimates around of the economic impact but was anything done to assess the actual impact? If they didn't put together a detailed analysis of the event and its impact after the fact they should have and it would be the first thing to look at before assessing if it is worth going after another super bowl.

**iheartthed** · May-20-09, 05:19 PM

I think I remember an analysis that said Detroit just about broke even on what they spent versus the economic boost to the area. Of course, it is impossible to quantify in dollars what the city reaped in good press... But whatever benefits Detroit received in good press were clearly short lived.

I would be more in favor of Detroit pursuing an Olympic bid. A successful bid will force Detroit to make some quality of life improvements that would make it a more viable place to live overall. I don't think hosting the Super Bowl is enough of an incentive for the city to do those things. But the city can tout it's successful stint as previous host city for the Super Bowl as evidence that it could handle the Olympics...

**Gistok** · May-21-09, 01:01 AM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

The next time the SB is back in Detroit is when they build a new stadium. Theres no way they're coming back to Ford Field.

Huh?

Yes they were promised a Superbowl when Ford Field was built... but I wouldn't translate that to mean that they'd have to build another new stadium to get another Superbowl in the future...

**EastsideAl** · May-21-09, 03:02 AM

Detroit was far from the favorite Super Bowl destination for the NFL management types, team people, the press, etc. It was really only the long NFL involvement of Bill Ford and the pull of the auto companies that got the game here. And now that the American auto industry is in such disastrous shape and big ticket auto advertising ion TV is drying up I see no incentive for the NFL to come back this way anytime soon.

Add me to the list of those who are dubious about the actual positive economic impact of big sporting events.

**hudkina** · May-21-09, 03:52 AM

I'm not 100% sure on this, but I would bet $20 million that it doesn't cost $20 million to bid for the Superbowl...

**Olddetroiter** · May-21-09, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by Ralph

The question is, does the metro area have enough plywood to cover up the broken out windows of all the abandoned buildings within eyeshot of the Super Bowl area.

Don't forget about all the plywood they will need to cover up the abandoned Cobo Hall.

**GREENTROIT** · May-21-09, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

Huh?

Yes they were promised a Superbowl when Ford Field was built... but I wouldn't translate that to mean that they'd have to build another new stadium to get another Superbowl in the future...

I don't know. It's a common NFL practice: Build a new stadium, you get a Super Bowl. Dallas has one in their new stadium in 2011, Indianapolis gets it in their new place in 2012. Besides fulfilling new stadium promises, the Super Bowl is basically on rotation between Miami, San Diego, and New Orleans. And rightfully so. Each of those cities offers so much more than a city like Detroit or Indianapolis. First, the weather is obviously better in early February. They have adequate transportation [[enough cabs, public trains) or have a lot of central hotel rooms. Those cities are walkable. There are other things to do that can occupy a visitor that is here from Wednesday to Monday. Detroit has no realistic chance at another Super Bowl... Nobody was really happy that we got the one in 2006, and nobody really wants to come back.

**kraig** · May-21-09, 08:09 AM

Closed mouths don't get fed. Go for it, the worst that can happen is that the NFL will say no. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. We may catch the right person in the right mood.

**iheartthed** · May-21-09, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

I don't know. It's a common NFL practice: Build a new stadium, you get a Super Bowl. Dallas has one in their new stadium in 2011, Indianapolis gets it in their new place in 2012. Besides fulfilling new stadium promises, the Super Bowl is basically on rotation between Miami, San Diego, and New Orleans. And rightfully so. Each of those cities offers so much more than a city like Detroit or Indianapolis. First, the weather is obviously better in early February. They have adequate transportation [[enough cabs, public trains) or have a lot of central hotel rooms. Those cities are walkable. There are other things to do that can occupy a visitor that is here from Wednesday to Monday. Detroit has no realistic chance at another Super Bowl... Nobody was really happy that we got the one in 2006, and nobody really wants to come back.

Well, besides the weather, I can't think of anything that Miami, New Orleans or San Diego have that Detroit doesn't. They are all sprawled. All lack a train system. Miami and New Orleans clearly have crime issues like Detroit. The only reason they continue to get the SB is because of their climates.

The Super Bowl has only been hosted north of the mason-dixon three times in history, and two of those times it was in Metro Detroit. And all three times, the host city was awarded the game after building a new stadium.

I found an interesting article written this year for the Tampa Tribune about the mythological Super Bowl boost. [[Am I the only one who forgot that the SB was even in Tampa this year?)

Detroit didn’t get a boost in image from hosting the 2006 Super Bowl, but more people said they might visit after the embattled city pulled off a successful game week, the poll found.

http://cerc.net/in-the-news/spotligh...lasting-boost/

**Fnemecek** · May-21-09, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by izzyindetroit

Karsch and Anderson on 97.1 The Ticket just proposed that Mayor Bing should try to get a bid together for the 2014 Super Bowl. Currently the only two cities who are currently bidding for that year are Tampa Bay, FL who hosted the SB last year and London, England. With only two cities bidding they were suggesting that the Mayor would have a good chance to bring a Super Bowl back.

The downside is that the city would have to front $20,000,000 in order to bid for the Bowl.

I concur with Karsh and Anderson. First, there's no real chance for London to host the Super Bowl. We'd really only have to beat Tampa.

Contrary to what all of the naysayers argue, the reviews of Detroit's SBXL hosting were generally positive. They did point out a few shortcomings [[lack of mass transit, trouble getting cabs near the RenCen, etc.). However, those are all things that we are already making progress on.

Since SBXL, Detroit has opened a couple thousand new hotel rooms that are within walking distance of Ford Field. That's huge. It both minimizes how much mass transit we need and maximizes the our benefits. During SBXL, people were staying in hotels as far away as Toledo and Ann Arbor.

We're starting to see some progress in improving mass transit downtown. This, of course, will get kicked into high gear if another Super Bowl comes to town.

**SWMAP** · May-21-09, 09:13 AM

The Mayor doesn't decide to bid - the Detroit Lions decide. The City doesn't pay for the bid - the Detroit Convention Bureau does [[always has, at least) and neither the Bureau nor the Lions organization want to bid. It would be impossible to raise the funds. And the NFL doesn't want to come north. They only do it as a reward for a new stadium.

**kraig** · May-21-09, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by SWMAP

The Mayor doesn't decide to bid - the Detroit Lions decide. The City doesn't pay for the bid - the Detroit Convention Bureau does [[always has, at least) and neither the Bureau nor the Lions organization want to bid. It would be impossible to raise the funds. And the NFL doesn't want to come north. They only do it as a reward for a new stadium.

They might as well bid. Neither organization has anything going on that approaches the magnitude of the Superbowl. Besides, until the Cobo mess is cleared up, Larry Alexander doesn't have anything to do. Just kidding, he's a good guy.

**GREENTROIT** · May-21-09, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Well, besides the weather, I can't think of anything that Miami, New Orleans or San Diego have that Detroit doesn't. They are all sprawled. All lack a train system. Miami and New Orleans clearly have crime issues like Detroit. The only reason they continue to get the SB is because of their climates.

I gotta disagree. I love Detroit as much as anyone, but really? New Orleans has the French Quarter and Bourbon Street, which Detroit has no match for. New Olreans has like 100 hotels, Detroit has like 5. New Orleans has world famous cuisine, and they have casino's like us. When you think of New Orleans you think of a good time and a party... which is what the NFL wants in a SB host city. Miami is the same way, tons of nightlife, a great beach, a lot of cabs, unlimited things to do, tons of hotels. San Diego has the best weather in the country, has the Gaslamp Quarter, and can handle the increase in visitors way better than Detroit.

I know we all love Detroit, but we aren't a MAJOR city anymore. I see about 3 cabs a day. Where do people stay for the Super Bowl? Windsor? Southfield? How do they get into downtown? A cab that doesn't exist? And what do they do at night? MGM and Motor City have to get old after two nights....

**Gistok** · May-21-09, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

I gotta disagree. I love Detroit as much as anyone, but really? New Orleans has the French Quarter and Bourbon Street, which Detroit has no match for. New Olreans has like 100 hotels, Detroit has like 5. New Orleans has world famous cuisine, and they have casino's like us. When you think of New Orleans you think of a good time and a party... which is what the NFL wants in a SB host city. Miami is the same way, tons of nightlife, a great beach, a lot of cabs, unlimited things to do, tons of hotels. San Diego has the best weather in the country, has the Gaslamp Quarter, and can handle the increase in visitors way better than Detroit.

I know we all love Detroit, but we aren't a MAJOR city anymore. I see about 3 cabs a day. Where do people stay for the Super Bowl? Windsor? Southfield? How do they get into downtown? A cab that doesn't exist? And what do they do at night? MGM and Motor City have to get old after two nights....

Whoa.... talk about an inferiority complex!!

You are comparing Detroit to probably the best of the superbowl contenders... what about Jacksonville and Tampa? The people who went to the Superbowl the year before Detroit hated Jacksonville because there was literally nothing to do there.

As for hotel space... 5 hotels is just the number that came online since the Superbowl.... we seem to have done alright for the Superbowl before these additional 5 swanky hotels came online.

So you don't think there's anything to do in metro Detroit? Do you even get out much?

1. Henry Ford Museum
2. Greenfield Village
3. Greektown [[it may not be Bourbon St., but you can only eat and drink so much...)
4. DIA
5. Science Center
6. Charles M. Wright Museum
7. Detoit Historical Museum
8. Hitsville USA
9. Detroit's Casinos
10. Trip to Windsor Ballet
11. Auto Heritage Tours
etc...

All the downtown historic movie palaces had shows for the Superbowl visitors. The visiting journalists were blown away by the extra spectacular show that was put on for them at the Fox Theatre... they raved about it [[and the theatre itself)...

Other cities set up tents for the Superbowl visitors... but we use glorious historic interiors... such as the Guardian and Whitney Building towering opulent lobbies, and the Fox State/Filmore, Opera House, Music Hall ornate interiors.

Sounds like some folks on this thread weren't paying attention as to the comments from the Superbowl visitors.

Granted we don't have a lot of sunshine or sunny beaches in January... but that's not to say that we couldn't put up a grand party.

I swear, sometimes the biggest detractors of Detroit are many of those who actually live [[or have lived) here... while the biggest fans are those who [[expecting a dangerous hell hole) are pleasantly surprised at all the nice stuff that Detroit has to offer out of town visitors.

Oh... and just because we're undergoing a tough time in the economy... we're still a MAJOR city... remember nearly 5 million people STILL LIVE IN METRO DETROIT.... compare that to metro San Diego, New Orleans, Tampa or Jacksonville...

**iheartthed** · May-21-09, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by GREENTROIT

I gotta disagree. I love Detroit as much as anyone, but really? New Orleans has the French Quarter and Bourbon Street, which Detroit has no match for. New Olreans has like 100 hotels, Detroit has like 5. New Orleans has world famous cuisine, and they have casino's like us. When you think of New Orleans you think of a good time and a party... which is what the NFL wants in a SB host city. Miami is the same way, tons of nightlife, a great beach, a lot of cabs, unlimited things to do, tons of hotels. San Diego has the best weather in the country, has the Gaslamp Quarter, and can handle the increase in visitors way better than Detroit.

I know we all love Detroit, but we aren't a MAJOR city anymore. I see about 3 cabs a day. Where do people stay for the Super Bowl? Windsor? Southfield? How do they get into downtown? A cab that doesn't exist? And what do they do at night? MGM and Motor City have to get old after two nights....

You're saying this as if Detroit hasn't hosted a Super Bowl before. Cabs? That is a non-issue that can be easily fixed. Detroit has plenty of hotel space between itself, inner-ring suburbs and Windsor. The Detroit Metro area is roughly the same size as the Miami area, about 1.5 times the size of the San Diego area, and four times the size of the New Orleans area. Stop confusing being a tourist destination with being a major metropolis.

**Gistok** · May-21-09, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by Ralph

So much to do, you're right.

You should move to the city and help be part of the solution.

What makes you think you can't do it from where I live? I belong to Preservation Wayne, give city tours to tour buses full of Europeans and USA out-of-towners, do movie palace tours, help with cleanups of some downtown buildings, and constantly bring friends and relatives [[in and out of state) into the city as a Detroit Ambassador of Goodwill.

I even got mentioned in one of the Detroit Convention & Visitors Guide a few years back.

You see that is a common misconception among many forumers... they think it is necessary to actually live in Detroit in order to contribute to the well being of Detroit. Neither Lowell, Kathleen, nor myself actually live within the city limits... and yet we contribute more to promoting Detroit than the majority of Detroiters...

It's not where you live... it's how you spend your time living...

**GREENTROIT** · May-21-09, 11:19 AM

@ Gistok... OK, the Super Bowl crowd is not interested in the DIA, or the Science Museum. They want bars open till 4 AM, parties, adult clubs, all within a close distance to one another. Detroit doesn't have this. Visitors don't want to wake up in Southfield, have to find a way to get into Downtown Detroit, go from location to location in 10 inches of snow, then have nothing to do at night unless they go through the hassle of crossing the border. And I'm comparing Detroit to these cities because it was said earlier that Detroit has everything that these cities offer. I was disputing that. And the reasons you stated are the reasons the NFL will never allow Jacksonville to host another SB... or Houston for that matter.

@iheartthed... Yes, Detroit metro is huge, but that doesn't make the city capable of handling an event like this. The city needs to have many attractions centrally located and all within very close distance of hotels. Detroit doesn't offer this. It's not walkable especially in early February. The reasons Detroit isn't a tourist destination are the same reason's its not a good Super Bowl host.

-- I love Detroit and love living here. I just don't think we're a good Super Bowl host and don't think we will ever get another one in Ford Field. There are too many better options.