This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel.
I think to dominate the AFC East you have to build a team that can play in those conditions. All 3 of our division rivals host cold weather games, and we often end up with at least 2 december away games in our division.
We have to have a dominant run defense and dominant run offense. But we also have to have a 'sufficient' passing game to balance our attack, to play with the warm weather turf teams, and to be able to score quickly in a 2 minute drill.
But I think the ground game has to be a priority for both sides of the ball.
I can't believe they would have a SB in the snow anywhere. But if that is the case, then Denver would be the best spot in the nation. Plenty of hotel space, and skiing just an hour away. I would think that Colorado would be pushing for it if NYC gets it.
When the new stadium was built here, many people pushed for a dome stadium just for that reason. Denver weather is much more mild than NYC. Front range weather has plenty of sunshine.
I think you have Tampa confused with Jacksonville where they had to house people on cruise ships because they couldn't handle the overflow.
Tampa is perfectly capable of handling a Super Bowl....and not a dump. The Tampa Bay area is a beautiful place and has a population of over 4 million people.
I prefer the cities across the bay for living but to call it a dump is completely asinine.
Now Meadowlands is in New Jersey not New York so if you want to talk about a dump....it is ACTUALLY a dump....and contaminated.
Joe Robbie is 23 years old. Ray Jay is 12 years old and you don't have to be fluent in Spanish to reserve a hotel room or buy a cup of coffee.
eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I highly doubt you have ever been to Tampa or
> anywhere else since I doubt they let you out for
> anything more than a one hour exercise period.
lose a debate, and resort to namecalling. Happens everytime.
#1 No one on this board has ever lost a debate to you.
#2 You are describing yourself. I did not call you any names but did make and implication with light-hearted humor.
You did, however imply that I was a racist prior to that...so you are right about one thing...it does happen every time but you are always the one doing the name calling.
#3 The levels to which you have already sunk are titanic.
Phinsfan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Leon In Denver Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I can't believe they would have a SB in the
> snow
> > anywhere. But if that is the case, then Denver
> > would be the best spot in the nation. Plenty of
> > hotel space, and skiing just an hour away. I
> would
> > think that Colorado would be pushing for it if
> NYC
> > gets it.
> >
>
>
> No offense to Denver, but its not even in the same
> league as NYC when it comes to Hotels,
> restaurants, New Stadium (opens this year), things
> to do, etc.
>
> As my grandfather used to say "there is only one
> Paris, and that's New York."
>
> Saying Denver is a better place for the Super Bowl
> than NYC is like saying that the World Football
> League was the best Football league in the world.
Sure NYC has hotels, cabs, crowded streets, lots of expensive places to go, lots of bad weather and is a royal pain in the A.. to get around in. If Tampa, Miami, Arizona, New Orleans, can host it, Denver would be a better spot than all except Miami. Denver has the hotels, great town, mountains with a good weeks worth of skiing very close to the city and great weather even when it snows. Denver weather is much better than NYC and that is plain fact.
I don't know how much travel you have done, but I have been to all of these places many times. I actually LOVE NYC. Great place to visit as is Boston. But for a Super Bowl? No freaking way. I can imagine the amount of money spent throughout Colorado that time of year. Just a great place to be.
I'm actually suprised they haven't brought the game back to LA. Or to SFO. Didn't they even have it in Detroit once?
Again, I really don't understand why the NFL would even consider a northern city without a dome. I can just picture this. Snow, cold, crappy transportation because of crowds, weather, and crappy game that proves very little with snow and cold. No keep the dam game in the South.
eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> You did, however imply that I was a racist prior
> to that...so you are right about one thing...it
> does happen every time but you are always the one
> doing the name calling.
>
I didn't imply you were racist, I said you were racist!!! You brought the racist slur and undertone into this deabte. And I called you on it!! With the backhanded comment that you can't get anything in Miami speaking English and needing to speak spanish. You mentioned that as a slap in the face to the city of Miami and to prop up Tampa. Don't lie now, that was your intention. You were race baiting and brought ethnic slurs into this.
Leon In Denver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm actually suprised they haven't brought the
> game back to LA. Or to SFO. Didn't they even have
> it in Detroit once?
>
> Again, I really don't understand why the NFL would
> even consider a northern city without a dome. I
> can just picture this. Snow, cold, crappy
> transportation because of crowds, weather, and
> crappy game that proves very little with snow and
> cold. No keep the dam game in the South.
It hasn't been in LA or SF because they have old stadiums and those stadiums can't handle this event.
How the NFL works now, if you build a new stadium, you get a Super Bowl. That's why Detroit got one. That is why its in Dallas this upcoming year and in Indy the following.
Now the Northeastern city's have been left out of this loop until now it looks like. NYC is probably going to get one. I expect Synder to then chrip up and get one in DC soon after. And with London on the horizon, the landcape of the Super Bowl is deffinitly changing.
In my opinion I would like to see a New Orleans, Miami, Dallas, Arizona, and Atlanta rotation. Those 5 cities can hold the event and the mass of people BETTER than any other city. Plus they are destenation places that the sponsors, media, and fans WANT to go!
ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but while in New York, I found it
> to be such a dump that I felt sorry for myself
> even being there temporarily. It's just not my
> kind of place people living on top of each other,
> etc.
>
> Sorry, dude, but that's the way I see it.
>
NY 20 years ago was a very different place than it is now. It's no longer a dump. You can now walk down the street and not feel like you're going to get mugged when you turn the corner. It's not Paris, but it's not the dump it used to be.
> And Tampa is a dump (sorry if anyone is from
> there, but for a Super Bowl the city is
> lackluster).
I disagree. I'm fairly happy with Tampa, and it's night life and entertainment qualities. Hotels are nice, with plenty of capacity. I could come up with plenty of more points of discussion, but I have a feeling this is one of those arguments that neither party will back off his talking points.
Phinsfan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When were you in NY?
RESPONSE: In addition to going through on I-95, my first wife, then girlfriend went to law school in New Haven and we would go down to either visit her relatives in New York or go into Manhattan to catch a show, etc.
Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who cares!? This is 2010....2014 is a long way
> away.
I do. Reason? Well if Miami gets slated for the 2014 superbowl, the chances of our stadium getting those needed improvements goes way way up. I understand your sentiment, but I'd really like to see Joe Roby(YES I STILL CALL IT THAT ROFL) get into that top tier of stadiums that teams love to come to.
I care too. This stuff is important to the Dolphins franchise now. Losing the Marlins out of the stadium hurts the Dolphins. That's 81 games at the stadium where most of the profits went into the Dolphins pockets. Not to mention the "RENT" the Marlins paid the Fins
The Fins need money to continue to stay at the level they are at. Otherwise they could quickly turn into a small market team especially in a division with 2 monsters like Bob Kraft and Woody Johnson. We have an owner in Ross who overpaid for the franchise and is upset about it still and took g'ment bailout money for his other businesses. He isn't in a stable position financially (in his line of work). Then losing the Marlins as a tenant hurts his bottom line.
This isn't a 'sexy' story or seems like nothing, but its the little stories like that have long-term effects on whether Miami can puruse big free agents in the years to come.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/27/2010 05:38AM by MikeO.