Originally Posted by lonestar
The superbowls are not about payback for new stadiums. If it were the superdome or MIN would never had them. For that matter LA and the rose bowl or San diego.
Sorry but those are just a few Examples why that is not true.
PS investco is not old either.
Miami and NO are places where they like to hold the SB because people like to go there. Southern California is a similar situation.
Besides those places, however, check the stadiums that hosted a SB and see whether they were either built or heavily renovated in the 5 or so years prior. Heck, they had to lodge people on cruise ships to get Jax their SB. The new stadium is the ONLY reason NY is hosting a SB.
EDIT: Oh, and Minnesota? They haven't had one since '92 according to what I'm looking at. Who cites 20 year old examples?