[sportscurmudgeon]

Three points here:


Point #1. The TV Networks are not going to like this idea even a little bit. Assume that you start the game at 9:00 PM in London, that would make it 4:00 PM in the Eastern Time Zone and 1:00 PM on the West Coast. Now since the networks want to have a 5 or 6 hour pre-game extravaganza - - where they make a lot of money on ads - - that means it would have to start at 7:00AM or 8:00AM on the West Coast. Ad rates for beer ads at 7:00AM would have to be "discounted". The adage "Follow the money!" applies here... This is a big hurdle.


Point #2. I believe there is an NFL Rule that the Super Bowl has to be played in a city with an NFL franchise. My recollection is that rule was passed in the mid-90s and that is the reason that the Super Bowl doesn't go back to the Rose Bowl - - where there are 105,000 seats for the league to put fannies in. This is a medium sized hurdle at the moment because if the NFL wants a Super Bowl in London they could put a franchise there - - or they could try to change the rule. Changing the rule requires a positive vote of the owners AND THAT LEADS TO ...


Point #3. An owner with a big stadium in a cold weather city without a dome who REALLY would love to host a Super Bowl - - let's call him "Danny" just for kicks - - MIGHT figure a way to trade his vote and maybe the voting bloc of other like-minded owners for getting some cold weather Super Bowls here in the US in cities such as Boston, NYC, Philly, Washington, Chicago ... Right there you have six teams (2 in NYC) that could be the start of a voting bloc; Toss in Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Cincy and you are starting to develop a powerful voting bloc. Therefore, if you want to have the possibility of seeing a Super Bowl in FedEx, you should support this idea and encourage "Danny" to start politicking and making nice with some of the other owners.


This is still a longshot, but it is better than no shot...