Wetmore: Should Minneapolis host the 2018 Super Bowl in new stadium?
Get the 1500 ESPN SportsWire delivered to your inbox daily, and keep up with all the news in Twin Cities Sports
With a new stadium ready to roll as planned, the Vikings have their eyes on the 2018 Super Bowl.
The state will ramp up its efforts to self-promote this week, according to the Star Tribune. Governor Mark Dayton is expected to announce Monday the leaders behind the local campaign, according to the report.
The NFL has shown willingness to reward teams with a new stadium, as Vikings Vice President Lester Bagley told the Star Tribune.
Each finalist city has an indoor stadium. But will Minnesota's cold-weather climate deter the NFL from pursuing a Super Bowl in Minneapolis in 2018?
I'd contend that the ratings for this year's cold-weather Super Bowl in East Rutherford, New Jersey, will have a significant impact. The TV advertising revenue is a big consideration, and the weather likely has little impact on that. But the hullabaloo leading up to the event also is a money-driver and thus a decision-maker.
That is perhaps the critical element to this question: could Minneapolis in February host a week-long party worthy of the world's most popular singular sporting event?
Here is an excerpt from the Star Tribune's report:
Michele Kelm-Helgen, chairwoman of the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority, which is overseeing construction of the $1 billion stadium, said in October that the Super Bowl could generate more than $300 million for the local economy.
I'm skeptical of that $300 million figure. I've yet to see an projection for the economic impact of a stadium or sporting event that fell short of the real total.
I'll turn this question to the readers: Do you think the Vikings should host the 2018 Super Bowl in their new digs?
As a media member, I'd like it if they did. Logic, however, dictates that the NFL should go the warm-weather route.