Share This Page
NFL

Minneapolis gets 2018 Super Bowl; vote on expanded playoffs on hold

| Tuesday, May 20, 2014, 9:30 p.m.
Vikings owner Zygi Wilf speaks at a news conference after Minneapolis was selected as the host for 2018 Super Bowl at the NFL's spring meetings Tuesday, May 20, 2014, in Atlanta.

ATLANTA — Build it and the Super Bowl will come.

That message rang loud and clear Tuesday when Minneapolis was awarded the 2018 game after a vote by owners rewarded the city for its new stadium deal.

The owners chose Minneapolis and the $1 billion stadium planned for the site of the old Metrodome to host the championship over New Orleans and Indianapolis.

“In large part, it was due to recognition of the great work they've done on the stadium,” commissioner Roger Goodell noted.

“It's been 10 years, and we've always been driving to build a stadium,” Vikings owner Zygi Wilf said. “We can rejoice right now for being rewarded this, but the hard work comes now.”

New Orleans bid committee members were certain the new Minneapolis stadium, set to open in 2016, swung the vote. The stadium will hold up to 72,000 for the Super Bowl.

“The new stadium was absolutely the deciding factor,” Greater New Orleans Sports Foundation President Jay Cicero said. “Any time that there is so much public support for a $1 billion stadium, the NFL owners are impressed.

“We did everything we were supposed to do, had a fantastic presentation. In the end, we think the stadium did it.”

The big game will be staged in the Twin Cities for the second time. It was there in 1992, when Washington beat Buffalo.

It will be there in 2018 because the Vikings lobbied for years to replace the aging Metrodome, one of the NFL's least profitable facilities. When Minnesota political leaders realized the team could move out of state without a new home, the stadium project moved forward. Legislators in 2012 approved the stadium, with taxpayers carrying about 56 percent of the freight.

Owners needed four ballots to choose Minneapolis, with Indianapolis the first city eliminated. Indy was praised for a highly successful 2012 Super Bowl but could have been hurt by the recent legal troubles of Colts owner Jim Irsay.

Irsay underwent treatment after he was arrested and accused of having $29,000 in cash and bottles of prescription drugs in his car. He made his first public appearance at these meetings since the arrest.

Irsay said Indianapolis will bid again.

“Before, we had to lose one to get one,” he said, noting Indy fell short in previous bids before landing the 2012 game. “It will take persistence, and we know we have the type of people who will be that.”

New Orleans was considered the favorite and has staged the Super Bowl 10 times, tied with South Florida for the most. Its bid might have been damaged by the blackout that interrupted the 2013 title game.

Earlier at their meetings, owners tabled any vote expanding the playoffs to 14 teams.

There is strong sentiment among the owners to add a wild-card team in each conference to the postseason, most likely beginning in 2015. Under such a setup, only the team with the best record in each conference will get a week off at the beginning of the playoffs.

Goodell said it will be discussed again in October.

“I do believe it will be approved for the 2015 season,” he said.

“I don't think it's a sure thing at all,” New York Giants owner John Mara said. “It's probably more likely than not, but nothing is set in stone. There was no straw poll taken. ... I think it's good the way we have it.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.