back to top

7 Even Worse Places To Hold The Super Bowl Than East Rutherford, New Jersey

The Amazon River would be worse. For one, all those piranhas.

Posted on
Andrew Burton / Getty Images

There have been a lot of complaints about a cold-weather area like New Jersey being allowed to host the Super Bowl in an open-air stadium. Former NFL coaches and noted curmudgeons Mike Ditka and Don Shula were just two of the most notable people to call a Big Apple-based championship game a bad idea.

But they should think about how much worse it could have been.

1. Los Angeles

Can't hold the game in a city that's not big or important enough to support an NFL team.

2. The Moon

The extremely high altitude could make it difficult for players to excel.
NASA handout / Getty Images

The extremely high altitude could make it difficult for players to excel.

3. The Amazon River

Piranhas. Anacondas. Jon Voight. Not the best place to hold the game if the NFL is truly serious about player safety.
Luis Davilla / Getty Images

Piranhas. Anacondas. Jon Voight. Not the best place to hold the game if the NFL is truly serious about player safety.

4. Antarctica

Pictured: Lambeau Field.
Hulton Archive / Getty

Pictured: Lambeau Field.

5. West Rutherford, N.J.

If you thought East Rutherford was a bad idea, just think about how bad it must be on the OTHER side of Rutherford.
Warner Bros.

If you thought East Rutherford was a bad idea, just think about how bad it must be on the OTHER side of Rutherford.

6. Canada

What does Canada know about anything, let alone football?
Jeff Vinnick / Getty Images

What does Canada know about anything, let alone football?

7. Jacksonville

It would just be ridiculous.
Scott Halleran / Getty Images

It would just be ridiculous.

The best things at three price points