Vegas is Getting Another Super Bowl, And That's a Problem
Adam Schefter dropped the news yesterday: Super Bowl LXIII is headed back to Las Vegas. The NFL seems to love the desert. Allegiant Stadium just hosted Super Bowl LVIII this past February, a game where Patrick Mahomes led the Chiefs to a 25-22 overtime victory over the 49ers. That was a thrill, no doubt. But for the league to circle back to the same city in such a short timeframe feels… lazy, frankly. This isn't exactly a new phenomenon. Miami and New Orleans have been Super Bowl regulars for decades, but usually with a longer gap. New Orleans last hosted Super Bowl XLVII in 2013, and won't get another until LIX in 2025. Vegas is getting two within five years. Something's off.
The NFL's New Favorite Child
Look, Las Vegas is a party town. We all know that. The NFL clearly sees dollar signs and a ready-made event infrastructure. They've already held the Pro Bowl there, the Draft, and now two Super Bowls in short order. Allegiant Stadium opened in 2020, a $1.9 billion marvel, and it’s a beautiful building. But there are 30 NFL stadiums, many of which are just as capable of hosting the league's biggest game. SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, California, hosted Super Bowl LVI in 2022, and it was a smash. MetLife Stadium in New Jersey got Super Bowl XLVIII in 2014, a cold-weather classic. The league used to spread the wealth more. Now it feels like a select few cities are on a rotation, and Vegas is suddenly at the top of that list.
It's not just about the glitz. The logistics of a Super Bowl are immense, and Vegas certainly has the hotel rooms and the airport capacity. But so do Dallas, Phoenix, and Atlanta. Those cities have all put on fantastic Super Bowls in recent memory. Dallas hosted Super Bowl XLV in 2011 at AT&T Stadium, a massive event. Phoenix has hosted it three times since 1996, most recently Super Bowl LVII in 2023. Atlanta's Mercedes-Benz Stadium put on Super Bowl LIII in 2019. The argument that Vegas is uniquely equipped just doesn't hold water when you look at the track record of other major American cities.
Spreading the Wealth (Or Not)
Here's the thing: the Super Bowl is supposed to be a special event for a city, a chance to showcase itself to the world. Giving it to Vegas again so soon diminishes that. It makes it feel less like an earned honor and more like a convenient booking. Think about how much a city like Nashville or Kansas City would rally around hosting a Super Bowl. They've got passionate fanbases, emerging downtowns, and could use the economic boost and global spotlight. Arrowhead Stadium is one of the most iconic venues in sports, yet it's never hosted a Super Bowl. Imagine the atmosphere there.
The NFL needs to remember that variety is the spice of life. Moving the Super Bowl around keeps it fresh, allows different fan bases to experience the spectacle, and rewards cities that invest in their teams and infrastructure. Sticking to the same few locales, even if they're "easy," ultimately makes the event feel less grand. It's a missed opportunity to truly celebrate the league across the country. My hot take? The league is prioritizing flash over genuine connection with its broader audience by making Vegas the default choice.
I predict that by Super Bowl LXX, the NFL will have hosted three of the previous ten Super Bowls in Las Vegas, further solidifying its status as the league's go-to, albeit uninspired, destination.