The Pro Bowl is getting great ratings. But is it even “football”?
I think I mentioned this to you last year Vic. One thing that has added entertainment to baseball’s All-Star Game is the incentive of home-field advantage in the upcoming world series. The Pro Bowl doesn’t seem to have that kind of incentive, but it should, and here’s why. A trend that seems to have been pretty common (with the exception of maybe 4 games) since Super Bowl XXX, the teams that won did so in a stadium that is used mostly by the conference they represented (i.e.: the Broncos won their first Super Bowl in Qualcomm Stadium, an AFC stadium; they won their second Super Bowl in SunLife Stadium, an AFC stadium; and the Packers won this past Super Bowl in Cowboys Stadium, an NFC stadium). So assuming the NFL does indeed award Super Bowl L to Los Angeles, the following year is when the NFL ought to take a page out of Major League Baseball’s book and do the following: (1) play the Pro Bowl to allow a conference to host a Super Bowl, with a neutral stadium (like the Meadowlands or anywhere an NFL franchise doesn’t play) hosting in the event of a tie; (2) with the stakes being higher, allow blitzes and sacks for once. Nothing excites NFL fans more than punishing defensive plays. If the Pro Bowl on video games allow blitzes, sacks, and instant replay stoppages, why shouldn’t that stuff be allowed in real life?