re: 2018 Super Bowl...who gets it?

Asking if you honestly believe that the word "very" is meaningless is arguing semantics. Pointing out that you misquoted is a grammatical and honesty issue.

If you save up the money I would recommend going to some of these Super Bowls. Seattle, Denver, and Minneapolis are all awesome cities, even in February.

quote:

---

Asking if you honestly believe that the word "very" is meaningless is arguing semantics.

---

So you admit it.

Admit that one of my posts argued semantics? Sure, one of my posts argued semantics. That has no bearing on the rest of the discussion.


Do you think that someone asking a semantics question means they have lost or conceded the argument? (This is a logic question btw.)

When someone starts arguing semantics it's usually because they are unable to make an actual point.

i mean you are sitting here arguing that by somehow saying the word very to imply some vague emphasis on time is meaningful to you somehow not being wrong and contradictory.

You said what you said, you were called on it. End of discussion about semantics and the impact of very.

Yes those cities may very well get their second chance to host, however it will not come as frequently as NOLA/Miami for the numerous reasons outlined in this 9 page thread.

quote:

---

I'm still curious if you think the word "very" has no meaning.

---

I think the word "very" is inconsequential to the meaning of anyone's argument in this thread. I think you know that but you're being unreasonable.

quote:

---

Does the fact that Minneapolis has hosted a Super Bowl in the past tend to make you think that they can do so successfully in the future?

---

I don't think Minneapolis hosting a Super Bowl 26 years before 2018 in a different stadium will foreshadow in any way how well they can host in 2018. That being said, I don't doubt that they could pull it off, but I also wouldn't put them in the same class of host cities as New Orleans and Miami.

ETA: I'm done talking about the importance of the word "very" because it is a stupid conversation.

quote:

---

i mean you are sitting here arguing that by somehow saying the word very to imply some vague emphasis on time is meaningful to you somehow not being wrong and contradictory.

You said what you said, you were called on it. End of discussion about semantics and the impact of very.

---

Let's go through this step by step:

1. I said that it will be a long time before New Orleans hosts again.

2. Someone asked if someone posted it will be a "very long time" before New Orleans will host again.

3. I stated that no one said that. I said so because that's correct. "Very long time" =/= "long time". The only way it could be even close to the exact same is if the word "very" was without meaning, which I don't agree with.

4. You stated I "literally" said "very long time." Oh the irony of using literally.

5. I denied this because it's incorrect.

6. You "caught" me in this "contradiction" of correctness and, perhaps, think that I have conceded your point by asking if you honestly thought the word "very" is meaningless.

Do you understand know how you're wrong? If you don't then honestly I don't think I'm able to help you any further.

quote:

---

Yes those cities may very well get their second chance to host, however it will not come as frequently as NOLA/Miami for the numerous reasons outlined in this 9 page thread.

---

We actually agree here. I never said that New Orleans shouldn't host any more Super Bowls, merely that it will be a long time (by my estimates maybe 10 years?) before they host again because the NFL will move the Super Bowl to other venues for a while.

But because I don't agree that N.O. is the only place to properly hold the Super Bowl I'm basically the devil here.

quote:

---

I don't think Minneapolis hosting a Super Bowl 26 years before 2018 in a different stadium will foreshadow in any way how well they can host in 2018. That being said, I don't doubt that they could pull it off, but I also wouldn't put them in the same class of host cities as New Orleans and Miami.

---

I think it, at least, suggests that they have the infrastructure in place to host and that the weather won't prevent people from going.

quote:

---

ETA: I'm done talking about the importance of the word "very" because it is a stupid conversation.

---

Agreed, I'll drop it.

quote:

---

see that is where i do not agree. In this past SB you had two cold weather squads. Had it been two warm weather teams, I don't think you get as many of the overflow fans that come just for the party. I just can't see many people justifying that to trudge around in snow and sub freezing temps for 3-5 days, especially from warm weather cities. Cold weather doesn't really bother me, but most people in the south bitch when it drops below 60.

---

I see where you're coming from, but I've lived in the north and a lot of people there embrace the cold, especially winter sports. For a lot of people the weather is a positive, not a negative. I also read somewhere that tv ratings can increase in bad weather because people like watching clusterfricks. I wonder if anyone has actually looked at the total number of tourists who traveled to party but not actually go to the game