The Super Bowl flyover may have cost $450,000. Was it worth it?

[edjr 5,784]

 

For a stadium that had the roof closed.

 

 

Is there a dumber city than Dallas? I don't think so.

 

 

The fans inside Cowboys Stadium for Super Bowl XLV had as good a view of the flyover by four F-18 fighter jets as those watching at home. With the roof closed on Jerry Jones' $1.2 billion stadium, people in attendance were forced to watch the flyover on the massive high-def screens inside.

 

A Dallas TV reporter estimated that the flyover cost the Navy a total of $450,000. His total includes gas, operational costs and air time for the four F-18s, which traveled from Virginia to Texas for the event. The Navy told CNBC that its official records only tallies the amount spent on gas, which came out to $109,000 for the Super Bowl flights.

 

Even if we call it somewhere in between, the Navy still spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money for a few seconds of camera time. It's like an old riddle: If four planes fly over a stadium and nobody insides sees, is it worth the cost?

 

Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post doesn't think so. In a column lambasting the excess of the Super Bowl, she wrote:

 

For absurdity, how about those four Navy F-18s flying over the stadium -- with its retractable roof closed? Everybody inside could only see the planes on the stadium's video screens. It was strictly a two-second beauty shot.

 

She's right on one level; for the people inside the stadium, the flyover was a waste. But who says the flyover is about the fans at the game? All the Super Bowl extravagance is geared toward those watching on television, not in attendance. The anthem singers, the halftime shows and the blimp shots are for the viewer at home.

 

Christina Aguilera isn't making a trip to Dallas to sing a two-minute song in front of 100,000 people. She's doing it for the 100 million watching at home. Game organizers don't get the Black Eyed Peas and the Rolling Stones and Janet Jackson and Prince to stage elaborate halftime shows because fans in section 538 crave them, they do them to entice the casual viewer watching FOX or CBS or NBC to stick around through the first half.

 

The justification for the flyover is similar. The Navy used the one on Sunday as a recruiting tool. Instead of spending $3 million on a 30-second commercial during the game, it spent $400,000 on a five-second advertisement that everybody watched. Why is it all right for Chrysler to get billions in bailout money and then buy a two-minute advertisement for around $10 million but not for the Navy to use a fraction of its budget to promote itself?

 

"These missions are included in the annual operating budget of all branches of the military and they are used as training," Mike Maus, deputy public affairs officer for the Naval Air Force's Atlantic division told CNBC. "There was no additional money provided to us, Congress did not cut us a special check to do this flyover. This is considered a training mission whether they were to fly over the Super Bowl or not."

 

Call it wasteful if you want, but there are far worse ways to spend taxpayer money than promotion of our nation's armed forces.

[pimptastic69 0]

"These missions are included in the annual operating budget of all branches of the military and they are used as training," Mike Maus, deputy public affairs officer for the Naval Air Force's Atlantic division told CNBC. "There was no additional money provided to us, Congress did not cut us a special check to do this flyover. This is considered a training mission whether they were to fly over the Super Bowl or not."

 

I watched some show a while back that corroborates this. Basically, they are going to be flying anyway, so all they do is divert the path over the stadium.

 

I don't have a problem with it. In fact, I appreciate it. During the Bengals home opener last September, I was coaching my son's t-ball game and we had to stop playing because the 3 F-18s that just flew over Paul Brown Stadium flew right over our field at what seemed like a thousand feet. The kids were covering their ears and going crazy over how cool it was.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

"These missions are included in the annual operating budget of all branches of the military and they are used as training," Mike Maus, deputy public affairs officer for the Naval Air Force's Atlantic division told CNBC. "There was no additional money provided to us, Congress did not cut us a special check to do this flyover. This is considered a training mission whether they were to fly over the Super Bowl or not."

 

I watched some show a while back that corroborates this. Basically, they are going to be flying anyway, so all they do is divert the path over the stadium.

 

I don't have a problem with it. In fact, I appreciate it. During the Bengals home opener last September, I was coaching my son's t-ball game and we had to stop playing because the 3 F-18s that just flew over Paul Brown Stadium flew right over our field at what seemed like a thousand feet. The kids were covering their ears and going crazy over how cool it was.

 

It is also usually an opportunity to help recruit. I know that there were 3 Ospreys flying around Boston last summer as part of a recruitment drive. They fly around as part of training and to get people fired up about our military might.

 

I think that there is waste in some of these activities, but I think that is more related to the bands and things that have no real fighting value.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Is there a dumber poster than Edjr?

 

The Super Bowl wasn't played in Dallas.

 

HTH

[Mike Honcho 4,191]

Is there a dumber poster than Edjr?

 

 

 

Few names come to mind....

[cbfalcon 824]

Anytime I've witnessed a flyover, it has been super kickass.

 

If I'm going to complain about what things cost, I'll complain about the non-kickass things.

[mobb_deep 919]

Worst super bowl in some time (the event, not the game). Worst city to host a super bowl ever. Worst use of tax payer money to fly retarded jets for. Texas = worst crap hole state in the USA.

 

Let's stick to hosting super bowls in Florida, California, etc. No more crappy Super Bowls in the armpit of America please.

 

HTH.

[Mike Honcho 4,191]

Worst super bowl in some time (the event, not the game). Worst city to host a super bowl ever. Worst use of tax payer money to fly retarded jets for. Texas = worst crap hole state in the USA.

 

Let's stick to hosting super bowls in Florida, California, etc. No more crappy Super Bowls in the armpit of America please.

 

HTH.

 

 

So you would be opposed to Detroit hosting a third Super Bowl?

[cbfalcon 824]

Worst super bowl in some time (the event, not the game). Worst city to host a super bowl ever. Worst use of tax payer money to fly retarded jets for. Texas = worst crap hole state in the USA.

 

Let's stick to hosting super bowls in Florida, California, etc. No more crappy Super Bowls in the armpit of America please.

 

HTH.

 

I live in DFW and I can't disagree too much. It was a disaster. That said, I think the Super Bowl will be back and with better weather it'll be a success.

 

Just bad luck that we had our worst winter storm in 15 years during our first Super Bowl week. Maybe God hates Jerry Jones. Normal weather solves most every problem that occurred.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I live in DFW and I can't disagree too much. It was a disaster. That said, I think the Super Bowl will be back and with better weather it'll be a success.

 

Just bad luck that we had our worst winter storm in 15 years during our first Super Bowl week. Maybe God hates Jerry Jones. Normal weather solves most every problem that occurred.

 

You better delete this post before RP sees it.

[pingpong 0]

3 Ospreys

[mobb_deep 919]

So you would be opposed to Detroit hosting a third Super Bowl?

 

Yes. I'm a Lions fan and Michigan homer by birth. I don't for one second question the fact that Detroit is probably the worst city in America. The only cities I've visited that are even close to as crappy are Houston, St. Louis, and Baltimore. I've never been up to SUX crappy area (Stockton, Oakland, Sacramento, etc.) so I can't really comment on those. I'm sure they're pretty miserable too though.

[DanXIII 8]

Anytime I've witnessed a flyover, it has been super kickass.

 

If I'm going to complain about what things cost, I'll complain about the non-kickass things.

 

The difference here is that nobody in the stadium "witnessed" the flyover.

 

If you will give me $10 I will tell you how awesome my prime rib was last night!

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

The difference here is that nobody in the stadium "witnessed" the flyover.

 

If you will give me $10 I will tell you how awesome my prime rib was last night!

The flyover was for the people who paid $200 to be "near" the stadium. HTH

[Cruzer 1,993]

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said Monday the decision was made well in advance of the Feb. 6 game so the league could have a "singular focus" on logistics.

 

Whether it was a waste of tax dollars is open for debate. But 2 things are for sure, Clowny Jones nor the city of Arlington had anything to do with the decision to close the roof. That call came from Rog Goodell and his team - came several days before the game was even to be played.

[cyclone24 1,838]

Anytime I've witnessed a flyover, it has been super kickass.

 

If I'm going to complain about what things cost, I'll complain about the non-kickass things.

 

 

What he said

[BudBro 123]

why not put a camera man on top of the stadium or use the blimp to cover the f-18s? why have the hand held guy in the parking lot shooting straight up? i'd rather see 10 seconds of f-18s than be stuck watching c aguilera's mug while she's moaning the anthem. btw, the person who sings the anthem is the leading a choir of spectators through the song, not building a portfolio to solicit record deals. just sing the f*#king song like it was written so people can sing along.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

You better delete this post before RP sees it.

 

Why should he delete it before I see it? I agree with him it was bad luck to have the worst storm in 15 years hit the week of the SB.

[IMMensaMind 460]

Even if the dome had been open, not enough open sky would have been visible to most in the stadium to truly enjoy a flyover.

 

I think flyovers need to be restricted to open-air stadiums. Early in the year, there was one at Lambeau, and that was amazing. Goosebumps.

[GettnHuge 1]

 

For a stadium that had the roof closed.

 

 

Is there a dumber city than Dallas? I don't think so.

 

 

 

your 2c seems more of a waste at this moment