Considering that the NFL has staged the Super Bowl in Detroit and Jacksonville in recent years, I don't have a problem with the league playing Super Bowl XLV in North Texas. That gives us four solid years to brace ourselves for whatever the Dallas/Fort Worth area is willing to offer.
I do, however, take issue with the league's refusal to accept that this game really shouldn't be passed around as if it was a traveling road show. The Super Bowl, when it's placed in the right cities, is supposed to be the perfect ending to another season of pro football. And when you really think about it, some places just can't produce suitable finales.
This is why I've always believed the Super Bowl should be confined to certain cities, specifically those that don't have to account for wind chill factors in their local weather forecasts. Here are my choices:
1. Miami: This doesn't even need an explanation. Any time you can spend a week on the beach and enjoy 80-degree weather before the game, you're going to be pleased with the experience.
2. San Diego: It's not Los Angeles, but it doesn't have to be. The Gas Lamp District is a central location for partying and most people don't even care that the game is held in a dilapidated stadium. Again, the constant sunshine is huge here.
3. New Orleans: Prior to Hurricane Katrina, this would've been the top city on this list. You've got the French Quarter, hotels that are well within walking distance of all the fun and great food. As far as set-ups go, you couldn't ask for better logistics.
4. Phoenix: The drive to the Cardinals' new stadium in Glendale will be harsh, but people can deal with the traffic. This city has hip clubs, excellent food and a zillion resorts. In other words, it can take care of its tourists.
5. Tampa: Hey, somebody had to be fifth. I'd take this city over Houston, Dallas, Jacksonville or Atlanta any day. It might not be as big as those places, but it's also much warmer there in late January and early February.
Jeffri Chadiha is a senior writer for ESPN.com.