Majority of San Diegans Want City to Host Another Super Bowl

An overwhelming majority of San Diegans want the city to host another Super Bowl, saying that professional football’s mega-spectacle is good for San Diego’s overall economy and for its national image, a Times poll shows.

The poll suggests that last January’s game here--as well as the nationwide publicity and influx of free-spending visitors that came with it--were a major financial and public-relations success in the eyes of most San Diegans.

Asked whether San Diego officials should compete for the right to host future Super Bowls, 72% of the poll’s respondents answered in the affirmative.

The main reason given was that the game benefits the city economically, an explanation cited by 56% of those polled. Another 11% argued that hosting the annual professional football championship game--the crescendo of two weeks of intensive national news media coverage--enhances San Diego’s image.

‘Very Much in Line’

“That’s very much in line with the impressions and reactions we received after the game,” said Deputy City Manager Jack McGrory, who acted as the City of San Diego’s Super Bowl point man.

“The general sense we got in terms of community feedback is that people were really happy about how things turned out. Although there were some minor inconveniences, they were outweighed by some economic benefits that are going to be really significant over the long haul.”

Based on telephone interviews conducted March 19 with 736 San Diego residents, the Times’ poll’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus five percentage points.

The poll’s findings complement the results of a recent economic analysis detailing the Super Bowl’s local impact, and reinforce the confidence of San Diego officials who plan to make a bid for the 1993 game, local leaders said.

A report commissioned by the National Football League, the San Diego Super Bowl Task Force and the city’s Convention & Visitors Bureau showed last month that the game generated $136.2 million in spending by visitors, residents and businesses involved in San Diego’s first Super Bowl.

Well Aware of Benefits

The Times poll, meanwhile, indicates that most San Diegans are well aware of the considerable civic economic benefits of hosting a Super Bowl. Among those who believe the city should make future Super Bowl bids, 67% noted that the game is a boon to the city’s treasury. Another 13% added that the game and its concomitant nationwide press blitz benefit the city’s image. Only 7% said they would personally benefit financially if future games were held here.

“Our original economic forecast was emphasized throughout the months (before the Super Bowl), and the results were so close to the target that it’s not surprising that people would jump on that as a major factor,” said Les Land, executive director of the city’s Super Bowl Task Force.

Combined with the overwhelming 72% overall support for the city’s bid for future Super Bowls, the poll findings indicate that “we’re on the right track” in going after the 1993 game, Land said. Only 19% of those polled opposed efforts to attract future Super Bowls.

“It shows that we’re in sync with what the community is thinking in regard to the total effort and the results from the game,” Land said. “It’s nice to know that public support is there.”

Hoping for 1993

Last May, San Diego was one of five finalists competing for the 25th anniversary Super Bowl in 1991. But after NFL owners selected Tampa, Fla., to host the silver anniversary contest, members of the local Super Bowl Task Force began planning to repeat their pitch for the 1993 game--a bid they hope will be strengthened by the smoothness of January’s game. (The NFL owners have made a tentative commitment to hold the 1992 game in a northern city.)

In response to a question asking why San Diego should not try to attract future Super Bowls, 18% of all respondents said the game, which draws tens of thousands of fans to the host city, produces too much traffic. Another 12% said they were troubled that the game could ultimately lead to excessive growth, while 10% complained that it brings too many tourists to San Diego.

However, 46% of those questioned did not specify any reason why San Diego should not seek additional Super Bowls--apparently indicating satisfaction with city’s first experience with the game.

“There were no significant complaints from citizens about reduced services, traffic or other problems because of the game,” McGrory noted. “We did get some calls from people fearing that the exposure might lead to growth down the road, but we feel it’s more likely to mean increased tourism and spending. The overall public response has been very positive.”

Among respondents who opposed future Super Bowls, 26% cited traffic problems as their major concern, followed by tourists (25%) and the potential impact on growth (21%).

There was no significant difference in men’s and women’s attitudes toward the Super Bowl, the poll showed. Seventy-five percent of the men polled supported efforts to attract future games, as did 69% of the women.

While San Diegans of all ages supported the city’s efforts to attract future Super Bowls, younger people viewed that possibility more favorably than older people. According to the poll, 81% of people between the ages of 18 and 40 would like the city to host future Super Bowls, contrasted with 64% of those older than 40.

SHOULD SAN DIEGO BID FOR ANOTHER SUPER BOWL?

YES: 72% Reasons given:Economic benefit to the city 67% Good for the city’s image 13% Personal financial benefit 7% Like football 1% Like the parties and hoopla 1% Other 1% No opinion 10%

NO: 19% Game brings too much traffic 26% Brings in too many tourists 25% Leads to too much growth 21% Don’t like football 7% No personal financial benefit 3% Other 14% No opinin 4%Source: Los Angeles Times Poll