Pasadena Might Wind Up With Super Bowl in 1993

The National Football League is about to pull the 1993 Super Bowl out of Arizona and award it to Pasadena’s Rose Bowl, NFL club executives and owners indicated Wednesday.

At a league meeting in Dallas next week, the owners are expected to reject Arizona, which in Tuesday’s election rejected a proposal for a holiday honoring slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

Among the cities competing to replace Phoenix as the site of Super Bowl XXVII, Pasadena is the front-runner, several owners said, because it finished second to Phoenix in last spring’s NFL voting, 16-12. San Diego also may be in the running.

Commenting on the lack of support among Arizona’s citizens for an annual King-Civil Rights Day, NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said Wednesday he will strongly recommend that the league’s 1993 championship game be moved out of the state.

“I do not believe that playing (it) in Arizona is in the best interests of the NFL,” Tagliabue said.

Norman Braman, the influential owner of the Philadelphia Eagles and chairman of the league’s Super Bowl site committee, endorsed Tagliabue’s statement and added that as far as he has been able to ascertain, his is a unanimous view in the league.

“Paul’s statement was both courageous and correct,” Braman said, noting that it won’t be popular in Arizona, home of the Phoenix Cardinals.

“I haven’t polled the (other owners), but I have heard nothing to suggest that Paul’s recommendation will be turned down.”

Adding its endorsement was the NFL Players Assn. “It is our belief that the Super Bowl should not be held in any state which does not honor the Martin Luther King holiday,” general counsel Dick Berthelsen said.

About half of NFL players are black and the league has been highly sensitive in recent years to calls to add minorities to its coaching and front-office staffs. When Phoenix was chosen last March to play host to the game, NFL officials said that the league could change its position if there was no holiday to honor King.

However, “at the league meeting last spring (in Orlando, Fla.), we didn’t make any contingency plans because we fully expected the King holiday bill to pass in Arizona,” Braman said. “Last week, in fact, we still expected that it would pass.” That has changed, and, speaking as chairman of the site committee, Braman said he favors a Western location for the game, which is scheduled to be played in early February, 1993. The 1991 Super Bowl will be in Tampa this winter and the 1992 game in Minneapolis.

Southern California interests were quick in responding. In a letter to Tagliabue Wednesday, Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley renewed the Rose Bowl bid, congratulating the NFL on its “moral stance” in renouncing the vote of Arizona’s electorate and citing the readiness of the stadium to play host to the game.

San Diego Mayor Maureen O’Connor also wrote, asking the NFL to consider San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium as an alternative site. The stadium played host to the 1988 Super Bowl.

Charger owner Alex Spanos said Wednesday he would support the bid.

The Pasadena proposal had been submitted to Braman’s committee by a unified Los Angeles-area group representing Los Angeles and Anaheim as well as Pasadena. Making the presentation at Orlando were Bradley and the head of the L.A. Sports Council, David Simon.

“I remember that it was a very effective presentation,” Braman said. “And so was San Diego’s. Knowing the San Diego people and how quickly they mobilize, I won’t be surprised if Pasadena has some (competition).”

Simon, however, expects to win it for the Rose Bowl, as he did last spring, when Pasadena lost to Phoenix in an upset.

“Most Super Bowls are awarded four or five years before the event,” Simon said. “With a lead time of only two years, the (Los Angeles area) is the place to put it because this is the largest city in the running, with the most facilities.”

Los Angeles Sports Council representatives had gone to Orlando last spring with a full bag of hotel space for the competing teams, for 2,000 reporters and for other visitors and guests.

“We had to release the hotel rooms afterward,” Simon said. “They will all have to be re-booked, but I’m sure it can be done.

“It’s such a big piece of hotel business that I know we can do it in a city this size.

“We’ve had the Super Bowl so many times that the NFL knows we can put it on in a big way, even on short notice.”

Many in the NFL, including former commissioner Pete Rozelle, have preferred Pasadena because it has one of the best-managed stadiums in the country, as well as one of the largest, seating 103,000.

The league, however, voted down the Los Angeles area last spring, acting in part because the Raiders announced that week that they were on their way to Oakland.

That objection has been removed with Raider owner Al Davis’ decision to keep his club at the Coliseum.

Pasadena officials said they welcome the opportunity to get back in the running to stage their fifth Super Bowl.

“This is very sad for Phoenix, very unfortunate, but delightful for Pasadena,” said Pasadena’s former mayor, Bill Thomson, who remains on the city’s board of directors.

On Tuesday’s ballot, Arizonans had two chances to authorize a King-Civil Rights Day and voted against both.

A proposal to save the citizenry some holiday pay for state employees--by substituting King Day for Columbus Day--lost, 3-1.

Another referendum simply setting an annual King Day lost by 15,000 votes out of more than 1 million cast.

Earlier, the Arizona legislature had authorized a King holiday, but former Gov. Evan Mecham led a campaign to put it up to Tuesday’s voters in referendum form.