I wouldn't mind if the SB was in Bristol, I would take the whole next week to check out the Applschisn mountain ranges & surrounding areas the whole week after Super Sunday.
The facility could, yes. But the NFL wants to make the Super Bowl the type of event that lures people in three or four days ahead of time and keeps them there for a day or two afterward because of all there is to do and see, and Bristol, Tennessee, is not the type of place that will do that.
Who the **** would want to go to Bristol TN for any reason whatsoever? I wouldn't want to spend 2 hours in Bristol TN, much less a week.
Maybe you need to read before you talk, week around the Bristol is the Applachian Mountain Ranges( Huge area covers many states). Tenn, VA, NC etc.
Super Bowl is a 3-3.5 event, after that visit the unreal beauty in that area with also Blue Ridge Parkway, Mountains, Valleys unlike the flat area we live in TX.
Unless Bristol gets an NFL team, then no. Every SB has had an NFL team in that city, and the owners won't break away from that.
^Rose Bowl (Pasadena, CA) and Stanford Stadium hosted the Super Bowl without having a regular NFL home team. There's even proposed bids from Wembley Stadium in London, England and Aztec Stadium in Mexico (same site for this year's Texans-Raiders game) who wanted to host the Super Bowl.
Wiki: The Raider and Rams were in the LA region when the Rose Bowl was selected, no SB after both left LA region. Now that the Rams are back, LA is slated for the 2021 SB. Stanford is considered San Fran suburbs, 49ers area (plus that was in 1985, no chance that will host again with Levi just built). Bristol's nearest NFL team are the Panthers at 156 mi away. Wembley is being pushed hard by Goodell and will get shot down by the owners, they have a good ole boys system and want to keep the SB in house. Plus the time difference from Wembley is a major obstacle.