That would have been a good get 20 years ago.

Is it a policy of the Super Bowl to hire only entertainers who have a 20 year margin between the date of their performance and the last time they were relevant?

I was hoping for Spinal Tap

(sigh)

IMO, that's an upgrade from the last 2-3 years worth of halftime shows.

madonna makes me puke

I don't get it. What demographic are they appealing to? The guys who watch Super Bowl? No. Their wives? No. The kids? No.

Homosexuals? Good luck with that. We're going to be watching some Will & Grace or Kathy Griffin marathon on Bravo.

jj325: I was hoping for Spinal Tap

(sigh)

They missed their best chance by 35 years

They actually hired Lady Gaga. It's a common mistake.

Well, that should lock in the gayest sector of the NFL fan demographic and cause them to actually pay attention to the halftime show. Assuming that even gays still pay attention to Madonna, which may or may not be the case, I don't know.

Well, now I can safely go outside to get high during halftime and know I won't miss anything.

As was mentioned earlier, just who are they trying to appeal to? Perhaps 25 years ago it might have had people interested in it, but now? Has she even done anything musically in the past decade or so (I honestly don't know)? I almost never watch the halftime shows anyway but this just guarantees that I won't.

Maybe whoever pushed this is being hired by a rival network & is doing his best to make his current employer's numbers tank before leaving. That at least would be a logical reason for getting Madonna to do the halftime show...

Look, I loved Madonna back in the 80's and fapped regularly to her videos (hey I was a teenager!), but now I do wish she would just fade into the background and enjoy memories of the success she had at one time.

Also, what's with the people doing these halftime shows these days? They need to learn the difference between appealing to an audience and entertaining an audience. The acts they're getting, they're trying to APPEAL rather than ENTERTAIN.

Considering that ABC is still letting Hank Williams Jr. intro Monday Night Football, Madonna must seem positively fresh by comparison.

You could put just about any singer in existence in place of the name "Madonna" in this headline and the thread would play out identically. I mean, what's the NFL supposed to do here? There are very few bands in the world that command universal respect, and they're very difficult to schedule. I mean, sure, they could ask someone like Kings of Leon or Cold Play, but what are the chances they're available? Green Day, is another, I suppose, but cutting-edge punk isn't really the sound you want for the Superbowl. And they've already had Aerosmith. There's just not much else left to choose from.

Pocket Ninja: You could put just about any singer in existence in place of the name "Madonna" in this headline and the thread would play out identically. I mean, what's the NFL supposed to do here? There are very few bands in the world that command universal respect, and they're very difficult to schedule. I mean, sure, they could ask someone like Kings of Leon or Cold Play, but what are the chances they're available? Green Day, is another, I suppose, but cutting-edge punk isn't really the sound you want for the Superbowl. And they've already had Aerosmith. There's just not much else left to choose from.

Golf clap.

internutthead: Edsel: Cythraul: Is it a policy of the Super Bowl to hire only entertainers who have a 20 year margin between the date of their performance and the last time they were relevant?

Pretty much, due to the "wardrobe malfunction" incident. That said, they did have the Black Eyed Peas perform recently, and they're not that ancient. Although saying they were ever "relevant" is a stretch.

I dunno - the Black Eyed Peas was the biggest, safest bet the NFL could have made... it wasnt a bad half time show.



Yes it was. It was awful. It made me long for an Up With People reunion.

I really dislike Madonna, but she will be better than Black Eyed Peas.

Grables'Daughter: Cythraul: Is it a policy of the Super Bowl to hire only entertainers who have a 20 year margin between the date of their performance and the last time they were relevant?

Um, Prince was fantastic.

Prince's show was just farking outstanding. Dude shredded the whole stadium. The difference between them is that Prince is actually a really great musician, whereas Madonna is only skilled at dance and dictating fashion. Oh, and affecting a British accent even though she's from Michigan, I think.

/jaw dropped watching the Prince show

dickfreckle: Grables'Daughter: Cythraul: Is it a policy of the Super Bowl to hire only entertainers who have a 20 year margin between the date of their performance and the last time they were relevant?

Um, Prince was fantastic.

Prince's show was just farking outstanding. Dude shredded the whole stadium. The difference between them is that Prince is actually a really great musician, whereas Madonna is only skilled at dance and dictating fashion. Oh, and affecting a British accent even though she's from Michigan, I think.

/jaw dropped watching the Prince show

AC/DC would be the greatest Super Bowl halftime show in history, but the ass clowns in charge won't go for it.

Marine1: Also, she's terrible. I want AC DC or Anthrax.


Or KISS.

Charles Martel: She is this era's version of Lawrence Welk.

Lawrence Welk didn't lip sync and could actually read music.

/When there were no talent women doing teh slutwalks on MTV, Madonna was at the front of the line

When the Super Bowl comes back to Houston:

ZZ Top

If I had my way, the half time show would be a college marching band and those Frisbee-catching dogs.

TheShavingofOccam123: Are her breasts floppy enough?


This is now a thread about pancakes.

Steel Panther, FTW