The Super Bowl is a mass market spectacle that usually draws in nearly every American demographic, but rarely satisfies any one of them. The Ultimate Super Bowl examines what would happen if the NFL could focus on one demographic at a time.Target audience: Hard-core football fans.
Ultimate Super Bowl: For starters, the Ultimate Super Bowl for hard-core fans wouldn't feature any of those much-celebrated Super Bowl commercials. That's not what the real fans tune in for. Ditto for the halftime show. Let's axe the musical numbers and replace them with analysis of the first 30 minutes of the game.
What the broadcast would feature is Ron Jaworski as the analyst. Jaws is universally praised as the man who has put the Xs and Os back into Monday Night Football, and he's a treat for fans who care more about a quarterback's throwing mechanics than his girlfriend.
And as for the game on the field? The Ultimate Super Bowl for real fans would feature the two best teams in the league, which, with all due respect to the Giants, we don't have right now. The Giants beat the Cowboys and Packers fair and square, but both of those teams would give the fans a better game against the Patriots than the Giants will.
Chances of anything like this happening: For the no commercials part, zero, unless the Super Bowl goes pay-per-view some day. But giving the hard-core fans what they want as far as graphics and announcers may be only as far away as the day when technology gives us the option of multiple audio feeds when we watch TV. That technology already exists for bilingual audiences. Why not expand it to include those who like Xs and Os, and those who like fluff?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-23-2008 @ 10:24AM
chris said...
new york vs boston thats great its not like we could throw los angeles in the mix too bad.
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 11:03AM
c_golden07 said...
How about this to make the Super Bowl more enjoyable? Season ticket holders of the respective teams have first shot at SB tickets. It would be awesome to watch such a big game with a crowd that actually gave a damn about the game instead of a crowd filled with corporate suits.
I also wouldn't mind seeing a Super Bowl up north where weather would be a factor but I know I'm in the minority with that idea.
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 11:09AM
Jay said...
So I guess if the Giants beat New England to bring a championship back to New Jersey then the best team didn't when the Super Bowl either, huh?
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 11:34AM
tobrien28 said...
All this B.S. about how the Giants aren't the best team is stupid. Everyone moans about the BCS and how we should have a playoff. WHEN WE HAVE A PLAYOFF THE TEAMS THAT LOSE SAY THAT THEY WERE THE BETTER TEAM!
If you don't agree with me talk to Bill Cowher. He and many other coaches believe that the playoffs show which teams are truly better.
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 10:22PM
BlueStarDude said...
RE: "So I guess if the Giants beat New England to bring a championship back to New Jersey then the best team didn't when the Super Bowl either, huh?"
Uh, yeah. Duh. It happens.
Reply
1-25-2008 @ 4:58AM
Blaine said...
OK boys...all the bickering aside, the Giants and Pats are going to play each other on February 3rd. The point of this post was not to fight over which teams should be in this particular SuperBowl, but how it could be televised to make it more enjoyable to the REAL football fans.
While some of the commercials are entertaining, too many of the advertisers are just trying way too hard. Ha ha. Yawn! I'm here to watch a game.
Ever since the "wardrobe malfunction", the HalfTime shows are positively painful to watch. How much older can the performers get? Before long, we'll be listening to Mozart, with scenes from "Amadeus" flashing at us from the jumbo-tron.
In my opinion, this statement sums up the whole post...
"...technology gives us the option of multiple audio feeds when we watch TV. That technology already exists for bilingual audiences. Why not expand it to include those who like Xs and Os, and those who like fluff?"
Amen! I see singing birds and sunshine in the SuperBowls of the future if the NFL offers this. The wife (or non-fan) can watch on one TV, and the men (and real fans) can watch on another. Everyone's happy!
Reply
1-25-2008 @ 9:20AM
frank said...
The BEST team is all about who wins the trophy. If the Pats lose , you can say the Giants are truly the better team , cause you have to consider depth/53 men, hunger/who wants it more, coaching/who guessed right more, and that funny looking ball we call FOOTBALL.... NYG 31 NE 27
Reply
2-05-2008 @ 8:04PM
Karl Harnish said...
When we get the choice for audio feeds, give me the play-by-play by the 2 "Official Voices" of the teams (in the same booth and let them cheer their own teams on) with the analysis by the 2 Pro-bowl coaches (this is what we expected 2 weeks ago and how we tried deal with it / this is what we tried and how they dealt with it.)
My other choice would be just have the stadium wired for sound - no talking!
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 10:13AM
Mike said...
Hardcore fans are interested in seeing a game between the two teams who won their respective conference (Giants, Patriots.) To say that the best situation for the fans would not include the Giants sounds to me like a formula for the Ultimate Sugar Bowl, not ultimate Super Bowl.
Reply
1-23-2008 @ 10:23AM
Bish Wheeler said...
Well, I sort of agree, the half time non sense should be put in a weighted bag and sunk in the deepest part of the Pacific ocean, but I, a Real Fan, enjoy the goofy new commercials.
Jaws is good, maybe a bit too effusisve for my ears, but he knows his stuff and gives very good insights.
I think the two best teams are playing. I'm a west coast guy who has little affection for things on the east coast, but in this case I feel the Giants have what it takes to make "Tom Terrific" into Tom ordinary. The "Hoody" can scheme all he wants, but the fact remain the Giants "D" line will overpower and that will be the difference.
Reply