Sunday, February 05, 2006

Super Size Bowl XL

I'm pulling for Pittsburgh, because I want Seattle to win.

Predictions for the Super Bowl:

1) Scared of repeating the 2004 Janet Jackson debacle, ABC will cut away at any potentially titillating moments. These include, but aren't limited to: streakers; Heath Miller breaking away for a long ball; players getting hit; the referee bending over to pick up the coin; cheerleading routines; Janet Jackson, because she's heavy now; and, of course, any footage of women in any capacity. Similarly, Steelers coach Bill Cowher's mouth will be digitally removed for the entirety of the game.

2) In an attempt to raise badly needed funding, the FCC will rate the telecast "TV-Y."

3) Because of the new squeaky-clean policy, the game will be touch.

4) The halftime show will have a giant curtain surrounding it, with Al Michaels offering commentary from inside as to what everything looks like. He will read from a script.

5) The Rolling Stones will change their name to the Let's Rolls for this performance, because "Stone" implies some sort of drug lingo and/or fast-track lifestyle that goes against the American family ethic.

6) Osama bin Laden will streak onto the field during the second-half kickoff. Because both the cameras and the entire crowd will dutifully look away, no one will ever know it was him.

7) Somebody will awaken from a coma for the first time since 1999, wondering why so much hoopla is being made over the AFC Championship game.

8) At least one genius viewer will notice that the game seems so much faster now than they appeared on the NFL Films of old.

9) Former Seattle receiver Steve Largent (R-Oklahoma) will decry the Hail-Mary pass as "a divisive papist barrier and an affront to all that is decent and holy."

10) After the game, George W. Bush will make the traditional victory phone call, congratulating the Detroit Lions on their impressive season. Confused, the Packers will hang up on him.

For more, read this Super Bowl trivia I compiled last year.

10 comments:

Flamingo Jones said...

Ian, I knew I could count on you to improve upon the Super Bowl experience. Funny stuff. As you know, #10 is my favorite.

The leftist southpaw said...

Hope you enjoyed the game.

I'm the other liberal that Cajun Tiger now has a link to on his blog site.

www.southpawspot.blogspot.com

stop by any time.

Nick said...

While it is true that the Christian groups have taken things too far since the Janet Jackson fiasco, they had every right to be upset with the boob incident. The Super Bowl is played on stations such as ABC, Fox, and CBS, not HBO. Parents have a right to be assured that certain vulgarity will not pop up.

However, I will say I was upset with the complaints against the Bud Light commercial where the dog bit the guy in the groin. That was good humor, humor that is shown in 95% of the America's Funniest Home Videos, son hits dad in the balls with a bat, son hits dad in the balls with a ball, dad rams himself with the bicycle tire, etc.

Ian McGibboney said...

Nick, you have precisely touched on the problem I have with censorship and the religious right: it's arbitrary. Violence, crotch-centered gags, fart humor, drug use and cute beer commercials are all fine on "family" television, but ANY reminder of the human libido is taboo and obscene. I fail to understand why a loose boob is worse than a crushed pair of nuts. Help me out here.

Second, I am staunchly against allowing the religious right to set any definitions on obscenity standards. Not only are they arbitrary, as I've already shown, but they are the most repressive group out there. Despite their chokehold on power, the RR is still a fringe group.

Third, I would debate on whether the Super Bowl is, in fact, a "family" event. If it is, then that family is obviously in a trailer park somewhere in Stubville, West Virginia. The Super Bowl is a FOOTBALL GAME, brought to you by Budweiser and Sharpie, and featuring the Rolling Stones. That sure screams "family" to begin with, eh? Not to mention that the halftime show with Janet was the raunchiest show ever even without the floppy disk. Expecting the Super Bowl to be a family-friendly event is like me expecting a stripper at a child's birthday party. Anyway, I think most children wouldn't care anyway if repressive parents didn't raise such a fuss over it all.

Finally, the only reason the NFL cared at all was because of revenue. Back in 1993 or so, the NFL announced that it was going to begin attracting major acts since audiences had long grown tired of generic variety shows. I expect the pendulum to swing again the moment people start voting with their pocketbooks. Or wake up to what's happening in this country.

Nick said...

Well, a raunchy halftime show with Janet Jackson and NSYNC is what you get when you allow MTV to produce it. Whoever hired MTV should be fined for stupidity. Hiring a network that brings you "The Real Life", a show where having an IQ of 70 or higher automatically disqualifies you from being on it, and Jackass, where it's funny to staple your nuts to a bar in Houma, to do your hafltime show is just plain dumb. I'm convienced the average IQ of MTV actors and watchers is lower than that of average IQ of NFL players.

Nick said...

And what's the point of your trailer park living, Budwieser, Sharpie, and Stones reference? Are you trying to insinuate that people who live in trailer parks and enjoy Budwieser and the Stones are somehow not intellectually equal to others? If so, I don't think my parents got that memo. My dad's sister and husband didn't get it either.

And yes, the Super Bowl has been a family even for a long time, as many 7 and 8 yr. old boys grow up watching football with their dads and dream of being a Super Bowl hero. The Super Bowl was always a family thing in our house. I would sit in the living room with my mom, dad, and sister enjoying the game, pulling for classy guys like Rice, Farve, Montana and Elway.

Ian McGibboney said...

Nick, I'm insinuating that any event that features wall-to-wall beer commercials and tacky crotch-biting ads has no right to label itself a "family" show. You wouldn't tolerate Bud Light commercials on PBS or Nickelodeon, so why are you expecting the Super Bowl to cater to your kids?

Personally, I don't care that those ads run, or that risky things can happen. It's a live event, and the biggest in the country. It saddened me to read the NFL bragging about how predictable the event was going to be. But that's the collective power of overprotective parents who want to shield their childrens' eyes from the female form (while exposing them to hypocritical messages about drugs, alcohol and violence) and who apparently have no capacity to be a parent or turn off the game during halftime. We shouldn't cater to lazy parents.

And Nick, I'm not implying that any one group of people are necessarily more intelligent than another. But I don't understand why I'm supposed to uphold the trailer-park life as the pinnacle of American intellect. Besides, your parents don't live in a trailer. Maybe they did decades ago, but now they live in a wealthy suburban home. There's nothing about your family that screams, "trailer park."

Flamingo Jones said...

Oh, I don't know...I think people who use Sharpies are quite dumb, in general.


(not really. in fact, I make it a point to almost always have a Sharpie concealed somewhere on my person. just in case. I just thought that was a funny connection to make. It makes about as much sense as Nick's leap of logic)

Nick said...

But still, you liberals are always preaching against others about grouping people of similar likes. When you talk about a family living in a trailer park in Virginia sipping on Budwiser, what makes you think that they are any different than those such as my parents who started their family with me in a trailer but eventually moved out.

Cherie lives in a trailer, and I basically live with her when I am in town. Last night, we watched the Super Bowl, drank Budwiser (Select) out of football mugs with her little girl sitting with us in the living room. Is that "trailer" for you? How about I generalize like you and say that the only families who regularly enjoy BET with rap videos and commercials about St. Ides malt liquor are sitting in a project house in New Orleans? Wait, no, that would probably make me a bigot. But, it's perfectly ok to associate a family that happens to live in a trailer park with Budwiser, Sharpe, and the Super Bowl.

Ian McGibboney said...

Nick, you're taking this WAY too personally. The only point I was trying to make was that different households have different ideas as to what is appropriate on television. I intended no dig on your lifestyle or anyone else's.