Sunday, February 05, 2006

Super Bowl

Which was less entertaining, the game or the commercials?

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'd say the commercials, not as good as last year.

KauaiMark said...

Was there a game today? How many homeruns did the winning team get?

...Mark

Mike T said...

Please don't tell me that....I missed a good hunk of the game (in Kuwait the kick off was 223am Monday) and my nephew is burning the commercials onto a DVD for me (You know AF Television would not broadcast good commercials, but only this safety or “don’t beat your girlfriend” or security crap.) Now you’re telling me we have nothing to forward to out here...waaaaaa! :(

Mike T said...

From the Drudge Report this am:


FLASH: SUPER BOWL RATINGS DOWN FROM LAST YEAR, ACCORDING TO NIELSEN OVERNIGHTS... ABC'S 41.8 RATING/62 SHARE OFF FROM FOX'S 2005 43.4/63... 84 SHARE RECORDED IN PITTSBURGH [!]... MORE..


It must have been a really suck game!

rightwingprof said...

The first half was slow. The second half was good. And we won.

Doug said...

Fear not, Mike T. This wasn't a banner year for commercials, but some were quite good. Some were a major waste of 2.5 million bucks, but there were some clever ones. I think you'll enjoy it.

As for the game, I enjoy a good back and forth with no clear winner until the last few minutes. I found it entertaining.

Olivier Blanchard said...

The game was better than the commercials. And that's not saying much.

EdWonk said...

Oops! I thought the match was next week! :P

Anonymous said...

It wasn't a pretty superbowl, but it was hard-fought superbowl. And the commercials sucked. Except for the Magic Fridge.

Dan

Darren said...

Magic Frig? Ewww.

Now, having a somewhat negative experience with the TSA myself, I liked the Sierra Mist commercial.

Darren said...

Any scorn and ridicule the TSA types get is ok with me.