Should the Superbowl Halftime show be reserved for older acts?
 

Ever since Bruno Mars was announced as the performer at next week's Superbowl Halftime show, something just hasn't felt right about it.

I mean, the guy has talent and I'm not denying that. I even like a few of his tracks. However, he just hasn't been around that long. Madonna, Beyonce, and even the Black Eyed Peas had been in the industry for at least a decade before playing on America's biggest stage.

There's many other artists that have been successful over the past few decades and haven't been given the chance to play Halftime. Metallica is one that comes to mind.

I have nothing against Bruno as a musician, but the Halftime has always been played by older, legacy artists, not newcomers like Bruno.

Overall, the NFL made a big mistake by hiring him to perform. It seems the tradition of seeing accomplished acts playing the stage is over, and we'll start seeing new, current artists performing every year. Ugh...

What are your thoughts?

well i wouldnt say that established acts performing is really over. i mean rhcp is supposed to be there with bruno. bruno is really talented and is an easy listen, i think it will be a good performance. it will be interestin to see what the chili peppers play or if there will be any special guests as sometimes happens.

just in the last 10 yrs if i remember correctly we've seen madonna, the who, rollin stones, paul mccartney, etc. at the end of the day whatever happens will be buzzin on twitter for a few hours then nobody will really remember the next day. unless it sucks like black eyed peas lol. its kind of a middle aged-younger event anyways (the show itself). they are the ones usin social media and stuff and talkin about it. the older fans dont care about the show and prob arent too broken up with metallica not playin

I blame Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson. Ever since that incident they decided to play it safe with crappy old timer acts. Don't worry they won't be giving up on the safety of having those old farts perform. This isn't the start of some new trend.

Yes. I believe that the older acts should be given a slot at the Superbowl Halftime show. It is blasphemy..where is the love for the reunion of Creed, and Nickelback is about to have their 12th anniversary of 'Silver Side Up'

#veteransdeserverespect

I lost all respect for my friend's musical taste when he said he liked Fergie doing that god awful Axl Rose impression.

That is all.

It think it should be strictly reserved for boring artists so that they blend well with the boring ass game they're performing in the middle of.

I really don't understand the premise for this thread. Bruno's a solid live performer. He's got a huge following. NFL wins, viewers win, everybody wins except the OP.

WTF does being old have to do with it?

Creed is one of the bands I never did understand what all the hype was about. I always thought they sounded like a generic version of Pearl Jam. I rarely ever watch half time activities anyway, I tune in to watch the football game itself, I could care less about what band is playing at half time. I guess it might make a difference who is playing at halftime if you're at the game in person.

i really enjoy live vids. i watch a lot of youtube vids of ppl performin at events or hbo specials or dvd specials or late nite shows and ive never seen a good black eyed peas performance. im not overly critical or care much about halftimes cause thats when im 8 beers deep and stuffin buffalo chicken dip to my face but that one sucked

I think it should be scrapped completely. 15 minute break where the pundits discuss the tactical goings on then straight back out for the 2nd half.

No need for a half time concert.

I don't listen to Bruno Mars, don't have a clue what he sings. But I think it might have the fact that he had a tragedy that happen last pass year when his mother died. And maybe just maybe it was out of sympathy. I like to think maybe someone somewhere who controls the half time show had a heart and felt sorry for him, but I don't know. Maybe it's 95% marketing and 5% sympathy, but either way everything during half time is about marketing, not about paying dues to the likes of Esther (aka Madonna) just because she been around longer than half the players on the field. Maybe they mix it up with old and new singers and bands from year to year because they know they are broadcasting it to an audience with a wide demographic in age. They know the audience has a very wide music taste and they can't cater to everyone at the same time and they mix it up - like it or lump to the fans whose musical taste isn't represented at half time. (to paraphrase a quote attributed to potusa AL) "You can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can not please all of the people all of the time." Not only half time but all pro sports (and broadcasters of pro sports) is more about marketing the the sport. We live in a world that is one giant sales pitch.

guaranteed it has nothn to do with sympathy. youre right its marketin and promotion but thats not a bad thing. they want younger fans to tune in tho i doubt anyone is watchin just for the halftime show. i think its already the most watched event.

I think the Superbowl should be a venue for the classic rockers to reunite and put on a damn good show.

But Beyonce and Black Eyed Peas were not around that long either. I personally thought they were to early in their careers to headline it and more deserving acts should have had the opportunity.


They might have been around longer than Bruno but most of the PAST veteran acts who have headlined Halftime had careers of 25+

At the TIME of when they had did their halftimes

ex. Prince had been in the industry for over 25+ 2004
ex. Madonna had been in the industry for 30 years 2012
ex. MJ had been in the industry for over 20+ 1993


PERSONALLY, I personally think Icons and legends should headline it because it is such a huge venue and they need artists who have iconic songs that people will easily recognize. It also gives them an opportunity to shine and to get some easy marketing for new projects or new potential fans. The older acts need that more than the new ones in my opinion.

Nobody remembers the Black Eyed Peas or Beyonce's boring performances or what they sung because their not icons and they dont have iconic music.


I think the Super Bowl is changing the acts they pick and I think they are gearing it more towards the youth versus the old like they did in the past.


Ive seen Bruno live and he is a good entertainer. He has that old school flare, plays instruments, has a killer band and nice dance moves. He has quality songs too and he can sing live. It will be much better than last years thats for sure

:laughing:

Your hatred runs strong.

http://media.giphy.com/media/A6NO2EKHZ9IzK/giphy.gif

LOL hahaha

No hate here hun, just speaking the TRUF :D

I never get tired of this gif lol

But what in the case of Journey should Steve Perry be the lead singer or Arnel Pineda?

The halftime show should have been Billy Joel.

Billy Joel has a residency at Madison Square Garden for the next two years and can be seen performing at any time.

Why not pick an older act that hasn't performed together on awhile.

:beer:

Agreed.

Yes, that would be something. Maybe he could do a dubstep version of "It's Still Rock And Roll To Me", since new wave is no longer relevant.

No way. It should be a a performer that can get crowds and that can able to succeed and make great music. Who cares if the performer is young or old.

Hardly...his tour starts in 2 weeks. He's at MSG Monday, then plays Raleigh, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Toronto. July, he's playing Fenway Park. :D (Note: he's a die-hard Yankee fan.)

Naah...New York State Of Mind, Only The Good Die Young and Zanzibar.

I don't care who plays as long as Dave Grohl is behind the drumkit :drummer:

It's Bruno Mars? Recording that.

You don't like the Beatles and now you don't like Billy Joel? :(

I thought he was good enough to make an impact on the people that have been hiding under a rock lately and never heard of him (*cough* some older folks I know). Most people really don't understand what it takes to pull off a performance like that. Years of training and self discipline, as well as sludging through the grime to get to a pinnacle of that magnitude. As for his performance, he made it look easy, and THAT is the sign of a solid performer. I enjoyed it, although it was just a bit sterile. Just a bit.

...and RHCP, well... yeah they've performed that tune live a million and one times, so...

It was fine, to me, but what was that about? The most random thing - a 20 year old song mixed in for no reason.

I'm thinking it was the little edge that they figured would satisfy the the groaners.

You may be right.

Why couldn't Bruno Mars do the show by himself?

Is it because he's black?

Like RHCP didn't need to be a special guest.

They didn't add anything to his performance

Has there ever been a special guest before in the past?

Also wtf was Flea wearing pants?

Bruno is not black. He is mixed race. He is mixed with Filipino, Puerto Rican and Hawaiian.

And his Super Bowl was GREAT! Much better than last year's!!! I am so glad he decided to play the drums for his half time. TRHCP sounded good but they did not have to be apart of that.

i knew rhcp was there just to please the older crowd but i expected them to play a lot more


bruno was terrific tho. one of the best halftime performances in recent memory. he sounded great and the production of the whole halftime show was incredible

I like some of his songs, I just find him kind of boring.

:laughing:

Bruno's show was one of the best in a while. I still like seeing some of the older acts, but as long as it's someone with some decent songs and is capable of putting on a good show, then I'm fine with anyone. Please no more Black Eyed Peas though, that may have been the worst halftime show ever.

Ha, I see whacha did there. I love that song.

I may be crazy.

Don't go changing to try to please me,