Super Bowl Ads

I'm not just talking about players, I'm talking about the structure and organization in general. Yes, its good that there's something closer to parity between players and owners, and I appreciate the concerns over the health risks players are putting themselves through.

But yeah, Tom, I love ya, but saying I'm arguing sports should be free is a terrible strawman. Obviously there's going to be money involved, and to be honest I'm less concerned about the salaries of the players (which are admittedley an easy target) but the commercialization that surrounds them. At some point watching the Bridgestone Bud Light Pre-Postgame Commercial Breakdown gets oppressive. Its a little messed up that you can't watch a game for a single second without someone trying to manipulate you into buying something. Granted, this is more a general symptom of the the world we live, its just things like the Super Bowl are just really egregious examples of it.

 

your previous posts did seem to be more focused on player salaries. i'm totally on the same page with you regarding the commercialization and the fact that it's reflective of a sickening trend in society at large.

 

That's actually the genius of it. FB, the 80's teen Peter Pan with a paunch and driving a soccer mom car.
Because if a realistic sequel were ever made, that's what he'd be doing.

 

Eh, radio and television broadcasts have always been advertisement-heavy. It's how they keep themselves on the air, and big revenue streams such as the Super Bowl can fund other things throughout the year-- especially on NBC lol. And if you question why people make millions off of kicking a ball and getting concussions, you might as well ask why anyone gets millions of dollars-- at least 20 times the average household income in the U.S.-- for doing anything. We wouldn't want that now, would we?

 

yeah, i agree with that. yes, athletes are overpaid but so is just about anyone who is extremely wealthy. if anything professional sports are remarkable in that the very wealthy owners actually pay the players a fair share of their revenue.

 

I did not see every commercial.

Of what I did see I liked the Chevy Comaro, the M&M, and the red and black Fiat commercials. The Eastwood commercial was ok, the polical fighting over it today is funny.

 

I find this to be an interesting point of view, especially because its so popular. Pro athletes, no matter how gifted, have at best a 20 yr career ahead of them and once they've peaked at the 10 yr mark or so, the cries for them to "go out on top" start in. Now this phenomenon of watching human beings push themselves to the limits of human endurance is not new. It's been around for as long as human beings have organized ourselves into large social groups. I imagine that if the Roman Empire had the technology we have today, the gladiatorial battles would be just as commercialized as the superbowl is today. The only difference is that the performers would have been slaves and their lives utterly expendable.

So we want athletes to "play for the love of the game". We want them to endanger their lives and quality of life for our entertainment purely for the love of the game? Because it's more noble?

In order to achieve the level of performance that we want to "celebrate", these men and women often devote the entirety of their youth to the game we want to watch. They work countless hours in the gym and on their respective fields, often enduring numerous injuries and pain all to get to the point that they can compete at the highest levels. They sacrifice time with family and friends, other personal pursuits, higher education, etc. All so that they can get 5-10 yrs on average, 10-20 yrs if they're great, on the big stage. When they're done and used up, we'll forget them. They'll be lucky if they get their names etched in some wall or hall of fame. Maybe they'll be part of debates about just how great they were in their prime. A few will get TV contracts in punditry. Some will use their names to attach to products. But most will live in relative obscurity with few, if any skills to apply to a world outside of their chosen sport. Most will live out their lives with permanent aches and pains earned playing the sport. Many will have such significant injuries that their quality of life will be forever degraded.

Are pro athletes overpaid? Some definitely are. Others probably are. But I personally have a hard time sitting in judgment on them. I would never do what they do. I am convinced that these people are there, for the most part, because they love the game.

Regardless, I think its ridiculous to expect any person, let alone an sport industry of people, to sacrifice so much and perform at so high a level without significant reward--rewards that will sustain them after their bodies, minds, and skills fail them, as they inevitably do.

 

I will shock those who are familiar with my idle rich bashing threads but I've always found the, "They make too much money" argument to be silly.

Athletes make millions because they generate billions. Same with big name actors, etc.
No one gives them money out of charity.

 

It's devoid of moral consideration, yes, but it is not for entirely economic (generate more money = higher salary) reasons either. As tom alluded to a few posts ago, the owners would gladly stiff the players out of their "fair shares" if the players didn't have unions and such to fight back. And certainly the whole revenue generating argument gets more dubious once you look at millionaires who are not entertainers.

EDIT: And I don't really understand why we shouldn't question it morally anyway. We're not a bunch of wild animals living in some social Darwinist masturbation fantasy.

 

You only think we're not

 

wow great use of pathos [/sarcasm]

 

Well, when you put it like Souderwan....it actually just makes me realize how absurd professional sports are as a concept.

 

Agreed.

 

I'm dive-bombing in having read none of the thread.

On an abstract debate about the merits of player salaries, though, I'd say the following. On the one hand, yes, I don't think it's necessarily sensible to aim criticism at the players. But one can still criticize their salaries and the overall "commercialism" of the enterprise as viewed from the broader structural lens. It's also worth pointing out that as unfair as playing for the pure "love of the game" might seem, we ask equally huge sacrifices from any number of other careers with much humbler reimbursement, and which have demonstrably greater impact on our culture. Ballet, for instance.

 

To your first point: Commercials are commercials for a reason...............yeah they can be so annoying most of the time/are shameless attempts at wanting you to buy crap, but isn't it going to far to say "You should be disappointed it exists in the first place"? I'd rather be disappointed in far more serious matters (say all the crap going in the LAUSD and the slaughter going on in Syria) than to think a commercial event (such was the Super Bowl) is such offensive thing to human nature and dignity.


To your second point: No kidding there's a lot of commerce involved, but at the end of the day (and of course varying athletes having varying abilities), the athletic part in sports does matter, or else why the hell would anyone watch/be passionate over them? And yes, so many athletes make so much more money than a lot of Americans, but say they didn't. Say sports wages were balanced to the point of non-excess...............just how much of that money would really go to the average American? Just because there would potentially be billions of extra funds floating around dosen't mean it's going to effect those Americans that much for the better. Far more serious financial issues (say banks/how loans are dished out & handled, pay scales in a lot of work environments for example) exist, and actually matter more to make things better for your average American family. And what they add to the proceedings is a ridiculous premise because sports, like any other form of entertainment/escapism we all have in our lives, is purely subjective. Just because many people don't like sports doesn't mean it's wrong for people to do so. A family tradition/shared passion (like what me & my dad have for the Dodgers) is something else for other parents & their kids (a lot of variables there, of course) for many different things. A night or a day spent doing things many others do here that I don't care for/I find to be silly or odd to me can be looked at in the same fashion by anyone else whenever I post about a day spent at Dodger Stadium or Staples Center/watching games on television. And just because pro athletes are overpaid doesn't mean they don't deserved to be paid.



To your last point: Yes, the handing out of cars to athletes in that type of situation is an example the crazy side of sports.


Los Angeles Lakers: Drama, guaranteed.

 

Never said people shouldn't enjoy sports, never said it was the only economic disparity in the world worth caring about, never said that there shouldn't be commercials. I'm more concerned that we live in a society where commercials have become a fact of life that we don't question anymore.

I didn't mean to suggest that you should be disappointed that commercials exist (although maybe you should, but this is a more involved argument than should be held on a message board) but you should be disappointed that a commercial like the Ferris Bueller one exists, because it treats a piece of art (even if it is pop art) with disrespect, because it treats the viewer with disrespect, and because it treats the current economic climate with disrespect. So who cares that its about a C-RV instead of some other cooler product? It was bankrupt on arrival.

Let's not even talk about the way the culture has started to treat commercials as a form of harmless entertainment, instead of as things that are calculated to manipulate you.

 

I think a lot of people do question commercials, especially Super Bowl commercials. A lot of what I'm been reading today is on how the emphasis on Super Bowl ads is becoming ridiculous, and throughout many of the commercials yesterday, me, my brother & our pals were pointing out/laughing about just how silly so many of them were (I actually walked out of the living room at the beginning of 2 Go Daddy!.com ads.............I've seen enough of their crap before, and just had enough). And yes, a debate on this subject is probably suited elsewhere around here (say The Senate, though I want to avoid that forum at all costs ), or if you & I ever meetup/hang out one day, we can certainly have an interesting discussion. One last thing: Why should I care if Broderick whored out his Bueller character image (since he didn't direct play Bueller in the ad) for that Honda Super Bowl ad? I haven't seen that movie, but obviously I'm quite aware of it's existence/beloved statues it has for many people. Still nothing to get worked up about as I see it.


Los Angeles Lakers: Drama, guaranteed.

 

That may be the car he drives to work every day, but when Ferris takes the day off ... definitely not choice. The Acura NSX would have been a far better match.

 

Of course one can. I'm simply suggesting that such criticism, while easy and might make us feel morally superior, is myopic. It implies that there is some absolute measure of worth beyond the agreement between two people who make the exchange of labor and dollar. But no such measure exists. If it did, it would be used at least somewhere in larger society. And since it doesn't exist, whatever method other than money we come up with would be based on someone's values. Should a garbage man and a doctor be compensated in the same way? It's arguable that garbage men are even more valuable than doctors, after all. If the issue is compensation above "need", who is to say what that "need" level is?

Every generation there is some indicator of the moral decay of humanity due to societal excess. This argument has been around for as long as humanity has been. It's only in the last hundred years or so that the participants in the ring--the focal points of our entertainment--have been handsomely compensated for their efforts. And their pay scale has absolutely zero impact on my day to day life. I don't see why anyone cares. As long as they and their employers are content with the agreement, why should it bother anyone else? How is that harming society? All you have to do is choose not to watch.

lol

 

Exactly. A handful of diamonds being worth more money than the average person's salary isn't about right and wrong... it's just what a buyer is willing to pay for one over the other.