“Super Bowl” is maybe the silliest name for a sporting event on earth.
What makes the game a bowl? (Bleacher Report traced the completely arbitrary origins.) Were the leaders of professional football in the late 60s so unimaginative that they just lifted nomenclature from the college game? The World Series is at least a series, even if the world has nothing to do with it. Play the game at The Rose Bowl every year if you’re going to keep the dumbo name.
And super? Really? That’s the adjective they decided upon? Even in the late 60s the word super was lame.
Todd: Well, Jim, the game is gonna be really terrific.
Jim: The Terrific Title Game. What do you think, Todd?
Todd: Doesn’t pop, Jim. The name has to pop!
Jim: The Fantastic Football Foray!
Todd: Sounds too much like a burlesque show.
Jim: The Super Bowl? I know it’s lame –
Todd: Nailed it!
This Super Bowl lacks juice. Three reasons:
- The best storyline is something that might happen after the game is over, with Goodell handing things to the New England hierarchy. People actually care about this? I don’t even watch the trophy presentation. And based on the way a majority of Super Bowls have gone, I probably won’t watch the tail end of the fourth quarter.
- This NFL season was awful but the postseason has been a particular kind of grotesque. Outside of Cowboys/Packers, was there even an entertaining game? (Or don’t tell me that thing the Steelers and Chiefs did was entertaining.) As a huge fan of professional football, I’m hoping this season will merely be an anomaly. But I think it’d be foolish to expect this Super Bowl to save the season. Still, one can hope.
- The Falcons. If this were the Cowboys, the game’s juice would be out of control. If this were Aaron Rodgers, the Rodgers v. Brady would make people salivate. But there’s something bland about the Falcons, even though they have the most dynamic offense in the league. I’ll be rooting for them Sunday but if they lose, it’ll take me about seventeen seconds to get over it.
