Super Bowl Halftime Options

Yesterday's news that the NFL wants this year's potential Super Bowl halftime performers to contribute to some sort of NFL charity definitely seemed a little weird.  I get what they were trying to say: "You're getting all this free publicity from doing the halftime show, why not pay it forward?"  But their execution was obviously way off, and it's making the NFL look incredibly bad as a result.

I'm sure what they were trying to do was see if any of the performers would be willing to do that.  Whoever said yes, if any, was likely going to be the NFL's choice.  But, and I'm not sure if this was their intention or not, it never should've been made public.  Bring this up in your negotiations with the artists and see if they'd be willing.  Then nobody would've ever known if the answer was "No."  By doing it this way, the NFL looks bad for asking and the artists look somewhat bad for saying no, although, in fairness, why would anybody expect them to agree?

Now, there's a common misconception about the Super Bowl Halftime Show.  The NFL doesn't pay the artists that perform at halftime.  They pick up the travel costs, but the artists themselves aren't financially compensated for performing.  And this isn't a problem for anybody, since most artists use the publicity from the Super Bowl to launch a new album or tour.  So, it's not as if the NFL is suddenly getting cheap and going from paying the artists to asking them to pay for the privilege.

And I'd bet whoever the NFL ultimately chooses might make a goodwill gesture and make a donation to charity anyway.  It could've been a great PR move.  The problem is that it backfired.  The NFL shouldn't have asked ahead of time.

What's being somewhat lost in this outrage, too, are the three artists that the NFL has reached out to.  Whether or not these are the only performers being considered, who knows, but I wouldn't be surprised if they really have narrowed down the list to just these three.  Especially since two would be excellent selections who've been considered in the past and have the type of wide-reaching appeal and following that would be appropriate for the millions of people who watch the game. 

Nothing against Coldplay, but they don't have the cache of either Katy Perry or Rihanna.  They're not the type of group that has the "Wow" factor we've grown to expect for the Super Bowl Halftime Show.  Both Katy Perry and Rihanna do.  Likewise, Katy Perry and Rihanna both have legions of fans, but are also relevant enough that they and their songs will be familiar to casual viewers.  And they're upbeat performers who lend to the type of show the NFL would want (I've heard that Katy Perry is awesome live).  I may be wrong, but I don't see Coldplay as that type of artist.  People aren't going to get anywhere near as excited for Coldplay as they would for Katy Perry or Rihanna.

Between the girls, though, I don't think they could go wrong either way.  They're both all over the radio, with tons of songs that everyone knows, whether they want to admit it or not.  They've got different types of songs too, which isn't as relevant for halftime as it would be for a full concert, but is important nonetheless (Taylor Swift or Adele wouldn't be appropriate because all of their songs are the same).  They've both got their fans who might not care at all about the game, but will tune in to see either one perform at halftime.  And, most importantly, they're big enough headliners that people won't turn the game off or go do something else at halftime.  The fact that they're both attractive women doesn't hurt, either.

Personally, as long as it is either Katy Perry or Rihanna, I really don't care which.  I'm kind of leaning towards Katy Perry because I've heard how good a performer she is and I'm not sure about Rihanna live, but I'm pretty sure she's amazing as well, so it really is a toss-up.  Ultimately, though, either one would be a great choice.  In fact, why not have both?  One this year, the other next year.  (I've got a feeling the NFL's got something special planned for Super Bowl 50, though.)

Super Bowl halftime has taken on a life of its own in recent years.  I'm sure we'll find out the ultimate choice soon (Bruno Mars was on the set of FOX's pregame show in Week 1 last season), but I'm excited about the possibilities (at least, two of the three).  And I'm sure the charitable donation thing will sort itself out, too.

That's being blown out of proportion, though.  The NFL didn't mean to come off as bad as it did.  It was just an unfortunate consequence of poor timing.  And it's a mistake that probably wouldn't be made again if the NFL had the chance to do it over.