Does rock 'n' roll have a place at the Super Bowl?
February 9th 2010 19:58
If you ask me, calling the union of Pete Townshend and Roger Daltrey the Who is like calling the pairing of Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr a Beatles reunion. Without all the guys, it just doesn't quite make it. At least dead members can't sue for use of the name. Then again--there's that sticky legal mumbo jumbo involving heirs.
Do we need to see rockers past their prime trying to recapture their youth?
As far as that goes, does rock 'n' roll even have a place at the Super Bowl?
Seeing the likes of Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, or the Who performing at halftime is a signal of change. Some people may see this as a shift toward more popular acts However, more than anything else, this is an indication that things are the same as ever and the only thing that has changed in corporate America is that the children of former CEO's are now making the rules. Instead of Al Hirt or Up With People, we now have 60's rockers.
By the way--didn't the Saints win that game????
Do we need to see rockers past their prime trying to recapture their youth?
As far as that goes, does rock 'n' roll even have a place at the Super Bowl?
Seeing the likes of Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, or the Who performing at halftime is a signal of change. Some people may see this as a shift toward more popular acts However, more than anything else, this is an indication that things are the same as ever and the only thing that has changed in corporate America is that the children of former CEO's are now making the rules. Instead of Al Hirt or Up With People, we now have 60's rockers.
By the way--didn't the Saints win that game????
| 22 |
| Vote |
















