Pugilist Punch: A Potent Shot Of Fighting in Sports

Powder keg (n):
1. A small, barrel-like container for gunpowder or blasting powder.
2. A potentially dangerous situation, especially one involving violent repercussions.


We all know the ingredients to create a powder keg. For those of you who don’t, definition number one, above, should tell you. You take a keg and fill it with gunpowder—the palpable consequences of messing with the keg’s equilibrium are well known and extremely violent, lending itself to its figurative second definition.

In professional sports, each game is a powder keg.

Mix brawny, male athletes who meticulously and laboriously hone their craft, a restricted playing area, and the desire to win and emotions can easily boil over into unsanctioned and flagrant abuses of equipment, personnel, and even fans.

Although pugilism purists always have boxing to fall back on along with the plethora of up-and-coming mixed martial arts federations, there are always those rare, albeit scintillating moments when bellicosity is unavoidable on the gridiron, the diamond, the wood, and especially the ice.

There are those who proclaim that fighting has nothing to do with sport. In fact, the very definition of a sporting gentleman would preclude them from fighting an opponent; however, the prevailing emotion in our modern-day major sports is that sometimes being a gentleman is no way to win. No way at all.

For the general sporting public, fighting is a guilty pleasure—something exciting, but wrong. People silently, or not so silently, wait for something to erupt when two rivals play each other or when things become overly physical in the wrong circumstances. Whatever the case is, the repetitious offerings of every fight, every skirmish, every brawl by ESPN, NHL network, VS and your local sports affiliates only corroborates what every one is thinking: Most people like this stuff.

Most examples of rough-housing in professional sports are of the illegal variety, meaning, the act was banned by the rules of the governing body of the respective sport. You know a lot of the famous incidences. In basketball, the infamous brawl between the Indiana Pacers and Detroit Pistons of November 19, 2004, better known as The Malice at the Palace, sent shockwaves throughout the sporting world. It was not the first time basketball players had come to blows, and no, it wasn’t the first time fans were involved, either. But the chaotic level that the brawl in question reached was so out of proportion with what we were used to seeing in an NBA game that it was very scary—mostly for fan, Charlie Haddad, who got sucker punched in the jaw by Jermaine O’Neal.

As for the chaos I referred to, nothing more needs to be said except the resulting penalties from that melee. Nine players were suspended for a total of 146 games, sacrificing $10 million dollars in salary, while five of those players were also charged with assault resulting in one year probation and community service, each. Five fans were also legally processed and charged, and one fan received a lifetime ban from The Palace in Detroit.


Another sport we normally regard as a peaceful pastime is baseball. Typically a calm and rhythmic game, baseball, under the right circumstances, can be just as heated and intense as any full-contact sport. Pitches thrown inside on a batter, spikes up when sliding into a base, A-Rod slaps, home-run watching, and other minor infractions can cause quite a stir with the opposition. Most baseball fights are bench clearing brawls, making any type of physical altercation in baseball national news. Unlike many hockey fights, baseball brawls don’t generally fly under the radar even though they occur substantially less often. And while the MLB has put the kibosh on airing their league-owned footage of fights on youtube, that does not stop me from posting a picture from a fight right here.

And here.











A sport that has surprisingly few fights that is an intensely violent sport is American football. There are arguments stating that the inherent physicality of the sport is what prevents things from getting out of hand often. Another possible justification for this paradox is that the players are simply more disciplined as a whole in the NFL as opposed to MLB or the NBA. Generally, gross misconduct represents at least a one-game suspension and/or monetary penalties. The NFL cracks down hard on anyone presenting an overly physical threat to another player. The following video of left tackle, Matt Light, of the New England Patriots and linebacker, Channing Crowder, of the Miami Dolphins gives us a glimpse of what can happen when emotions run high in a divisional football game.




For as minor a transgression as this looks to be compared to the rest of the action in an NFL game, Matt Light was fined $15,000 dollars for the incident and both players were immediately ejected from the game. Light was not suspended for another game, but at the time there was great outcry for him to be, and many viewed this as league favoritism shown to the Patriots by League Commissioner, Roger Goodell. This is but one example from football whose parent league has also done what they can to abolish league owned videos of fights on the internet, but in my humble opinion, it is the NFL who runs the tightest ship concerning personal conduct on the field.

The league with loosest personal conduct rules as pertaining to the field of play is the NHL. This is not to say that they peddle a chaotic product hell-bent on debauchery and no-holds-barred action, but it is to say that since its inception, the NHL has only penalized in-game fighting with, at most, a five-minute sit in the sin-bin.

The NHL has a great amount of history. It has its heroes and its villains, and throughout the storied history of the league, fighting has always been there as a remnant of the past, where men policed themselves. Fighting in hockey isn’t only about anger. It isn’t only about hurting your opponent. Those aspects are almost always there, but there is something greater at hand. Fighting in the NHL is about honor; it’s about picking up your team when you think they need it. It’s about protecting your players, especially your goalie, if the other team is taking liberties with them. Watch what happens when Keith Tkachuk, then of the St. Louis Blues takes a run at then Detroit Red Wings goaltender, Dominik Hasek:




Fighting in the NHL is regarded by some as a barbarous activity—some vestigial part left over from a pre-modern game. These people would have a point if NHL players were indiscriminately walking around picking fights with each other constantly. This is not the case. There are many games in which there is no fighting at all. When combatants do agree to drop the gloves there is more or less a code that these tough guys follow. Sometimes, it does get out of hand, though:




There is currently a small movement in the NHL to change some of the rules regarding fighting in their games. Some seem to feel that fighting for the wrong reasons is on the rise; that once a clean, hard body-check is thrown, it becomes inevitable that someone will retaliate. I have to agree that this is a trend. More and more players are finding themselves accountable for huge and sometimes reckless hits they throw on other players. I have no problem with this. It was fighting in the first place that was always lauded by the players for helping them police their own game. Fighting, they believed, made everyone accountable for their actions. This sentiment is what some are using for the argument against fighting now; that it will make players think twice about their actions and not throw huge hits.

I never knew accountability to be a bad thing. Have you?

Adding extra penalties to those who the referee feels “instigated” the fight is a silly amendment, as well. We read aloud from the NHL rulebook:

An instigator of an altercation shall be a player who by his actions or demeanor demonstrates any/some of the following criteria: distance traveled; gloves off first; first punch thrown; menacing attitude or posture; verbal instigation or threats; conduct in retaliation to a prior game (or season) incident; obvious retribution for a previous incident in the game or season…

To me, this covers any reason at all why one player would fight another, and also includes instances which are impossible to forgo in the instance of a fight. Things like, traveling a distance, removing gloves first, first punch thrown, et al. All of these things need to happen in order for a fight to occur. Is the NHL claiming that an instigator penalty (an extra two minutes on top of the five for fighting, plus a ten-minute misconduct) is doled out on a per-fight basis? It certainly is not.

There is no other sport where the players are as accountable in their actions to the other players. There is no sport that so liberally allows its constituents to have it out and let that determine the flow of the event. To a certain extent, yea, it may seem a bit anachronistic to let boys be boys to such a length, but the fans love it, and the longevity of the league and some of its more cryptic customs are a testament to what works and what will continue to excite fans. Besides, you really want to give this up?






Sometimes the powder keg’s equilibrium is left unmolested. But without a little explosion now and then, where would that leave sports fans? I don’t know, but I don’t want to find out. I leave you with this:

The Dueling Sports Brain

Man’s brain is hemispheric, and as there are two parts creating the whole; these two parts control wholly different aspects of our psyche.

Sports fans are no different.

You see, the left hemisphere is logical, sequential, rational, analytical; it examines the smaller details. This is all going on while your right hemisphere is random, intuitive, holistic, synthesizing, subjective; it’s looking at the big picture, but it’s here to party.

As you can imagine, it’s hard to listen to both halves at the same time. There is indefinitely some prevailing logic that you tell yourself is the next step, whether that’s based on intuition or logic. In the sporting world, these two sides of your brain were put to war during the fantastically frenzied periods of MLB and NFL free agency, as well as the NHL trading deadline.

For argument’s sake, I’m ignoring the NBA trade deadline that saw almost nothing happen this past February 19, besides Drew Gooden going to the Spurs on waivers, after the deadline passed.

In these turbulent times, these annual flirtations with the leagues’ best and brightest can leave a fan confused. As a fan of your favorite team, your right hemisphere wants to see a big splash. Yankees fans have been spoiled, to say the least. Their team consistently overpays for great talent, more often than not, setting the market price for comparable players on every other team. This past off-season the Yanks made a serious raid on their own coffers, shelling out $423 Million dollars (this is not hyperbole, folks) on three, THREE, free-agents: C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, and Mark Teixeira.

According to GM Brian Cashman, “It was between signing those three quality players and balancing the National debt of Lithuania.” (He did not actually say that)

The right hemisphere is screaming to the scrape the bottom of the barrel for any type of tradable commodity to get the Big Name. Red Skins fans’ right-side must have been so very pleased at the awe-inducing, $100 Million contract their management just handed over to defensive tackle, Albert Haynesworth, not to mention the $55 Million dollar contract extended to corner back Deangelo Hall.

You see, in the gamut of emotions the right hemisphere affords the sports fan, there is no need to save money; to manage the team’s future. There is just now, and you NEED the BEST player right NOW.

This type of behavior is on display on almost any sports website you go to. There will be some poor message-board troller stirring up bile amongst the faithful. Yesterday’s NHL trade deadline went by amidst some compelling mid-level deals, but big names that were rumored to be on the move like Jay Bouwmeester, Keith Tkachuk, and most notably Chris Pronger, did not move. Chris Pronger, whose strongest trade-rumor had him going to the first-place Boston Bruins, seems to be the cause for some ridiculous right-brain activity among the Bruins faithful. Look at the following posts on the Boston Globe’s Bruins Blog:

1. had there [sic] chance but with the team as is they won't get past the 2nd round way to go Chiarelli

Posted by dan March 4, 09 05:43 PM

6. … the pom pom waving lemmings congregate. A 41 year old and a 5th D-man. Pathetic.

Posted by BlkGld72 March 4, 09 06:10 PM

16. Grampa [sic] Recchi and Who?
first round flops!! these guys are dropping faster then [sic] General Motors stocks.
Grampas [sic] good for 14 goals a season and already has 13, how can i contain the excitement and anticipation of 1 more {before geritol fails him}?

Posted by DaveW March 4, 09 08:21 PM

By these posts you’d think a team fighting for its playoff life had just stood pat when suitors were giving players away. As it stands, the Bruins, astride the league and the Eastern Conference, picked up two vital pieces for a long Cup run in veteran forward Mark Recchi and stay-at-home defenseman Steve Montador. For you left-brain fans out there, perhaps you’ll appreciate your humble scribe’s inroads in convincing these apocalyptically-driven fans to see the silver lining, albeit sardonically:

5. "oh no! they stuck with their 1st place roster! Time to panic."

What's everyone's problem? These deals only strengthened the team. People would rather have Pronger and no kessel? No Bergeron? I don't think those moves would have made the Bruins stronger.

Everyone should be happy with the amount of vet presence this team now has. Now it's time to get to work and start winning again. We won with this team to get to the top, now it's time to stay there.

Posted by Paul March 4, 09 06:03 PM

And…

10. People seem to forget that more often than not, playoff stars are not the ones that shine during the regular season. Your roll players are the ones that win you the little battles. The older, vet guys are the ones to keep the team on an even keel through the ups and downs of playoff hockey. Recchi has two cups, and shoring up the defense is never something to dismiss. I think too many fans missed the point of today's trades. We didn't make huge waves with the names, but we sure as hell got some talent, poise and leadership.

Anyone who says these moves were pathetic doesn't really get the philosophy of this front office. Don't care how long you've been around, these moves make sense.

Posted by Paul March 4, 09 06:49 PM

Both sides of the brain have their merits, though, and it would be irresponsible of me to leave them out.

For all the talk about the forget-the-future right-brainers, it is undeniable that they make the best and most passionate fans. These are the people you converse with in dark pubs wherein the most coherent argument against logic is, “Well my team is ALWAYS better, so F- you, jerk!”

These are the men and women who live and die by their teams. These are the men and women who will cry when their favorite player is traded. These are the sports fans who are the soul of the team; the crazy, screaming, wild soul.

The brass of any sports franchise is inevitably made up of left-brainers. Those who make decisions based solely on the future, financial, and immediate needs of the team. GMs cannot make decisions based on emotion and sentiment. They suspend their fan-hood, and attempt to make their team better anyway they can. That does not necessarily mean making a huge splash in any free-agent or trade pool—unless your name is Glen Sather, one of a few suspected right-brainers in a GM position.

Eh, but who am I kidding? I think it’s fair to say that the majority of sports fans everywhere are a little bit of both. A bit of logic goes a long way in justifying a move that your right brain can’t handle. And in those fleeting moments of glory when your team wins the Big One, is there a better feeling in the world than being completely illogical?

Just watch KG and ask yourself this: What?

Isn't It About Time Then?

For those of you who do not watch the Professional Bowling Association tournaments on ESPN in the middle of your weekend days, you may not be familiar with the tour’s pride in its collective past. Bowling greats are revered; their progeny, if competitive in the professional ranks are also respected. Bowling is a sport that thrives on etiquette, respect, and tradition.

Ironically, bowling is a sport that is intensely dictated by technology. Oil patterns get tougher to master with automated equipment; hooks get more drastic with counter-weighted, urethane balls.

Bring Jason Belmonte to the fore, a young Australian professional bowler with a unique two-handed delivery that only 3 or 4 professionals in the world use. A WSJ story written by Adam Thompson on February 5, 2009 shed light on the controversy this technique is causing in the mild-mannered sport. Purists are against its potentially destructive ways and the attention it gives the 25 year-old Belmonte. Some are afraid young fans will hurt themselves trying to emulate his style.

After a strong showing in the PBA World Championship in October, he was granted two exemptions for tournaments the following December, which meant he got to skip to an advanced round. Many pros had a problem with this.

They saw this as a blatant attempt for the PBA to foster interest in the later rounds of their tournaments. It was, but it was also a reward for an excelling young star in the sport. The attention Belmonte is bringing to the sport is phenomenal and not every pro is jealous. In Thompson’s story, PBA pro Mike Fagan was quoted as saying, "Bowling's lost its luster, and I think he could bring it back."

This begs the question, what is pure? And why do so many athletes deem their sport as being such? If they thought about it, surely technology would render most of their purity arguments moot in any sport, especially where so much of the success is currently based on equipment improvements, like bowling. Don’t believe me? Review this list of the PBA's Annual Average Score Leaders and notice how the scores get dramatically higher after 1980, coincidentally about the time the urethane ball was made popular.

Let’s take a look at some other firsts that were hotly contested in their time which we, I think, can all agree worked out for the best.

The Dunk

We know that a certain Julius Erving helped revolutionize the dunk, but that was way after forerunners like George Mikan, Bill Russell, and Wilt Chamberlain occasionally used their brute force and obvious size advantages* for a dunk shot, as it was called. But it took a progressive if under-funded brother league known as the ABA to bring in such commodities as the three-point line and applied a new style and flair to what was eventually coined as the slam dunk. As players took the dunk to the next level, it became a statement of power; a graceful punctuation to a drive to the basket. Darryl Dawkins gave the dunk its undeniable promise of power, whereas Julius Erving, or Dr. J, portrayed the dunk as a manifestation of man’s eternal desire to soar—even if it was only from the foul line.

Add names like Larry Nance and Dominique Wilkins to the list. Dee Brown, Cedric Ceballos, Michael Jordan, Vince Carter, Spud Webb, Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Shaquille O’Neal: All of these players helped to revolutionize the slam dunk either in slam dunk contests during various all star weekends or during games. They have all added to a unique NBA legacy that started as a “big man” move to take advantage of the little guy. Consider the following video of 5’9’’ Nate Robinson leaping over 6’11’’ Dwight Howard in this year’s All-Star Slam Dunk Contest. We’ve come a long way.

The Slap Shot, And Then Inevitably…

As with much of sports lore, the origins of the slap shot aren’t necessarily crystal clear. Canadiens Hall-Of-Famer, Bernard “Boom Boom” Geoffrion, aptly nicknamed for the sound his shots made off the boards, is often credited with inventing the shot as a youngster in the late ‘40s , although an American named John Mayasich (an Olympic player) was allegedly using the slap shot since the early 1950s. Regardless of who invented it, goalies still had to deal with it with virtually no protection. Bobby Hull’s thundering slap shot instilled fear in just about every goaltender, and today, the likes of hulking defensemen Zdeno Chara of the Boston Bruins can crank slap shots out at bone-splintering speeds of 105.4 mph.

It’s easy to see how the early days of the slap shot, opposed by many as brutish and ungraceful would have precipitated a change in the goalies’ approach to the game.

The Goalie mask

Although Clint Benedict wore a nose guard for several games after breaking his nose, the first official mask worn by an NHL goalie was in 1957 by Jacques Plante. He was only allowed to do so because he was struck in the face by a puck and refused to act as the Canadiens' only goaltender until he was permitted to wear the mask. He faced his fair share of disdain and questions of his toughness, but with the ever-increasing speed of the game, the players, and consequently, the puck, Plante’s pragmatism opened the door for other goalies to protect their faces and heads, play more aggressive styles of goal tending and keep up with the evolution of the forwards and defensemen. The last goalie not to wear a helmet was Andy Brown in ’73-’74, long after the slap shot and curved stick blade were in common use. After viewing the following, consider if Plante had not been so bold.

The Forward Football Pass

American Football owes its very soul to soccer and rugby and other sports that gave rise to the current megalith that is the NFL. Football has changed so dramatically from its start in America that it is not in many ways comparable to its former self; however, one of the most positive changes or rule adaptations American Football ever made was the adoption of the forward pass as a means of making the game safer. Previous to the forward pass, plays were built strictly out of blocking and running on offense, and blocking and tackling on defense. Every play garnered extreme physical contact and too many players were getting hurt to continue in this vein. There had been many illegal and experimental attempts at the forward pass before it was deemed legal, but it took 18 deaths, 159 serious injuries, and Presidential intervention on Teddy Roosevelt’s behalf to reform the rules in 1905. In 1906 Bradbury Robinson threw the first legal forward pass for St. Louis University to teammate Jack Schneider, which went for an incompletion—perhaps the most important incompletion in history. The governing body to legalize this new offensive weapon was the Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States, which would become the NCAA in 1910.

As a first-hand witness of the event, St. Louis Post-Dispatch sportswriter Ed Wray would later write in an October 1947 "Wray's Column", "The football world in general and the college and professional treasuries in particular are indebted to [Coach] Cochems and Robinson and St. Louis University... That's because the tremendous rise of gridiron interest everywhere can be traced directly of the Cochems-Robinson forward passing and to the improved spectacle it has made of this fine and manly game."

Integration In Baseball

For a long time baseball mirrored our nation’s scarred history. Baseball was just as beset with segregation as our closed-minded nation was and both suffered for it. At first, it was simply a victory for minorities to have a league at all, even if it was segregated. Eventually, when it was obvious that the skill level in the minority and Negro leagues was at or above that of the white professionals, questions needed to be answered: Hey, why can't we play?

One of the most hotly contested changes in sports history was the integration of baseball, of that you can be sure. Jackie Robinson, who was the first African-American baseball player in Major League Baseball played his first game in 1947 and opened the door for minorities everywhere. Granted, that door was slow to adjust to its fully ajar position in the sports world, but opening it was vital, and Jackie Robinson, while not the first to play with whites, was the first to do so on such a grand scale.

He received death threats, endured barbaric verbal abuse from players, coaches, and fans. A lesser man could not have possibly represented the cause as well as Jackie did. I think it's only too obvious to state that we, as sports fans, and we, as a nation have benefited from this step immensely. Not only has it opened our eyes to view the amazing feats of athletes we would have never been privy to, not only has it opened our minds to accepting others and embracing the global community, but it has also opened our hearts to understand that sports are transcendent. Anything you put your mind to can be done. That is Jackie Robinson’s enduring legacy.

And it would have never occurred without change.

Never.

Roll that ball with two hands, Jay.

We all might be doing the same thing in a few years.

* not one of them was shorter than 6’10’’ in an era where the average height of an NBA player was 6’5’’ vs. today’s NBA average of 6’7’’

Crumbling Idols Are Our Pillars of the Past

There is no chance you’re a sports fan without them. The Greats of their respective games have all given us a reason to rejoice, to celebrate the beauty that is sports and in return we fans offer our unconditional adulation—well, as long as their name isn’t A-Rod.

Seriously, though, when you were a kid who was your all-time favorite player?

DiMaggio? Unitas? Howe? Russell?

Gretzky? Montana? Ripkin Jr? Jordan?

Ruth (for you older folks)? Crosby (for you toddlers)? Brady? Shaq?

For me, it was a fourth-grade-roller-hockey-playin’ alignment with Raymond Jean Bourque, the most prolific offensive defensemen ever to play the game of hockey, not to mention one of the most defensively talented defensemen of all time. His demeanor on and off the ice, his uncanny prowess to always be in the right place, his humility, and his toughness made for the total package. I was immediately a fan. And even though by that time he had already been in the NHL for 14 seasons, I knew my choice was as solid as his play. I was following a living legend. He would play for another 8 seasons after that, finishing an illustrious 22 year NHL career winning a Stanley Cup with the Colorado Avalanche.

So who’s yours?

Your personal sports idol not only embodies the qualities you wish to see in star athletes, they embody qualities many of us find or want to find in ourselves—a professionally athletic projection of our own values. You can find examples of this all over the map. Take Pittsburgh, for instance. Their fans, since the team's inception, have been enamored with their hometown Steelers because the team has always embodied the work ethic Pittsburgh’s blue-collar constituency has always valued. It makes perfect sense that they’d love a team that worked just as hard everyday as they did.

Joe Namath was the perfect Quarterback for the Jets in 1969. Who else emanated “cool” like he did? Who else was the perfect NY pretty boy to lead them? I contend that no one else was. That’s the point.

The point is, while we re-witness these perfectly aligned moments over and over in our heads, a new generation of stars is rewriting those record books that were rewritten by your heroes, your idols. They will say that records were made to be broken, that walls were made to crumble, that it is time for the past to move over for the future. Yea, that’s fine. That doesn’t mean I can’t still be biased toward a nostalgically perfect rendition of my sports idols, does it (See Ruth, home run records, et al)? Can’t I aggrandize the past when some star athlete who’s not even old enough to drink legally yet does something great(See Crosby, Lebron, et al)? No, you say? Fine.

What’s that, you say I sound like a bitter old man reminiscing? Ugh. Fine. I’ll stop.

The other night I watched a marvelous record fall. Mike Green, defenseman for the Washington Capitals, scored a goal in his eighth consecutive game, breaking the all-time mark for goals in consecutive games by a defenseman. The previous record, held by retired Boston Bruins defenseman, Mike O’Connell, was seven consecutive games. Even though this mark was not held by one of my all-time favorites, this defensive goal-scoring profundity leaves me a bit wistful. I remember the day, my man, Ray Bourque, was leaving the NHL record book in shreds as if the cat had gotten to it. Now the record books are being rewritten by a pantheon of up-and-coming, awe-striking talent in every sport.

The way it’s supposed to be, I suppose.

Sports are always for the young.

I guess in a way, even though the past is somewhat being erased by today’s bigger, stronger, faster athletes, when a record falls, it is as if an homage is being paid to their respective predecessors.

Would Mike Green have that record if Paul Coffey, Ray Bourque, Bobby Orr, even Mike Freakin’ O’Connell hadn’t skated before him? I doubt it.

Seeing idols of your past fall can be a tough thing to watch, but remember why you watch in the first place. That ephemeral glimpse of greatness that we so often associate with those prodigious figures in our past will undoubtedly be associated with many of the high-flying athletes by young and incredulous fans everywhere presently and in the future.

If you’re a sports fan, I doubt you’ll want to miss it.

Superbowling For Dollars!!

I'll admit it. I'm a regular guy. I watch the Superbowl every year. I am usually psyched for the game, especially if I have a rooting interest in the team-if I don't, I can usually find the right people to wager with to give me a rooting interest in the game. It's the Superbowl, come on!

I'm also usually amped up for the fantastically derived, cutting-edge commercials the top retailers of our nation cook up to be blasted across the globe during what is annually one of the most extensively watched global television events.

All in all, the spectacle usually does not disappoint, the game, however, sometimes can. No worries, though. And even though Janet Jackson's ill-fated, exposed breasts weren't all they're cracked up to be, we, for the past few years, have had a mishmash of old, washed up acts that appeal to an audience of baby-boomers and those who favor nostalgia...who cares if the drummer for the stones is over 80? Throw him up there!

Couldn't you hear The Boss' hip creaking during his creepy, middle aged pelvic thrusts? If you had Smell-O-Vision, surely, you would have smelled the Bengay. Surely.

What I was really disappointed with this year was the lackluster parade of almost sickeningly mediocre commercials. It was as if, this year, it was enough for them to merely show they had the spare cash to buy air time; writing the damn thing was an afterthought. LOOK AT US, WE'RE DORITOS! 3 MILLION FOR 30 SECONDS WHOOOO!! Apparently, they bought their commercial air time by the pound and bought a package of 8 prewritten commercials from COSTCO.

Look at us, we are literally eating money!! (Spoken in your finest Marv Albert voice) Corporate America, yes!

And GoDaddy.com...your shameless ads to drive traffic to your website work. We know that last year during the Superbowl, within 30 seconds after your ad you received 1,000,000 hits on your site. I think I can safely say that was only to see boobs. How many of those 1,000,000 IP addresses bought domain names?

I'd confidently take the under on 50.

I remember in Superbowls long passed, sitting, eyes wide open, waiting for the next hilarious commercial. I was rarely disappointed. See, back then, it wasn't enough to just show that your company was still economically viable...it wasn't enough! Then, you actually had to write something seemingly original, and then, THEN, make it somehow pertinent to your product, or at least pertinent to the audience you are trying to sell your product to. Nowadays, it is simply enough to buy the time.

Sense? We have to make sense?

No, you just have to be entertaining.

To me, game results aside (although I am truly pissed about those, as well.) this foul group of Superbowl commercials from this foul year, 2009, deserves a giant red FAIL in their collective lower right-hand corner.