emesem said:

isnt that the truth.


I'd take on paul anyday of the week then prince. (isnt saying that around here like saying I eat cats at peta?)

EverlastingNow said:

Yeah whatever but he's still boring

I do like McCartney, of course Prince would've been really cool, but I wouldn't expect any artist to do more than their hits at the Superbowl! We'd probably hear Musicology, Let's Go Crazy, Kiss & Purple Rain (which would still be cool). Or imagine if he did a whole set of tunes like Poom Poom, I Rock Therefore I Am & Cloreen Bacon Skin...

The only aspect of the half-time show I saw was the tale end where he performed "Hey Jude". It was pretty good but prince would've kicked ass.

emesem said:

Gotta agree with this. Paul may not be of the current hip generation but he's a friggin legend. My only beef was him performing "Hey Jude", never liked that song.

no, he wouldnt've.

Sdldawn said:

-----
I guess you don't value showmanship but, why does that not surprise me (LOL).
Nothing wrong with Paul but he looked bored and appeared to have no energy.
I don't know need to see a hundred dancers on the state but for the Superbowl you got to have some showmanship and some energy.

prodigalfan said:

..I kinda feel the same way..but then when I do hear him do those songs, I love it as much as the first time...its one thing to pop in the cd day after day...its another to hear him do it live..I never get tired of it...

I get the feeling a lot of you just dislike anyone who isn't Prince. If you honestly dislike the Beatles/Paul McCartney that's fine. But you need to know he was a trail blazer in the music industry and show some appreciation for that. Paul McCartney is a legend and was in many ways the father of modern music.

Not to mention that the Beatles songs are *still* good to this day.

Damn whipper-snappers need to get some respect.

----

That being said I would have preferred a Prince performance to a Paul McCartney one. I think he's a more dynamic entertainer. You get the full package with Prince: dancing, singing, lights, costumes, etc. It's much more interesting to watch than someone who just stands in place and strums a guitar or sits in front of a piano.
[Edited 2/8/05 13:10pm]

letyourfreakflagfly said:

Axchi696 said:

Co-Sign that!

Paul should be in a damn retirement home IMO its about time he gave it up he is about 64 right?

ABeautifulOne said:

You're a fool

Why dont we start a petition drive to get Prince to play SUPER BOWL XL next year?

dreamfactory313 said:

Sounds like an idea.

ABeautifulOne said:

Honestly, if he can sing, he looks great and can still play his instruments.. why in the right mind would he want to be in a "retirement home"
Thats such a juvenile and naive reply for someone who hangs around on a prince site.. Prince is 55 right?
This has GOT to come from a post teen.. has got to...

These days I imagine a Prince Super Bowl half-time show might turn out just like Homer Simpson's Super Bowl half-time show.

Sdldawn said:

Please, I beg you, don't group ABO with the rest of us teens and post-teens. We're not all that bad.

Paul's not exactly my favourite Beatle, but I still have a lot of respect for him as an artist, and what he's contributed to music can't be ignored.

I didn't watch the Super Bowl, so I missed his performance. I can't say I'm surprised they'd go with such a relatively tame act after the Mountain-out-of-a-Molehill they made about Janet's tit.

December1984 said:

LMAO!!! You're quite correct!

Sdldawn said:

Prince is I forgot like 46-47 right?And Paul uses Botox like those other old prunes in Hollywood so he ain't that young.

You know as I was watchin that crap, I was thinking the same thing!! But after Janet&Justin they gonna be real selective as to who performs at the halftime show. 2 bad for us.

creammc79 said:

The NFL dropped the ball for the 2000 Super Bowl.....1999 had just ended and they could have picked P for the halftime show. He was one of the three finalists chosen and was outvoted by the panel selecting the talent. They chose KISS!!! Those flea bitten, drugged out, rockers that are about 100 years old. Obviously, being a P fan, I thought they made the wrong decision. Insiders say that he wasnt chosen because of his history of "raunch" during his live performances. What a huge fumble from the NFL.

NPGman said:

I guess this is during the time when Prince was more underground? But still the 2000 SuperBowl tie in with the mega hit 1999 would have been a slam dunk (pun not intended ) Is this a true story?? Because I can't BELIEVE they picked KISS over Prince. Heck with Prince you would have got "Kiss" too. (I know, corny .)

meow85 said:

Im in my 20's too.. I just hear what ABO has said from way to many people his/her age, that i know from experience.. its typical

meow85 said:

Awww shut up

ABeautifulOne said:

emesem said:

[b] I'm a huge Prince fan, but the world could do without "Raspberry beret". Can't say as much for "Live and let die", though (one of the most covered songs in rock & roll history)
As for his "wish" set list for next years' Super Bowl halftime show, it would (or should) be as follows: Open with "head", slow it up with "do me, baby" followed by "soft & wet", then the big finale` - "jack U off". Instead of kids surrounding the stage and cheering, we'll have strippers gyrating. God, I long for the day when the "real" Prince will again come out to play, 'cause y'all know it's inevitable!!

gmoney1966 said:

Don't know about the inevitability of it, but I know how you feel.

what a worthless topic. a Prince fan who would have rather seen Prince perform. no shit. I'm sure Jessica Simpson fans would have rather seen her perform than Paul McCartney as well, but that doesn't mean she is a better musician than he is, which is being implied with Prince.