Super Bowl Ads Review - Part 1

Join Mark and new guest, Scott Edwards, as they discuss the 2025 Super Bowl spots. Following USA Today’s Ad Meter, discover where this positioning duo agrees with the viewers on the effective ads, versus those that will likely go down as duds just like the Chiefs! Starting with Budweiser’s “First Delivery” ad, Mark and Scott provide details on why the ads were winners or losers. 

Spend 30ish with Mark and Scott as they talk all things marketing, advertising, and of course … positioning!

Transcript

Mark Vandegrift 
Welcome to the Brand Shorthand podcast. I'm your host, Mark Vandegrift, and Lorraine is off today. She celebrated her birthday yesterday, and undoubtedly she's also celebrating an Eagles win as our Lorraine is from the Philadelphia area. So she was pretty excited last night. Quite the surprise. I don't think anybody saw the Eagles dominating the Chiefs as they did, but in the end, Eagles fans are singing Fly Eagles Fly today. Hopefully they know how to spell the word eagle. And if you don't know what that's about, look it up online and just type in Eagles, Mayor of Philadelphia, and you might find out. We also have today another Philadelphia area. I don't know if we'll call him a fan, but he's from that area, is our Executive Director of Creative Services, Scott Edwards.

Good morning, Scott.

Scott Edwards 
Morning

Mark Vandegrift 
So you got a Super Bowl win. I don't know if it means much to you.

Scott Edwards 
I should say in full disclosure that I am one of only a few people in America who do not watch the Super Bowl.

Mark Vandegrift
And yet you're in the advertising world.

Scott Edwards 
Well, some might say that the advertising on the Super Bowl is not all that reflective of the advertising world.

Mark Vandegrift 
This is very true. But because everything's online, you are able to view all of the ads that we're going to talk about today. And at 7:45 this morning, just about 15 minutes ago, since we're recording this, we have AdMeter from USA Today has published their winners, which are determined by you, our listeners, as well as a good portion of the rest of America. So what we're going to do today is go through their list and just have some commentary on why we liked or didn't like, and maybe didn't agree with what was ranked up at the top. So I'm going to give you the top 10 winners today at admeter.usatoday.com. And the winner overall, number one, was Budweiser's Clydesdale's first delivery. Number two was Lays, the little farmer. Number three was Michelob Ultra, the ultra hustle. For those that didn't see that, that was the pickleball ad with Willem Dafoe and Catherine O'Hara. Then we had Stella Artois, David and Dave, David Beckham having a twin brother he never knew about, the other David.

Then number five, the NFL titled somebody and also the NFL at number six was flag 50. Then number seven, eight, nine and 10 were Bud Light's cul-de-sac ad, Uber Eats century of cravings, Hellman's when Sally met Hellman's and Pfizer's knockout. Scott, based on your review of these ads, Did viewers get it right?

Scott Edwards 
To some extent my reaction to seeing this list is that people do have some better taste than I might have thought going into it because the spots that had the most attention about them prior to the game were the ones that aren't really showing up here. They're the more phonetic, you know, that's part of the Super Bowl experience and one of the reasons I don't watch it is it's so much about excess. The game itself is excess. The commercials are halftime show. And it's like having a kid behind you on the plane kicking a seat nonstop. know, there's no, it's relentless. You can't relax for one minute. But I see some of these on here that are more storytelling and a softer, longer form. There's a message to some of these and I think that that's encouraging.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, I was surprised pretty much every one of these had a longer form story behind it. There was, you know, Budweiser, which won it. that took a little while to develop, but we all know the Clydesdales and their connection to Budweiser. So they weren't getting away from their typical ad. and this was about a younger Clydesdale that was trying to make his first delivery.

And something crazy happens and he's able to make that first delivery, even though he was left off the team. So it was interesting to see that because first delivery, the little farmer, the ultra hustle, the other David, as I call it, and both NFL spots were all minute ads and they took a while to develop. Bud Lights, I think goes more to that frenetic excess it was that cul-de-sac ad and Peyton Manning was in it Post Malone Sean Gillis Just kind of craziness going on in the cul-de-sac around Bud Light, but then you get back to Storytelling again the century of cravings was Matthew McConaughey spending a century. He's in different outfits explaining why football is a conspiracy to make you hungry And then of course, Hellman's did the iconic scene from when Harry met Sally. And then Pfizer came out with the little boy who walks out of the hospital and he's a boxer. So really all of these went into storytelling mode. And I was surprised that they were the ones that for the most part, won, there aren't a ton on here that I would call comedic. And I really thought that viewers would pick the comedic side of things. Do have an explanation for maybe why the story won over the comedy?

Scott Edwards 
There seem to be a lot more of the humor-oriented spots in general. And so that is a surprise. And I think it's just because they weren't that good. And some of these that are in the top 10 like that, Bud Light one, I mean, that was a terrible spot. That's not a top 10 spot. going back to the storytelling and you've got number one on the list as to Budweiser first delivery. And I have to admit, I'm not as hopped up, pardon the pun, on this particular one for a couple reasons. And I think that it's a good example of we've got a great concept and you got to take it all the way. You've got to really be a part of that and not stray because you've got another idea in your mind.

And what I mean by this is, you've got a classic story. Here is the Clydesdale. We all love that. I wanted to love this spot. I wanted it to be something that made me tear up. And that's what I thought when I saw what it was about. But then they, there's something about it and it really displeases me because you've got this classic story of the underachiever. The runt who comes up to hit the home run and win the game as a surprise. The little engine that could, Rudolph the Red nosed Reindeer. That's what the story is. The story is the fall. So you've got this great idea. You've got Clydesdale, everybody loves them. And it's a baby one too. So how can you lose? 

And then you have this concept where the special effects is used to roll the barrel. Okay, that's nice. And it's going against, you know, this foal really wants to be part of the team. But it doesn't have that denouement. The denouement of this story should be that they see that he's accomplished this and accept him as part of the team. That never happens. Instead, they go for the cheap joke, horse walks into a bar. Now that's a major mistake. That's on its own a good thing in another commercial.

The wisecracking commercial. You've got to be in your idiom and stick to it. You're either doing something that has an emotional connection, which this is supposed to have done, or you're to do something that's more humor oriented. So I think the song also was another mistake because Let Your Love Flow, that's, I have nothing against the song and I was around when was on the radio the first time. But when I see its use in this, I'm thinking this isn't that well known of a song now.

And it could have been chosen either sincerely or it have been chosen to what they call ironically using it. And I think that that's the latter is more likely. And the uptempo aspect of it really got in the way of this idea of the triumph of the fall. And I think that those two things, it's maybe the kind of thing where somebody has too many ideas and wants to put them all in one thing. And I think that if I'd gone in and redone this, I want that data maw of the group accepting the fall. I have to have that. That's the closure of the story.


Mark Vandegrift
Well, our panelists agreed with you on our end. didn't see really the Clydesdale is an automatic connection to Budweiser, but beyond that, there was no idea seeded in the mind. Rolling the barrel, walking into a bar, there's just no differentiating idea that rolls, pun intended, out of that ad. And so our panelists, from a creative standpoint, gave it a seven or eight, but on the idea, it was mostly threes, fours and fives. And then the whole connection to the idea, because you don't have a good idea, it was also threes, fours and fives. So outside of the Clydesdale connection, do you walk away with this with any redeeming quality in your mind?

Scott Edwards 
I think what they were going for is a legacy story. The legacy of the Clydesdales and the superintendent statement was delivering since 1876. So they were trying to show you we're still the great American beer kind of thing. But that's lost in the whole what they're doing. As I said, they undercut the whole thing. Cheap joke at the end.

Mark Vandegrift 
Well, this one fell in the middle, I would say, of our ratings somewhere in the teens. So we are we are classifying this one as a going against the popular vote here. So number two was Lays, the little farmer with a little girl who picks up a potato and decides to become a farmer.

And we see her taking care of that little plant and finally digging up a pretty large potato that she then delivers to the Lay's potato farmer. And then we finally get a cut over to the chips. So Scott, what's your assessment on this one?

Scott Edwards 
Well, this is a nice one. It actually reminded me of in his majority videos from a few years ago, we did on behalf of Smith's Dairy, which concentrates on real family farmers and tells their stories. Well, in this case, whether somebody knows it or not, this is a real farm family and one of the Lay's family and that there is something behind it as far as the programs that they do with these farmers.

So knowing that, think, helps make it more purposeful. But the way it was done, it was really nicely done and it wasn't over the top or frenetic. It gave me a feeling of real people. I felt good about the brand, which, you know, I don't necessarily have to have a potato chip company be all that wonderful, but it's nice to know that there is something behind the story that's real.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, I was on WHBC this morning providing a little commentary on the ads and the radio show host indicated that this Lay's commercial was one of his favorites and it came in at number two. So we certainly can give the viewers who voted on this a thumbs up. They picked a pretty good one. It didn't come in the top five, though, surprisingly, with our panelists, but it was in the top 10. So you know, we'll give we'll give that a pretty good alignment with what the the viewers of ad meter gave it so number three is the Michelob ultra ad which was Willem Dafoe and Katherine O'Hara being pickleball pros and challenging a bunch of people for their Michelob Ultra the acting on from our panelists perspective was fantastic. There was a comment that the Michelob Ultra was indeed the star of the show. It was seen over and over and over again. And the connection to the ultimate or the ultra performance was very well done. this one was in the top two. What was your perspective on it, Scott?

Scott Edwards 
Surprised that it's that high in terms of the viewers. I think the effectiveness from our standpoint, where we're taking the need to promote the product and then have it translated into creative, was something that we could appreciate. But I'm surprised that it's that highly rated by the viewers. You know, one of the things that we know from our industry when we look at articles and their polls, and in theory, consumers say that they're not persuaded or interested in seeing celebrities in TV commercials. Now, anytime you have somebody say something like that that's in theory versus reality, have to be skeptical about it in the first place. But there are so many of the ads on the Super Bowl that are packed full of celebrities that you have to go, well, this is either that we're not reading what the people were saying or we realize that the fact that they say it doesn't matter because in real life am I going to be more interested in seeing Harrison Ford in the Scottish Highlands in a kilt carrying that Scotch whiskey or some nice looking guy doing the same thing? Of course it's going to be the Harrison Ford because the story behind it and when they did the teaser for it which was really effective because he gets a proposal he's looking at it and he's going, I don't know, says Icon Harrison Ford. And he takes the thing and rolls it up and throws it into the fireplace until he drinks the whiskey. And that convinces him to do the spot. But it's all about the celebrity. And he's in two different spots. But the other thing that makes me think about is, do most of the people watching these commercials even know who some of these celebrities are?

I hate to say it myself, but some of them are pretty old and are not necessarily in the kind of vehicles that I would be seeing if I'm a younger demographic.

Mark Vandegrift 
Well, what was interesting is, and we're gonna, this is jumping down to the Hellman's commercial, which didn't even make the top five, it was number nine. The radio show hosts this morning, he's probably in his late 60s, if I had to guess. His son looked at him after the Hellman's commercial and said, what was that all about? He did not even make the connection to the movie because he had never seen it. So, there were quite a few celebrities that were older. But when you have 120 million viewers of the Super Bowl, who many are tuning in for the commercials, you know that a large percentage of them are going to make that connection. yeah, Willem Dafoe and Catherine O'Hara, mean, you look at Catherine O'Hara and you automatically think what movie? Home Alone. And she's been in a zillion others, but you go back to Home Alone and that's over a 30 year old movie now.

Scott Edwards
when I think of Catherine O'Harra I go back farther to SCTV.

Mark Vandegrift 
That's true. I didn't even think about that. But she's been doing the Home Alone commercials with Kevin Hart lately. So at least there's been that little connection there. And you're right. I gave personally, I gave the faux and O'Hara the best acting award this year for any of the celebrities because their demeanor, their the whole way they grasp hold of the script and execute it, I thought was marvelous. And this one got a really high rating and this is another one that we would agree with the viewers that it was well done.

So number four was Stella Artois. And this one bugs me because David Beckham, in my opinion, is one of the worst onscreen talents that you could possibly get. You know, as a soccer star, I don't expect much. But thank goodness for Matt Damon, because he really has to cover over what was otherwise some pretty bad acting. And I wasn't impressed with the script.

I don't know if it was the fact that they tried to make it too complex. The basic thing is they walk away with, both of these guys who don't know each other have good taste because they drink Stella Artois. Beyond that, the whole script did nothing to build upon that. So what was your take on it?

Scott Edwards 
I'm surprised in every respect that it's highly rated because it wasn't good in any kind of way that I would evaluate it. you know, as we're saying about the celebrities, David Beckham, if I'm not incorrect, he hasn't played in a long time, right? So how do people even know who he is?

Mark Vandegrift 
No, he's retired.

Yeah, he's not an actor.  And you know, with Matt Damon in there, I think most people know him. They teased it out quite a bit. I think it was teased for a good couple of weeks. And saying that Matt Damon is David Beckham's twin, I don't even think the match was there.

Scott Edwards 
Because he doesn't look like the underwear guy anymore either.

Mark Vandegrift
They both grew a beard, so I think that was the only connection that you would have had in terms of looks. So it just, it fell apart for me.

Scott Edwards 
I think that ultimately it's not going to have much value to the brand either. Once you've done this supposed surprise and what they call stunt casting, you've already got your benefit from it, which is fleeting. Let's not forget, cost $8 million, just the media cost, $8 million to put on a 30-second commercial.

And you have some of these spots are a minute long. So you're saying, am I really getting $16 million value out of this spot? And then when you think about where you've got a blowout in terms of the game, what if I'm in the late third quarter and people aren't paying his attention anymore? I may not get any value from that spot.

Mark Vandegrift 
Well, on average, I was asked this morning at WHBC, on average, what are these companies paying for to hire the talent? In Hellman's case, what rights did they have to license to use that scene again? Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal and Sydney Sweeney are not cheap talent. So from all that being said, you're probably looking for a spot like that, maybe 25, 30 million? Would that be reasonable to estimate?

Scott Edwards 
Couldn't guess that, but I know that the owner of the movie, obviously they have to be paid for the intellectual property of redoing that scene. My guess is the screenwriter probably did as well. I don't know who directed the spot, but Rob Liner did the original direction. And then you've got expensive talent. And I believe they're on location at the Carnegie Deli again. So all that makes it very expensive. But you know, they got a lot of preview notice on this thing. It was debuted on one of the morning shows and it was seen over and over again. And last year, there was a stat that 60 % of the top performing spots were previewed prior to the game. So they're getting that additional amount of expectation. And so that's what they took advantage on this one.

There was a big story that was happening in the first place. So it's the 30th anniversary of the movie. It was inevitable that somebody would do this at some point and be able to pay enough to do it. I thought that it was what made it better than it would have been otherwise is that what they're advertising actually made sense for this scene. And the title itself, when Hellman's met Sarah, Sally met Hellman's is that's good enough on its own. And then when you see the way it was done, the 60 second version was much better than 30 because this is whole build anyway. But what makes it different? She gets all the attention, Ryan, but it's the little aside, it's thrown out that Billy Crystal that really make the scene. And the way that he does it in such a subtle way, that's why somebody who's really good at acting makes a big difference in these spots versus somebody who's just a celebrity and they get propped up and they get a lot of takes to get their best take but their best take is somebody else's worst take. But that little bit that he kept throwing out these little asides really made it. And the connection to the brand and its usage in the spot, I thought really elevated it from a good idea to something that really made a lot more sense from a marketing standpoint.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, his line, it's real this time with the double entendre there. That was connecting the real to Hellman's real mayonnaise. That was brilliant. So whoever wrote that one line alone, you couldn't have made a better connection.

Scott Edwards 
But everybody knows that final line and heard it so many times. Those familiar with the movie and it's been made fun of and all that over the years. But that Sydney Sweeney. She did such a terrible line delivery on that. It's horrible.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, I was disappointed at that too.

Scott Edwards
And you know what I've read about going into these commercials is that they're looking to have multi-generational people in the spots so that they can appeal to an older demographic but not leave out the younger demographic. That's her sole reason to be in this thing. And she was terrible. I don't know if she's a decent actress in general, but man, mean, everybody knows that line and everybody can do it better than that.

Mark Vandegrift
Yeah, well, Rob Reiner's mom did it in the original movie and she nailed it. Yep. Well, going back to Stella Artois, here's one of the things that I look at. Once you learn who the other David is, are you going to even pay attention to the spot going forward? I there's just nothing there that intrigues me about that entire commercial.

Scott Edwards 
Right, it doesn't go anywhere. There should be a next step, just like I was talking about the first delivery, is it needs to go somewhere that's a natural building of what this is. And now they're connected, what happens? Well, they just have a beer. Okay, whatever.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, we both have good taste well, that's a matter of opinion so Okay, number five and number six. So we're gonna give Stella Artois a thumbs down. So we're two for two on the viewers right now I would say the storytelling of the next two spots by the NFL both somebody and flag 50 The storytelling was there. I was more intrigued by the flag 50 because you see where it's going with the female football player taking on the male team and dominating. So it was fun to watch that. Somebody was more of an inspirational spot that it takes somebody so that somebody can or everybody can be somebody. It was a little more up to

Mark Vandegrift 
Everybody loves somebody. Right. So what were your takes on those two? Let's talk about those together. Would you put them in the top 10?

Scott Edwards 
Yes, and I hadn't seen them prior because I don't know if they were released early or whether it was by the NFL that I didn't happen to notice them. So watched them this morning and they're both very effective and entirely different styles coming from the same brand, I guess you could say, but they're more like PSAs. So I evaluate them differently. The first one has that messaging. It's very strong.

The second one has a plot to it and the plot makes you believe the message very effectively. It's a more edgy way of promoting the message but I think that that helps it get across to different generations as well.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yep, they did a good job with it. was pretty pleased with that. We'll give the viewers a thumbs up and put those in our top, at least in our top half. Bud Light, you already referred to this as too much going on. The cul-de-sac, big men on the cul-de-sac. Peyton Manning, Post Malone, Sean Gillis. It just didn't come together for me. What about you?

Scott Edwards 
They're also not using these people to any kind of advantage. They could be any kind of actors who are not well known doing commercials and be able to accomplish the same thing. And so it is just stunt casting. want somebody to know that Post Malone is in this spot. And that's all I care about. I don't know, it's just too frenetic. Didn't really lead to anything for me.

They really pushed it though. There were different versions of previews for this, teasers, and it was well done from a PR standpoint. They somehow got this recognition very heavily for this particular spot. But the substance isn't there.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, it's interesting that the viewers put it so high, because I would think that there's the lingering distaste for all that went down previously. We all know about the Bud Light's bad PR from about a year ago or a year and a half ago. And I was a little surprised that viewers gave it a pass on that PR and said, OK, we're going to throw them into the top 10 here.

I don't know, I'm a thumbs down on this one. It sounds like you are too. So we're four and three in agreement here. And our next one is Uber Eats. And this is Matthew McConaughey all over it, which I think overcomes for at least the ladies out there. They really like Matthew McConaughey and he could have been in anything, doing anything at all.

And it would have been a pretty good rating. This is the one where Uber Eats is convincing everybody that, of the conspiracy, that football is trying to make you hungry. What was your take on it, Scott?

Scott Edwards 
Well, he's certainly central to the thing, his ability to pull that off and do all these different characters is a testament to his talent. I think it was a good example of taking a concept that supports what the brand wants to say about itself well. And so there's some meaning behind this. And so I think it's strong from that standpoint.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, there's been a buildup. They've been doing this football makes you hungry series now really since I think mid season for the NFL. So we're probably going back to maybe October or November. So the concept wasn't new, which I think helped get past what I would call a relatively loose connection to the brand. We had some people that really hadn't seen that before and so they couldn't recall the brand that was connected to football makes you hungry. They got the concept football makes you hungry. They just didn't connect it to okay now you need to order food from Uber Eats. So this one got I would say a mixed review from our panelists just because Uber Eats is so far at the end of this. It comes on it says order food right now from Uber Eats boom end of discussion, there's no differentiation in play here that if I order from Uber Eats or DoorDash or any of the others that would say, well, football makes me hungry. So I need to order from Uber Eats because they do something better or differently than any of the other food service delivery platforms or services.

Scott Edwards 
I don't know if Uber Eats has the household penetration to even be known enough to make that connection in the first place. I know Uber but I don't necessarily know Uber Eats compared to the other apps.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah. And that was our complaint. When they got into this last year, so this is their second year of doing a spot. Lorraine and I talked last year about the fact that DoorDash obviously had the advantage and Uber, if it wanted to move into the eating space or the food delivery space, was maybe a stretch too far because we don't even say, you know, get a taxi anymore. Most people go, hey, grab an Uber.

And so the equivalent there is people delivery, not necessarily food delivery. So they're trying to move into that space. I don't know how it's going for them. Our panelists kind of gave it a middling rating just because the connection to football making you hungry versus what it does for the Uber Eats brand was pretty loose there.

So we're up to, that's eight and we're four and four on agreement with the viewers, because we're gonna give that one, we're gonna push that down on our chart. Number nine was Hellman's, we already spent quite a bit of time talking about that. So here's this Pfizer ad and I was really, really surprised that it ranked highly. Now, the story's good, but again, when I was down at WHBC this morning, the guy said, I really liked that kid with the cancer. comes out, he's a boxer. That was really cool. said, well, Matt, what was the brand? He goes, I don't really remember. I think it was a hospital maybe that treats cancer. There was no connection to Pfizer. When I said Pfizer, he goes, it was? So there's an example where the storytelling was great.

A lot of people at our Super Bowl party went, aww, but I bet if I ask anybody this morning who it connected to, I don't know that they'd be able to pull Pfizer out of their cap. What say you?

Scott Edwards 
think that the viewer is going to make the connection with the most likely answer, which is that it's a hospital. So whether I prominently see anything that tells me that or not, that gives me that cue, I'm going to make that assumption. If there isn't a strong brand connection, which is saying there's not, then I'm going to merely go with, okay, it's hospital. And it's a strange choice for Pfizer. And at the risk of being the wise acre, the theme we're going to knock you out by a pharmaceutical company really does seem like a good idea to me.

Mark Vandegrift 
Yeah, I'm not sure where that one, I don't think it landed its punch, let's put it that way. 

Thank you for joining us on todays episode of the Super Bowl ads we are going to make this a two part series, so join us again next week as we finish our discussion on the Super Bowl Ads. And if you haven't liked, subscribed, shared, subscribed, as Lorraine likes us to tell everyone, to the Brand Shorthand podcast. Please do, and until next time. Have an Amazing day.