Talk:Super Bowl XLVI

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kyle Arrington[edit]

The article states that Kyle Arrington led the New England Patriots in tackles for the season, but he did not. Jerod Mayo had 95 tackles which is more than Arrington's 88 tackles. Mayo also missed multiple games and he still achieved this.

Arrington: http://www.nfl.com/player/kylearrington/2507430/profile Jerod Mayo: http://www.nfl.com/player/jerodmayo/776/profile

--hilala (talk) 21:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

The article states that the roof will be open during the Super Bowl. What is the reference for that? The article about Lucas Oil Stadium indicates that the Colts play with the roof closed. In addition, there is an extra close parenthesis character in the opening paragraph of the article.Danburgess67 (talk) 06:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)Dan Burgess, 02 Dec 2010, 12:46am CST[reply]

Re-written. I couldn't find a source that said the roof would be open to support the uncited claim. Also fixed the open parenthesis issue.--MikeUMA (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if there has already been the revealing of the Super Bowl XLVI logo. Usually they have the next logo by now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.186.220 (talk) 22:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They usually reveal the upcoming Super Bowl logo on the current Super Bowl program. For example, the Super Bowl XLV logo was first made public on the official Super Bowl XLIV program. But for some reason this year's Super Bowl XLV program didn't show the Super Bowl XLVI logo. From what I'm hearing, because they switched to a standard SB logo format with the Lombardi Trophy, they do not need to reveal each different one ahead of time anymore. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Super Bowl XLVI Logo has recently been released. You can put the Super Bowl XLVI logo on this page now since it has been released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.163.140 (talk) 01:51, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

broncos verses packers who will win the super bowl BRONCOS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.39.249.157 (talk) 14:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is totally incorrect on the Super Bowl XLVI page to say that the Giants join the 1979 Rams and 2008 Cardinals as the only team to advance to the Super Bowl after winning less than 10 games (in the regular season). The 1967 Packers only won 9 regular season games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.240.20.23 (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Advertisements[edit]

Listing companies who didn't buy ad time seems like a pointless section as there are millions of companies who didn't buy ads and may be a violation of WP:UNDUE. Also would the anti-abortion ad really be a violation of equal time rules? According the the Equal_time page that only applies to ads for political office seekers. --173.14.242.85 (talk) 12:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is often a great deal of competition over the advertisements during the Super Bowl, would it be helpful to put the major sponsors who did buy end up buying ad time. Or, perhaps better yet it would be good to look at the general tone of the ads- the predominant types of ads- e.g., The beer commercials were more of a light-hearted theme focusing on camaraderie rather than the focus on patriotism of a few years ago. There was an undercurrent of overcoming even in difficult times in some of the advertisements (e.g. the pick-up trucks and 2012), which may reflect a sensitivity to the economic conditions that many viewers are going through. Overall, dogs seemed to be featured in many ads.

Just some ideas. I agree with the previous comment that listing those who didn't advertise is rather needless. Often broadcasters turn down ads that don't fit the general mood they want to convey for the whole event. They know they will sell the time even if they turn down one advertiser. NetworkedTogether (talk) 04:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No mention Chrysler having purchased an ad? The 'Halftime in America' ad with Clint Eastwood has been the most talked about Super Bowl ad in years! It will probably have its own page one day, but it should be mentioned here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.67.121.140 (talk) 17:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Patriots and Giants[edit]

It's official.[1] Obviously there needs to be some element here making SOME kind of comparison to Superbowl XLII. Many of the key pieces on both teams are still in place, so one could argue this game will have a significant revenge element for the New England Patriots. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.7.210.144 (talk) 03:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I won't go ahead and make the change (other reasons), but are you sure that they're that similar. NE has a changed defense, a different RB and two star TE's instead of WR's. NY does have most of it's old players, besides Nicks and Cruz. I see it much more as a new NE facing an almost the same NY. Then again, I'm a Pats fan. Buggie111 (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/giants/post/_/id/11372/rapid-reaction-giants-20-49ers-17

DAMN IT[edit]

Someone edit that this game will have the New York Giants, unfortunately, cause the San Francisco 49ers barely lost in overtime to a field goal; they are likely to dismiss Kyle Williams next season. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.57.83 (talk) 03:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Giants defeated the Atlanta Falcon in the playoffs before facing the Packers or the 49ers. Give credit where credit is due! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.104.167.200 (talk) 15:22, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Will a better quality logo be put in place of the current one? Like last years, with no white background and no stadium in the logo. Might want this done soon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.193.16 (talk) 01:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC) Here's a good logo:http://fangsbites.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Super-Bowl-XLVI-logo-I.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.193.16 (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Favored Line[edit]

It is continuing to the drop http://www.covers.com/articles/articles.aspx?theArt=262653 patriots are -3 flat to -2.5 now. Please watch and update accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.30.7 (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Line is continuing to move will we be updating the line or merely sticking with the vegas opening line? 24.147.30.7 (talk) 00:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)SirWence[reply]
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/odds — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.30.7 (talk) 08:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

XLVI[edit]

--212.184.88.151 (talk) 11:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC) Isn't it the 46th annual championship game of the modern-era NFL?[reply]

"Modern-era NFL" refers to after the 1970 AFL-NFL Merger. Super Bowl I was played in 1967 before the merger was completed. Zzyzx11 (talk) 09:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Typo in section "Commercials"[edit]

Not "as of January, 2011," should be "as of January, 2012."

Broadcasting In other countries : France[edit]

In France, the game will be televised by W9, a subsidiary of M6 Link to W9 on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W9_(TV_channel) To confirm the info: (in english) http://www.superbowlfan.com/tag/w9/ (in french) http://www.telesatellite.com/actu/tp.asp?tp=41171

Hope it helps Jean-Loup aka Wolfie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfie JLC (talk • contribs) 10:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Norway the Super Bowl is broadcast on VIASAT 4 and VIASAT SPORT HD (not VIASAT SPORT NORGE). Viasat Sport HD is transmitting 5.1 audio. Arnesten (talk) 00:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out. of date; january 22, 2012, games have come and gone; see lede[edit]

--64.134.67.112 (talk) 13:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

still showing stale version (written from per-jan 22 point of view) on some mobile versions. Tried different apps and different browsers including Wikpedia's own for ios5 devices. Tried several devices. . Different service providers as well. Some cache isn't purging somewhere on Wilkiland. Byg somewhere. --64.134.67.112 (talk) 13:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 31 January 2012[edit]

The article says this: Super Bowl XLVI will be the sixth Super Bowl in which the two teams had competed in a previous Super Bowl match up, as the Giants and Patriots had previously met in Super Bowl XLII.

It should say something more like this: The Patriots' appearance in Super Bowl XLVI will be its sixth Super Bowl appearance since Robert Kraft purchased the team in 1994, a total that is the most in the league over that span. Kraft is the first owner in NFL history to have his team in six Super Bowls. [Reference: http://www.patriots.com/news/article-1/AFC-Champion-Patriots-face-Giants-in-Super-Bowl-XLVI/7cfeae14-cd11-4109-8bb6-dcc52675a09c] The two teams have competed in the Super Bowl once before in Glendale, Arizona in February, 2008 (Super Bowl XLII). [info from wikipedia page on super bowl xlii]


24.248.13.26 (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: That change is almost word for word from the source. We can't violate their copyright by copying text directly into the article. Also, the details about the patriots ownership and record may be too much for this article. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 05:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia in opening paragraphs[edit]

I can't edit the article for some stupid reason, but there's a lot of trivia in it that can probably be removed to streamline the opening paragraph. Do potential readers (who may know nothing about the subject) really need to know straight away that this is the 'first time in consecutive years it's being played in a retractable roof stadium'? I know that roofs are important, but being the first consecutive retractable roofed venue isn't surely? Also, I know the cold weather issue is important, but is there any need for the full enumeration of what the 3 previous ones were? What does that tell anyone? And is the fact that there will be "an outdoor Super Bowl Village and other programs at the Indiana Convention Center" really important enough for the opening paragraph? Who really cares about that aspect of non-game info bar actual attendees, especially given how many people aound the world are interested in stuff that isn't mentioned - the national anthem and halftime show performers.

Together with some other streamlining, based on what's there now, I suggest the following as a new much more focused and relevant opening paragraph:

Super Bowl XLVI will be an American football game between the American Football Conference (AFC) champion New England Patriots and the National Football Conference (NFC) champion New York Giants to decide the National Football League (NFL) champion for the 2011 season. The game will be played at the Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis, Indiana on Sunday, February 5, 2012 (kickoff at 6:30 p.m. EST).

It will be the 42nd annual championship game of the modern-era NFL, and the first Super Bowl to be played in Indianapolis. It's the fourth time a Super Bowl has been allocated to a cold-weather venue, after twice being held in Detroit, and once in Minneapolis. The stadium has a retractable roof.

The game the sixth Super Bowl where the finalists have met before; the Giants and Patriots featured in Super Bowl XLII four years previously, and both team's head coaches (Tom Coughlin and Bill Belichick) and starting quarterbacks (Eli Manning and Tom Brady) featured in that game.[1]

Per convention as an even-numbered Super Bowl, the Patriots as the AFC representatives will have the home team designation. Kelly Clarkson will perform the national anthem before kick-off, while the halftime show will feature songs from Madonna.

References

  1. ^ Previous rematches: Super Bowl XIII, Pittsburgh vs. Dallas; Super Bowl XVII, Washington vs. Miami; Super Bowl XXIII, San Francisco vs. Cincinnati; Super Bowl XXVIII, Dallas vs. Buffalo; Super Bowl XXX, Dallas vs. Pittsburgh

Edit request on 5 February 2012[edit]

Please add New Zealand to the "In other countries" broadcasting section.

New Zealand ESPN on Sky TV Live HD Monday 6 February, 12:00 pm - 4:00 pm

SnoiNZ (talk) 22:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Added New Zealand to the table with a source. - JuneGloom Talk 00:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IAR request - minute by minute updating[edit]

OK, here's an IAR request about live updates of the score. I'm in Australia, it's 11:45 AM Monday morning, I'm at work, and every conceivable method of tracking the score has been blocked on our network. The person who was updating the scores in real-time was my ONLY source of information.

I respect that constant updating of the score breaks policy about not news, but as a long-time editor/admin, can I humbly ask for an IAR here? Please? Pretty please? Regards, Manning (talk) 00:47, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LMFAO halftime show[edit]

Could someone write something about the halftime show with LMFAO? Every edit i've ever made on a page was reverted. BIONICLE7628 (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - Broadcasting in Norway[edit]

Can somebody change the list of international broadcasters? In Norway, the game is broadcast on "Viasat 4" and on "Viasat Sport HD". (not on Viasat Sport Norge). Also, if it is allowed such info that could be considered "advertising", the game is broadcast on VIASAT SPORT HD with 5.1 audio.

Verification: TVGuide at viasat.no (http://www.viasat.no/tvguide/list/-1) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnesten (talk • contribs) 01:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Game summary[edit]

The article needs a summary of the actual game, preferably with sources, so that it can be put on Wikipedia:In the news on the Wikipedia home page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Bulgaria to the "In other countries" broadcasting section. Bulgaria: ESPN America on Monday 6 February, 1 am - 5 am — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.238.78.199 (talk) 08:44, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Bulgaria to the "In other countries" broadcasting section. Bulgaria: ESPN America on Monday 6 February, 1 am - 5 am — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.238.78.199 (talk) 08:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verification http://www.tvguide.bg/?go=program&p=chanel&tvId=115 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.238.78.199 (talk) 08:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

safety[edit]

Is it worth noting that this is only the second time (after Superbowl IX) that a safety opened the scoring? 188.221.79.22 (talk) 14:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect last safety[edit]

The game summary second paragraph (under the box score) states that the opening safety was the "first safety in a championship game since Super Bowl XXV". This is incorrect as there was one in SB XLIII when a holding penalty on the Steelers in the endzone scored a safety for Arizona. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.160.137 (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In other countries[edit]

BBC coverage was taken from NBC (Michaels/Collinsworth)- not the Albert/Theismann version as implied in the section. 188.221.79.22 (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

XLVI is 46[edit]

You and I know that XLVI is 46, but some visitors' Roman numeral and math skills may be more limited. Once they've figured out that L is 50 and X is 10, they still need properly calculate the result. I know the text mentions that "Super Bowl XLVI was the 46th annual championship [...]", but I still think that maybe the very first mention of "Super Bowl XLVI" could link to Wiktionary's XLVI, maybe "XLVI" itself, or maybe it could say "Super Bowl XLVI (46)". It's not really necessary, but why not. Makes some people's lives easier and I don't think there are any cons. --82.171.13.139 (talk) 19:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, that "Super Bowl XLVI was the 46th annual championship [...]" is not how the article starts, this sentence is further down. --82.171.13.139 (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

???[edit]

How the hell is this front page news, theres a whole world out there who don't even know what superbowl is, so why is it on the "news in the world" bit?--Collingwood26 (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions regarding what to post on the "In the news" section of Wikipedia's Main page is normally held on Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. The discussion for this particular article was held at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Super Bowl XLVI. Please forward any comments there. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Intro[edit]

Why is the introduction on this article so long. Do we really need all the information about the city and the stadium. There is an abundance of tiny little facts that don't belong in the intro. We don't need to establish who was the home team in the intro, we don't need to know how many Superbowls have been in cold weather stadiums in the intro... 71.52.18.223 (talk) 18:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lead looks fine to me, I don't see any excessive detail as of now. --Nutthida (talk) 22:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A few years ago, I tested a different format for the lead intro section on a few Super Bowl articles. The format was:
  • Paragraph 1: Basic info and identification of the teams, stadium, city, and date.
  • Paragraph 2: Short summary on the background of the teams.
  • Paragraph 3: Short summary of the game, roughly 4-6 sentences long.
  • Paragraph 4: Brief overview of TV, entertainment, and other most important points
Most of what I wrote still basically remains on the lead intro section of Super Bowl XXXIV article. On the other Super Bowl articles I tested, my edits were eventually reverted for being "too detailed", and the detailed trivia, just as you are complaining about, eventually got put in its place. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sbxlvi logo.png Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Sbxlvi logo.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Sbxlvi logo.png)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Magic" number[edit]

Quote: "New England won the coin toss - becoming the first AFC team to win the coin toss in 15 seasons (1 in 16,324) - and deferred."

The number 16,324 is provided, but not explained. Many readers would not guess the significance of 2 to the 14th power. Perhaps:

"New England won the coin toss and deferred. They are the first AFC team to win the coin toss in 15 seasons. The odds of either conference losing 14 consecutive tosses is 1 in 16,324."

The last sentence (or two) could be a footnote. WHPratt (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Side note, but the odds of a conference winning a coin toss 14 years in a row are 2 in 214 (or 1 in 213, 1 in 8,192). because there are two conferences. I have inserted these odds as a footnote. Frank AnchorTalk 18:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Championship Quarterbacks[edit]

This new citation needed tag brought to you by Staubach & Bradshaw. When they played in Super Bowl XIII, each already had two rings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.106.237.97 (talk) 19:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

final drive starts with New England STILL HAVING that last timeout[edit]

I have made a change today to point out that, after allowing the Giants to score touchdown, New England got the ball back with more time on the clock and still having their last timeout, which was used during that drive, which would fall short. I had seen "without", suggesting they got the ball back with NO timeouts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution[edit]

Copied text and references from Oh Yeah (Yello song) to Super Bowl XLVI; see former page's history for attribution. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Bowl XLVI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Bowl XLVI. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Super_Bowl_XLVI&oldid=1208814699"