Super Bowl: This year, the ads were the yawner

(UPDATE: An even worser worst-of-show is at the end of the story.)

In a month when unscripted TV is going to rule — whether we like it or not, thanks to the inability of the networks to resolve the three-month-old writers' strike — it's only fitting that the reality show airing on Fox last night offered a far more compelling spectacle than any of the written, rehearsed, acted and focus-tested-to-death entertainment that aired during the breaks.

Most Super Bowl advertising fits into one of four convenient ratholes. Movie ads; formulaic comedy; gratuitous violence; and creative long tosses, most of which don't work out. The first two are likely to be inoffensive at worst. The latter two have the real potential to generate negative buzz on the day after. Local GPS maker Garmin, for instance, aired its widely reviled "Maposaurus" ad during last year's Super Bowl; this year it moved closer to inoffensiveness with a spot featuring a height-challenged Napoleon Bonaparte using his Garmin to drive to battle.

Some ads are more memorable than others. Some are more effective than others. The truly great ads do both. None did that this year. Nonetheless, a handful stand out because they at least got one of these two difficult tasks done.

This FedEx ad was the creative breakthrough of the Super Bowl, a 47-second (??) wonder that combined mutant carrier pigeons with the tried-and-true sales pitch of a brand dominator — and a pitch-perfect little joke at the end. That said, when I use FedEx, it's for ground shipping, and it's because of price. (The FedEx store, in fact, is marginally less convenient than my local UPS Store.) No reason is given here to switch.

The E*TRADE talking baby ads were OK, too, though I think they will get less cute over time.

These ads, on the other hand, told me about something new, and I could actually remember the product afterward, even if the creative didn't do much for me.

Taco Bell has a menu item you should not eat with one hand while driving down the freeway.

Hyundai wants to play with the big boys (kudos for the USA Today shout-out).

And George Clooney has a new movie about ... football! Good use of NFL Films voice Harry Kalas.

For its nonsensical storyline, head-splitting violent imagery and needless chest-thumping, this Under Armour ad was my personal worst-of-show ... until I went to see the GoDaddy.com ad online.

Remember GoDaddy.com? The Internet domain registry that caused a minor kerfuffle a few years ago when its Super Bowl was rejected for being too naughty? Well, this time the come-on was that Fox had rejected another one of its ads, so you had to go see that one online. And as an additional come-on, the rejected ad began with feature race-car driver Danica Patrick unzipping her racing suit.

Well, all you had to do was think about it for one nanosecond -- or not -- to realize this was an Internet scam right up there with those "Your eBay account has been suspended" emails. Firstly, why if this was such a controversial ad, was nobody reporting on it? Why would Danica Patrick strip to an indecent amount of clothing for a has-been Internet name renter? And why would GoDaddy.com pay for an ad anyway, just to tell you to go online and watch the "real" ad?

Judging from the almost non-response to the ad, I'm guessing few people did. But if they did, what they saw was a rehash of a 15-year-old joke from the "Naked Gun" movie series. The one involving beavers. Fox rejected the ad, not because the content was sexy, but because the double entendre was inappropriate for a general audience, an impression not softened by its ham-handed execution. (Danica has no future in acting, far as I can tell.) GoDaddy.com submitted an ad they knew would be rejected, then took out another ad to get people to watch the "too hot for TV" spot. How lame!