An unnamed AFC player recently expressed disappointment over Bad Bunny being chosen as the Super Bowl halftime performer. He stated, “I think there are better examples of character and morality than Bad Bunny.” This perspective seems surprising, especially considering the NFL’s own track record of overlooking serious issues like sexual assault and domestic violence among its players.
In a recent survey by The Athletic, 58.6% of players approved of Bad Bunny as the halftime act, while 41.4% disagreed. Many of those who opposed him cited unfamiliarity with his music or a desire for an artist more connected to football culture.
Bad Bunny made headlines again after winning the Grammy for Album of the Year, a historic win for an entirely Spanish-language album. He also holds the title of Spotify’s most-streamed artist with nearly 20 billion streams in 2025. His Selection as the Super Bowl performer aligns with the NFL’s aim to expand its international and Latino audience.
Concerns about Bad Bunny’s character remain vague. Some might question his stance on issues like immigration, sparked by his comments at the Grammys where he stated, “We’re not savages, we’re not animals— we’re humans and we are Americans.” If the player disagrees with him on these issues, it would be helpful for him to clarify his views rather than make ambiguous statements.
The NFL’s choice of performer seems clear: they want someone who draws a crowd and can engage viewers. Bad Bunny fits that bill. While an alternative show, the “All-American Halftime Show,” is being organized by Turning Point USA, it’s essential to recognize that Bad Bunny’s performance aims to captivate millions, transcending just sports and music.
Evaluating halftime performers on their personal beliefs raises questions. The main criteria should focus on entertainment value. Bad Bunny’s star power guarantees a show that can draw in viewers worldwide, aligning with the NFL’s goals.
Source link
anonymous sources,Bad Bunny,Super Bowl halftime show,The Athletic
