RiverDog wrote:I can't imagine that there's enough of a gain in perceived game day experience to offset the headaches that comes with what is nothing less than soft core porn designed specifically to appeal to us men's libido.
burrrton wrote:"Soft core porn"?? Maybe if you're a 17th-century Puritan. They're a *dance troupe*, for Heaven's sake.
[edit- and yeah, I could care less who's on the troupe, nor what they call themselves.]
Hey, I'm a guy that loves patronizing breasteraunts like Twin Peaks and Tilted Kilt. Puritan is at the very bottom of the list of terms that my friends would use to describe my personality. My point was about the hypocrisy of the league, on the one hand fancying themselves as family friendly and respectful of women and on the other hand, employing half naked women who's primary purpose is to appeal to the predominantly male audience. They're using sex to promote their product.
Calling it soft core porn might be a little over the top, but so is calling them a dance troupe. They don't dress like dance troupes, don't shake their boobs and booty like dance troupes, and dance troupes do not have the television camera angles arranged to highlight their exposed cleavage.
Likewise, we had male cheerleaders in high school, too, and I really don't care one way or another if they have males on the cheerleading squads. As is evident in my comments above, I think that they ought to get rid of them. Their entertainment value is nil IMO.