In the end, for many Super Bowl viewers, it has become very easy to forget that "amid four sold-out, beamed around the world pop concerts and billions of dollars (U.S. dollars, that is) spent on commercials… they played a football game?" (Menon, 2003, p.A1). While the differences between the first Super Bowl in 1967 and the 38th version in 2004 are blatantly obvious, it should also be apparent that many of these are a direct result of the influence of television. After the TV industry took its chances by handing over millions of dollars to a fledgling pro sports league, it became apparent that the sport would eventually have to make some concessions in return. Though it has led to the creation of a broadcast which seemingly places a greater emphasis on the "entertainment" rather than the game itself, it is important to note that this only impacts the form in which the game is presented and not the content which takes place on the field.

For the most part, though, this shift in ideology should make it apparent that the Super Bowl is clearly unique from all other types of sports broadcasts, therefore, allowing it to be considered in a genre all on its own. Essentially, the main factor behind this notion is that no other type of broadcast has been able to successfully combine so many elements of both sport and entertainment into a single event. Since it has been able to both thrive in this respect and maintain a sense of dignity (unlike professional wrestling, for instance), the Super Bowl can effectively be viewed as the model which has others aspiring to join its lucrative "sports entertainment" genre of television broadcasting. However, considering the prominence and aura which now surround the game as, arguably, the world's greatest television event, the Super Bowl should cherish the fact that it will likely maintain a monopoly in this genre for quite some time.