Super Bowl Ads: What Worked, What Didn’t, and Why Brand Still Matters
- Lauren Ridgley
- 2 days ago
- 8 min read
I love watching the Super Bowl for the ads.
But I especially love watching them in situation: at a Super Bowl party, in a packed room full of distractions. Because that’s how these ads are actually consumed most of the time.
It becomes a small, very real case study in effectiveness: can your spot break through when 8–10 people are half-watching, half-talking, half-snacking, and occasionally yelling at the TV?
That was exactly the setup for me last night, watching with my partner (a Pats fan), our neighbors and my parents (all Seahawks fans), plus some kids thrown in for good measure. I paid attention not just to the ads, but to the commentary around the ads.
Here are my takeaways. Yes, they’re opinions — but they’re also informed by the science of brand growth and what actually drives memory, recall, and preference over time.
P.S. If I didn’t include an ad here, it’s either because it didn’t make an impression — or I missed it while yapping about the Patriots’ terrible performance and feeling badly for their VERY young QB.
🥇 MY WINNER: Budweiser
So good. Baby animals. A comeback story. I knew the second I saw the horse hoof it was Budweiser. This is a masterclass in distinctive assets and creative consistency. Year over year, they refresh without abandoning who they are.
Most brands fail here. Budweiser doesn’t.
I’m not even a Budweiser customer — but when the eagle spread its wings on the horse, the room cheered. That’s brand power.
🥈 RUNNER UP: Lay’s Potato Chips
This ad was evocative. Take me to the farm. Show me a family gathering around the cause of nourishing all of us with potatoes that are truly cared for.
I was IN the dirt, I was remembering how “Dad” taught me how to till the earth. It’s very hard to make what is - for all intents and purposes - junk food - feel wholesome and this did that. It’s also hard to make a major food conglomerate like Pepsi/Frito-Lay feel like a family brand. It did that too. Well done.
🥉 THIRD PLACE: Rocket Mortgage / Redfin
This spot was actually for Rocket and Redfin, now the same company — and that clarification matters. The ad carried the full idea of buying a home from start to finish, not just financing one piece of it. The storyline of a family reforming after divorce and finding their footing in a new neighborhood hit me in the feels, and both brands’ distinctive assets were thoughtfully woven throughout, so the payoff never felt like a bait-and-switch.
It’s still hard to make a financial services / real estate ad feel empathetic and human — and this one pulled it off. We have a mortgage through Rocket, so for me this worked as positive reinforcement, but even without that personal tie, the brand storytelling landed.
Home buying isn’t an everyday decision. Brands like Rocket and Redfin have to rely on creative compounding and long-term brand recall, not just screaming when someone enters consideration. Whisper to me early, show up consistently, and you’ve earned the right to be loud later. They’re doing this well.
The Others:
Most egregious use of celebs for no real reason: Ritz
The salty schtick didn’t land for me as a meaningful connection point to the brand. This all felt very messy. I love Bowen Yang, Scarlett Johansson, and Jon Hamm — but it felt like the point of the ad was celebrity, not selling crackers.
At one point someone at our party asked, “Is that really Scarlett Johansson in a cracker ad or is it AI Scarlett?” That question alone tells you something went wrong.
Ad that forgot to feature its product: Liquid I.V.
About 90% of the ad featured toilets from various homes. While I was mildly intrigued waiting for the payoff… it didn’t land. The brand made no use of its distinctive assets throughout the spot.
By the end, you could have slapped a logo for a local plumber on it and said, “Toilets…amiright?” and I’d have felt the same association. Missed opportunity.
Ads with QR Codes
Crazily, these ran back-to-back — Salesforce via Mr. Beast and Lay’s for a new potato chip challenge. Neither ad held the QR code on screen long enough for me to react (I’m lazy, to be fair).
In the Mr. Beast spot, that may have been intentional — the hype likely meant people “in the know” were waiting. Still, QR codes only work if you give people a real moment to act.
Ad that worked on its target audience, but not me: Manscaped
My neighbor and I both laughed and fake-vomited during this ad. The last thing I want to think about while slamming a jalapeño popper is my neighbor’s ass-crack hair. Okay?
The guys in the room were chuckling, and yes — it was memorable. But it caught me at the wrong moment, and I’ll be carrying that “eww” feeling forward. That might be fine for the brand’s core audience, but I’m not convinced it broadens appeal. Time will tell.
The brand that tried to break the ad mold (again): Coinbase
Points for trying to break the mold — but that’s where it stops. The brand attempted to top its viral QR code ad from a few years back with a Backstreet Boys karaoke gimmick. The tie to the message was weak. It grabbed attention briefly, but no one talked about it afterward. Attention without memory is expensive.
The ad that got a good chuckle and will definitely save lives: Novartis
The schtick took a bit to get to the payoff. But wow this ad really got the room rolling and talking about cancer screenings! Very effective way to bring humor to cancer screenings and recognize the real reason men avoid cancer screenings for certain… areas.
I am also a huge Gronk fan so tuned-in the second he popped on screen - he’s like everyone’s favorite goofy uncle. The visible tight-end relaxing montage was so effective. I think this one will be very effective and as one of millions of families affected by cancer, I’m grateful for that.
You get an AI ad. You get an AI ad.
I lost count of how many AI ads ran — many for brands I’d never heard of: Genspark, AI.com, Base44, Claude, OpenAI. Most focused on AI’s ability to simplify work. Category-level messaging dominated.
The only two I remembered by the end of the night were Claude and Google Gemini.
Claude’s spot took a hilarious jab at OpenAI’s expected ad rollout and got the entire room talking — more effective than I expected.
But Google Gemini hit me in the feels as a mom. It showed AI helping a woman navigate life with her young son — grounded, human, emotionally resonant. Not wildly distinctive, but emotionally sticky.
WTF ad of the day: Poppi
I’m not a Poppi fan after sitting on a panel where the founder referred to it as a “content creation brand that happens to sell soda,” and this spot leaned hard into that energy. It was next-level cringe.
The whole party looked around asking, “Does anyone understand this?” My friend Rob was literally drinking a Poppi and said, “Uhh… I guess I’ll keep drinking it anyway. What was that?”
That’s not intrigue. That’s confusion.
If the idea was to make people wonder what they’re missing, I’m not sure the brand understands the growth challenge in front of them. To scale, Poppi needs more light buyers — people who aren’t already familiar with the influencer vibe or insider energy. This spot felt like it was speaking almost exclusively to people already in the know.
Because Poppi is owned by Pepsi and backed by a team with massive marketing bona fides, I expected a stronger tie back to what actually makes the product distinctive — especially in a soda category that lives and dies by clarity. For a brand positioned as a better-for-you soda, it fell flat for me.
I’m generally skeptical of celeb-for-celeb’s-sake — but this worked. Yes, Clooney is surprising to see, but the ad had a singular focus: Grubhub eating fees. Clear message. Clean execution. Memorable. Well done.
Nostalgia as an Anchor: Dunkin’
Leaning into mid-90s nostalgia with characters from Friends, Cheers, Fresh Prince, and Good Will Hunting worked — because Dunkin’ has committed to this approach year over year.
They consistently tie celebrity use back to their distinctive brand assets (orange and pink), Boston identity, and product promotion. Whether you’re thinking about a franchise location or the grocery aisle, the brand feels cohesive. That’s not accidental.
In many cases, celebrity distracts from the brand — but Dunkin’ threads the needle well here.
Loved the re-imagining of Jurassic Park with Xfinity services. It hit the nostalgia bone (which I assume lives near my head because it always makes me tilt and smile).
The Jurassic Park theme may have overshadowed the payoff slightly, but for brand awareness, this worked. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Xfinity continue the “what if we were there?” creative thread.
The second it started, I knew it was Red Bull — and that’s the win. Same animation style. Same tone. Same payoff. New scenario. Not the flashiest spot of the night, but incredibly effective. This is what long-term brand investment looks like.
This felt like a lazy execution where the star stood in for weak brand work. For a brand with such strong distinctive assets — the tube, the stack, the shape — this was a miss.
Instead of leaning into what makes Pringles instantly recognizable, it relied on celebrity appeal. Disappointing. Fame doesn’t make people remember you. Your brand does.
Kendall Jenner is exceptionally famous, and Fanatics Sportsbook used that fame in a smart way. The spot leaned into who she is — her family’s reputation as an athlete’s anti-muse and her willingness to poke fun at herself — to sell the idea of her “tanking” athlete performance. Conceptually, the tie to the product was strong.
Still, it falls into a familiar trap. There wasn’t enough Fanatics Sportsbook in the ad. When I first wrote up my take for this ad I actually thought it was for Draft Kings! My colleague corrected me.
So: Could I have swapped in another gambling app and told the same story? Unfortunately, yes. Strong idea, solid celebrity fit — but not enough brand.
Funny, absurd, and product-forward. The Andy Samberg Niel Diamond bit was funny and attention grabbing. “Ham, Touching Ham, Touching Cheese…” I laughed and loved how much Andy Samberg’s comedic style was at work.
Still, for a :60 ad it went by fast and I could have used a bit more “mayo” in the spot. Still, I think the brand is onto something if it commits to the “Meal Diamond” bit and gives it more air time.
This was one of the most debated spots ahead of the game — largely because it attempted to borrow one of Coke’s most iconic and distinctive assets and use it to sell Pepsi. Yes, it was funny. But effectiveness isn’t the same as entertainment.
I paid close attention to the room. My mom said out loud, “I don’t get it,” when the polar bears showed up on the kiss cam at a concert. When an ad requires explaining an outdated cultural reference mid-spot, it’s usually a sign the idea is distracting from the goal.
Clever doesn’t always equal clear — and in this case, clarity lost.
The Big Takeaway on This Year’s Super Bowl Ads
The ads people cheered for, recognized instantly, or talked about afterward weren’t chasing novelty.
They knew who they were — and built on prior investments.
Celebrity can amplify a brand, but it can’t replace one.
AI can impress, but it still needs a human truth.
And QR codes only work if you give people a real moment to care.
Whisper to me early. Earn my trust. And when it’s time to scream — I’ll actually listen.