As always, there's as much talk Monday about Super Bowl ads as there is about the big game itself.

The marketing professor WNDU talked to Monday said this year advertisers, for the most part, used their money wisely.

There were of course some exceptions, but the ads still kept people talking and laughing the day after the game.

St. Mary’s College Marketing Professor William Shannon says there's no better way to learn about advertising than analyzing its biggest day.

“This is real world, hands on. We combine the theory with the reality,” Shannon said.

That's why his class goes over the Super Bowl ads every year to see if advertisers met their goals.

“I think the ads were a little more tepid than they were in prior years, except maybe Go Daddy dot com,” Shannon said, laughing.

Shannon says commercials like the bull growing up with a Clydesdale meant to remind people of established products, instead of launching new ones.

According to USA Today's ad meter, Betty White mixing it up on the muddy gridiron was the by far the best spot of the day.

Shannon agrees.

“The Betty White snickers commercial; they had gotten a lot of bad publicity so to speak for the last year so this was a really nice change of pace,” Shannon said, referring to a ad that had caused some controversy in the past.

But who missed the mark? For some of the students, some ads weren’t executed well.

“I know animals are a big appeal and I think some people just threw animals in there for no reason. Monster with the beaver violinist; I didn't really understand that,” said St. Mary’s student Lillian Reeves.

Shannon says others just didn't pick the right venue.

“A difficult ad is to promote an automobile. People know what they're looking for they've seen them… I don't think those had the impact,” Shannon said. He says products with a more broad audience, popular products like Doritos or Bud Light, have more to gain in a Super Bowl ad; reaching more potential customers per dollar spent.

For the students, they get a chance to see who executed their ideas well, and who reached their target audience.

“It's a good beginning to really seriously take a look at the advertising field, and if you're responsible for $90,000 a second you're going to make sure to do your best possible job,” Shannon said.

“I usually don't pay as close attention to the ads. This time I did, I didn't really care about the game as much (as the ads),” said Mary Kate Boyce, a marketing and finance major at St. Mary’s.

Shannon said another big change this year was that many companies released their ads before the Super Bowl on sites like you tube to try to generate some extra interest. If the advertisement “has legs,” it helps make it worth the hefty price tag of $2 million - $3 million dollars for a 30 second ad.

Meantime, Shannon said the fact that it was a close game to the end gave advertisers a better value, especially those that bought spots at the end of the game.

Ads in the first and second quarters cost a lot more, because many years some people don't watch to the end. But in a game like this year’s Super Bowl, the advertisers in the 3rd and 4th quarters likely got their money's worth.

To see the USA Today ad meter’s rankings, follow the link below.