Call it what you like, but the Grammys’ were anything but an award show. About an hour into the “award” show I was struck by a sudden curiousity: where are the awards?

In the first of hour of the three and a half our show only two awards were given out. TWO! So can the viewers expect to only see six or seven awards in the show? Well thats not fair for all the other genres of music, or the other artists who won in categories that aren’t good enough for live television.

There are 110 Grammy awards and 30 different categories. So out of all the awards, the Grammys’ chose a selcet few to actually be aired. So what will they do with the other 3 hour time slot they must fill? That’s an easy one, just use it up with pointless performances from artists that are only popular with the younger crowd. Some prime examples: Pink, Lady GaGa, the Blackeyed Peas, Beyonce, T-Pain and many others.

So why not just call it a performance show instead of an award show? I mean honestly, any “award” show that nominates Kathy Griffin for something is not an award show worth watching. And since only a select number of awards are good enough for cable television, why even give out the other awards? I mean, it’s not like anyone cares about the awards like “Best Solo Rock Vocal Performace” or “Best Metal Song”?

Another thing that bothered me is that the producers found it appropriate to partner up some of the greats of the music world with today’s favorite pop and rap artists. Let’s look at it this way, Lady Gaga is a popular musician, there is no doubt about it. However, her style of music is nothing like the style of the great Elton John. So why partner them together? It makes no sense, and it doesn’t sound that great.

In conclusion, the Grammys’ were a bit disappointing. Do not call it something that it is not, and the 2010 Grammys’ were anything but an award show.