Winning a Grammy is better because it is meaningful.
The other one is just promoting your songs in a big event.
Two weeks after that no one talks about you anymore but your Grammy's will stay with you forever.
When other people talk about artists they would rather ask if they have Grammy's and not 'did he/she perform at the Superbowl?'.
So my answer is: Grammy
But only like 5 or 6 GRAMMYS are handed out during the Live show, how about if your GRAMMY win is on the untelevised show how is the GP gonna know? There has been many occurrences in which nominated acts didn't know they won a untelevised GRAMMY till they are on the red carpet how is that meaningful when you wasn't present to receive it
Grammy Awards are more important. They're one of the biggest honors a musician can receive. When singers die, their obituaries say "Artist Name, # Grammy winner, passed away..."
Show me an obituary that lists "Superbowl Halftime performer" as a significant career achievement, or even mentions it at all.
How does one compare a sports event with a music awards ceremony?
Halftime shows are cool if you are asked to do it but it has no real merit in the music industry nor is it the pinnacle of a musician's career. It's basically just for fun.
To perform at the Super Bowl your music needs to be popular, upbeat and inoffensive to middle America. That doesn't have to be a bad thing, just that a lot of great performers and great music will never be heard there.
When you're promoting your music who would you want to be?
* 201x Grammy winner
* 201x Super Bowl performer
I'd go for the Grammy every time, especially if it was one of the big three - Album, Record or Song of the year.
Perhaps not so much if it was the Grammy for Best Album Notes or something like that.