Good points. So that’s six favourable points concerning the Sultans.
It’s a bizzarro version of Klaus Voorman stumbling into a Hamburg dive and discovering some English band.
After watching the clip, Knopfler is not really saying they are shitty (though he may be implying it), just that the imponent name “Sultans of Swing” contrasts heavily with the actual circumstances of the band (playing in a shitty bar to a disinterested audience)
Overnight I did some research, and there also was a Munich gay cabaret band called Les Boys (don’t pronounce the S). Knopfler didn’t think they were any good, either. So that’s two songs about “bad” bands.
It has always been so obvious to me that guitar George is the rhythm player, it surprised me that someone thought he was playing lead. A rhythm guitarist shouldn’t “make it cry or sing” it’s not their job.
Rhythm is the structure of the music, it gives it shape and stability. You can have a tune with just rhythm, but you can’t with just lead.
I also like the positive interpretation of the song. There are definitely context clues that can defend the positive view.
Having heard Knopfler talk about the incident on other occasions I’m in no doubt this is correct.
Bear in mind that at the time Knopfler was not a wealthy music legend - he was a nobody living gig to gig and hand to mouth in London just like the Sultans. He enjoyed the band’s music and his warmth and empathy for them shows through the lyrics.
On grounds we have just recited the song is substantially complimentary about the Sultans.
He just thought it amusing that they had such a grandiose name.
Remember also that Knopfler is a dour Geordie not an effusive American. Faint praise from a Geordie is approximately equivalent to wild enthusiasm from a Californian. And slight implications of shittiness from a Geordie are not incompatible with a degree of quiet affection.