Welcome to our 38th Media Mailbag AthleticThank you for submitting your questions via our website and app! We received over 170 questions, so here is part one of a two-part series.Note: Questions have been edited for clarity and length.
Does hiring someone like Tom Brady to call football games really boost viewership? Are people going to say, “Yeah, I’m going to watch that game because ____ is calling it?” Don’t most fans prefer a call-up guy who hits his own home runs? Am I way off the mark? — Chris A.
That’s an interesting question, Chris. It’s one that’s constantly debated within the industry, given how highly paid NFL commentators are to call the top games on each network. The fundamental answer is that people are watching the game itself. If you and I were to call the games, we’d have roughly the same viewership.
But how the game is presented and how the audience perceives it is very important to leagues and broadcasters because they want the audience to want to come back after the broadcast is over. And in the case of leagues in particular, they want to have people in the booth that they believe represent their product. And leagues have some veto power over broadcaster hiring, even if the broadcasters don’t publicly acknowledge it.
Now, as for Brady, his regular season debut will definitely be a curiosity, and Fox and the NFL have set up his debut to be a big audience, because there will be an exclusive nationally televised slot on Sunday afternoon of Week 1 with the Dallas Cowboys vs. the Cleveland Browns, and no CBS matchups. So, this is a game that some people (maybe 500,000 to 1 million) will tune in to see Brady in action.
Fox has asked its NFL partners to load up its 4:25 pm ET slot with games that will draw big audiences early in the season after not having the success it hoped for in the time slot last year, so Fox will also broadcast Baltimore Ravens vs Cowboys in Week 3, Detroit Lions vs Cowboys in Week 6 and the big game, a Super Bowl rematch between the Kansas City Chiefs and San Francisco 49ers in Week 7. All of those games will draw crowds, some of whom will tune in just to see and hear Brady.
Finally, I think it would be a mistake to have a home broadcast of the league since the NFL is a national sport. Of course, local fans are the biggest interest, but the NFL is a unique sport that is watched by people all over the country (and the world). It benefits the league to have a neutral announcer. Also, the people behind the scenes of a national game (producers, directors, video and graphic editors, etc.) all work in conjunction with the broadcasters and develop their work process over the course of a season or years. If they had to work with local broadcasters on a one-off basis every week, it would be a very difficult workflow and I don’t think it would benefit the product.
Could Fox be banned from broadcasting future World Cups and Euros? It was bad enough that they got Gus Johnson into that mess 10 years ago that ruined his career. Should we expect Tom Brady to be the lead commentator for the 2026 World Cup? John F.
The Foxes have the rights to the 2026 World Cup and signed a deal three years ago that also covers Euro 2028. They also just announced they will host the Women’s Euro 2025. If they want another rights holder, that won’t happen until the next decade.
I watched a ton of TSN’s Copa America and Euro coverage and their Canadian presentation and philosophy is far superior to Fox’s. I’ve met with Fox executives hundreds of times about their soccer coverage and they have a philosophy (US-centric coverage, avoiding host country controversy, etc.) and that’s not going to change. I think their coverage of major women’s soccer events has improved greatly and I appreciate their influence there. Fox executives will point to viewership numbers for the Euros and Copa America this month as evidence that people are responding to their coverage and they have a good viewership story. Would they get the same numbers on NBC or ABC given the teams they’re competing against? Absolutely.
I disagree about Gase. He’s Fox’s lead college football announcer. He’s had a great career. I don’t think Brady will be the lead analyst for the 2026 World Cup (I can’t imagine anyone other than Landon Donovan, given how highly Fox executives rate him), but I’d bet he’d play a role in coverage (pre-taped features, Q&As, etc.) if he’s still in broadcasting. He’s too big a name on Fox’s balance sheet to not be used somewhere in the US World Cup.
Going deeper
‘Stadium for Ali’: US men’s national team TV camera angles criticised
How feasible is it to significantly reduce the number of commercials in a streaming game in order to attract more fans to watch? Can you imagine having a PPV football game where commercials only play between quarters and after a team scores? — Jerry S.
Conceptually, this is certainly feasible, as streaming services have ad-free tiers. But given what streaming services have been paying for sports content, the best way to recoup spending is through ad buys, not just subscriptions (of course). I don’t think this is enough of an incentive for consumers to sign up en masse for a high fee. I think this will become more feasible in the late 2030s, especially for sports outside of football. The emergence of advertising as a second revenue stream should help push direct-to-consumer options to profitable.
Can we please convince ESPN and Apple TV (and other offenders) to stop putting microphones on players who are trying to broadcast baseball games? It’s bad enough that they do this, but they also ask the most pointless questions. Mach D.
I’m in the minority on this one. It doesn’t really bother me, but baseball fans seem to get really annoyed. Philosophically, I like it this way because the access gets you closer to the game. I agree that these interviews rarely produce insightful moments, but even if they only yielded 4 or 5 great moments, I think it would be worth doing 100 of them. But again, I think you’re in the majority here.
I just can’t understand how broadcasters can continue to acquire rights to sports leagues when prices continue to double and triple every few years. Will there come a point in the next decade where they move away from non-NFL rights packages? Bruce W.
Research firm MoffettNathanson recently released a report stating that the first quarter of 2024 will see the worst ever decline in pay-TV subscribers for all streamers, which raises the question: Where is the bottom for all of this, especially for traditional linear video, and what does it mean that big-name sporting events are increasingly moving to streaming platforms?
The reality is that the NFL is keeping some of these networks afloat. 97 of the 100 most-watched telecasts in the US in 2023 will come from the NFL. The NBA is obviously getting a massive rights increase, which will be officially announced soon. UFC will also be getting a price increase. I think the big question going forward is where do live sports rights fit into the business models of streaming-based entities? Major sports rights will continue to increase if these companies decide they need sports to maintain their subscriber numbers. Whether that’s a smart business strategy, especially for companies that have lost billions of dollars to streaming, is another question entirely.
[Many fans]complain about the national announcers when their team is on national TV, especially on ESPN. Why don’t the national networks hire announcers from the two competing teams to call the game? We would all benefit from having much more knowledgeable announcers commentating on the teams and hearing a different play-by-play of the game. — Bradley M.
Contractually this is not feasible, stations want to do their own presentation, there are plenty of home announcers who are not even close to being neutral, and there will be plenty of complaints about that.
Oklahoma’s win over Texas in the Women’s College World Series final set a new record for the most-watched title series in the sport. (Brian Baer/Getty Images)
As women’s sports grow in popularity, leagues and networks are realizing it’s an untapped source of revenue. Do you think the WNBA, women’s college basketball, college softball, etc. have enough appeal or clout to bring people back to traditional TV? Jesse K
There is no silver bullet that will bring people back to traditional TV. We don’t live in that world anymore. Right now, in the traditional world that still exists, I think all of the assets you listed above have great growth potential and would be attractive to companies like CBS, ABC, ESPN, FS1, Big Ten Network, etc. The numbers don’t lie.
South Carolina’s win over Iowa in the women’s college basketball final drew an astounding 18.9 million viewers, peaking at 24.1 million. Of course, Kaitlyn Clark was the driving force, but the tournament overall saw viewership numbers increase, even in games she didn’t play (Connecticut’s win over USC in the Elite Eight drew 6.7 million viewers). This year’s Women’s College World Championship Final between Oklahoma and Texas set a new record for the most-watched final, averaging 2 million viewers. I’ve been writing for over a decade that women’s sports are underrated in viewership. It’s great to see the numbers now, but as you say, they’re still underrated. There’s plenty of room to grow.
Can you arrange a Pat McAfee vs. Alexi Lalas match at the next WrestleMania? Alexi Lalas thinks he is the God of American soccer. It is true that American soccer is a huge disappointment and will never succeed, but Lalas has to go. I will nominate Pat McAfee to make it happen. Adam A.
A couple of things: First, we still have a long way to go before the end of humanity, so don’t give up on US soccer forever. A country with 340 million people and a powerful economy has a chance to be a powerhouse in any sport, but the Copa America was a tough one for the US. Don’t underestimate it.
McAfee has bounced between babyface and heel announcer in WWE. Laras clearly prefers being a professional play-by-play heel. Making McAfee the big babyface in the match would make this an easier sell. McAfee might invade Fox’s broadcast of the Copa America final and trash the Fox set. Laras defends Fox. It’s decided.
But the real issue is that Fox’s time with WWE is rapidly coming to an end, as WWE’s “Friday Night SmackDown” returns to the USA Network in October. There’s no way WWE is going to waste storyline time on a partner whose contract wasn’t renewed. This match isn’t going to happen.
Going deeper
Alexi Lalas and Stuart Holden – Bold and opinionated, but never “okay”
With the SEC announcing kickoff times for early games well in advance, is it possible other networks will follow this path? As someone who craves college football information during the summer, this helped me plan my Saturdays in my head. — Paul G.
One issue here is contractual. There are conferences that share college football game inventory between networks. Take Big Ten football, for example. My understanding is that media partners can’t release anything more than 12 days in advance because they don’t have a partner that controls the entire package. While releasing time earlier for planning purposes is definitely fan-friendly, a designated window for all SEC games from Week 3 onwards before the start of the season is a benefit of the new conference rights deal between the Southeastern Conference and ESPN. That’s why ESPN and the SEC were able to do this.
(Top photo of Tom Brady during the broadcast of the UFL Championship Game in June: Rick Ulreich/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
