Roundtable: Is J.J. Watt a true No. 1 NFL analyst; the NFL's Week 1 viewership declines — and has the Manningcast peaked.

0:00The Burna Black and Orange sale is here with up to 25 % off site-wide. No tricks, just a way to treat yourself to serious savings on serious protection. Because when something goes bump in the night, it's good to have options, including less lethal launchers, sprays, and alarms. The sale runs October 19th through 26th. Shop at byrna.com slash protection before these savings vanish into the night. Must be 18+. Purchase and shipping restrictions vary by state and municipality. At Fanatic Sportsbook, you don't pay for player protection. Introducing Fair Play Max, full game player injury protection for NFL and NBA.

0:37No fee, all season, all customers. Plus, new customers bet$10 and get up to$1 ,000 in fan cash over your first 10 days. Fanatics, the only sportsbook to reward every bet. Must be 21 plus. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER or 1-800-MY-RESET. CT, call 888-789-7777. MA, call 800-327-5050. NY, call 877-8HOPE-NY. MD, visit mdgamblinghelp.org. Not available in all states. Terms apply. See app for details.

1:07Welcome to the sports media podcast. I'm your host Richard Deitch. My producer is James Jackson. This is our weekend roundtable and we have three of the regulars Chad Finn sports media columnist and general columns of the Boston Globe Austin Karp sports media writer for sports business journal John Lewis founder and editor of sports media watch. Welcome fellas. thanks rich thanks all right let's let's start here also i'm gonna start with you because i totally swiped this from your social media feed um week one average for the nfl 19.5 million viewers that is down from last year 22.3 million viewers and down from 2024 21.5 million viewers So down 13 % year over year, but the caveat, it is still one of the three best week one audiences for the NFL in the last decade.

2:02Understand we obviously have had some measurement changes from Nielsen, et cetera. What do you make, Austin, of the NFL being under$20 million for its average for week one? I think Roger Goodell and Hans Schroeder should just pack it in. season's done like nobody's watching football no i mean this is one of those rare circumstances where you had that double double header like i don't know that i would have done it in week one but you want to give maximum exposure to these networks coming out of the gates they both had the national windows but that's naturally going to cannibalize one another in the 425 window um it really is a head scratcher as to why 60 minutes thought that this would be a good time to start knowing that they were going to have a smaller audience coming off of a CBS national window.

2:51But yeah, they knew they were going to be down. It's that first season of, you know, we have big data versus big data. Yes, there were some subtle changes there that the NFL wasn't happy about. Paul Ballou, who runs there, who's their chief data and analytics officer. He came on the SBJ podcast, talked about what they didn't like with those improvements outside of the co viewing changes, kind of saw it as a wash there. But they, I think they were just trying to prepare for something like this. They know that they were going to be down a little bit. And what this is, is similar to a couple of seasons ago.

3:20The NFL is going to have to dig out of a week one hole here a little bit. They're going to have to get some close matchups. Fox, I know in particular, the last couple of seasons has had a lot of blowouts. They need some close games. They need some big close games like they had this past weekend. And I think that they can get out of that sort of hole, the NFL on the whole. John, what was your analysis of this? Pretty similar. I mean, obviously, the competing doubleheaders. Beyond that, you also have to factor in the international game was not included in the week one averages the previous two years.

3:51Now, obviously, it's not like that was a dud or anything, but that's a sub 20 million audience. So that'll take the average down a little bit more. So between the two double headers, you have one additional window under$20 million. You add in the fact that you're including the international game. So that's another window under$20 million. And then when you do the double double header, it doesn't just hurt the late window. It hurts the early window as well because now in the early window, you have fewer games. You also don't have – when you have a single header, you're going to have a game with a week type game in that 1 o 'clock slot.

4:25You don't have that. So I wouldn't be concerned if I were the NFL. This is the first time since 2020 that viewership has declined in week one of the season, right? So that is notable. But, I mean, the reasons are obvious, and it is still the third most watched week one with all the caveats regarding Nielsen methodology. I wouldn't necessarily be concerned. I mean, one thing I would definitely look at as far as a takeaway from week one, those primetime windows helped along by the fact that the afternoon games cannibalized each other. But those primetime windows really led the way. NBC, two games over 25 million.

5:06Yes, the most watched week one Monday night football game since 1996. Again, with all the caveats regarding changes in Nielsen methodology. Yeah, Chad, John just hit on what I thought was kind of, if you're going to talk about viewership, kind of like the big viewership story or win of the week. And that was the NBC and ESPN numbers. Both those companies have to be overjoyed with that. And it really does, you know, it's sort of really like in some way sort of is a reemergence that like prime time is really the I don't want to say it's the window you want to because I always think the 425 p.m. afternoon window when you're not going up against anybody, obviously, is still the best.

5:48But, you know, we have had conversations on this podcast like, you know, like how good is Monday Night Football? Like heading forward, if you want to bid on it, how good is the Sunday Night Football package? And this, if nothing else, in week one, sort of reconfirmed that people do love primetime football. Yeah, for sure. I mean, we had, what, 25.1 million for Seahawks Patriots on a Wednesday night. People were ready for the season to begin, for sure. You just had a lot going on on Sunday. You had the two dueling doubleheaders there. You also had the U.S. Open men's final. Was that at 2 o 'clock?

6:25So just really a great sports weekend that probably watered down the NFL numbers a little bit. But I can't imagine there's really any concern from Hans Schroeder or Roger Goodell, as noted. Let me stick with you, Chad, on this. We'll move to some of the on-air talent kind of conversations. Biggest story of week one in terms of the NFL, I think when you were talking about on-air personalities, was J.J. Watt joining the Jim Nance Tracy Wolfson group. Obviously, this podcast, including the three of you, we've all talked about Tony Romo very much. The only sort of forwarding news from Tony Romo is that CBS released its week two and week three schedule.

7:12Tony Romo is nowhere to be found. J.J. Watt will be on that number one team. I wrote about this for the Guardian, Chad, and the word I would have used was solid. It wasn't transformational or anything like that, but I think if you're David Burson and company, I think J.J. Watt, Jim Nance left you feeling okay. If this was our number one team for the rest of the year, we're at least going to be okay. That was my read. How did you read it? Yeah, I was with you. I read your piece and just kind of nodded along in agreement. I watched a lot of that. And I've watched a lot of Watt in general. He has the Patriots-Steelers game this weekend, and he had it last year, too.

7:53That was week three last year. and then had a week 15 game with the Patriots and the Bills. And I went back and watched those, and I thought he made a big leap last year. And he did not make a similar leap in his first situation, first game in the booth with Nance. But I think we will see that progress. Ian Eagle, and we can get into Ross Tucker too, but Ian Eagle elevates everybody he's with no matter what sport he's doing. I think Nancy will do that for Watt as well, just as Eagle did for Watt last year. One of the funny things, though, it kind of makes me laugh. He had that Patriots-Steelers game last year when he was still acclimating to being in the booth.

8:34It was week three. And he referred to his brother as TJ Watt on every reference. TJ Watt, TJ Watt, which just made me laugh. You can't really call him TJ. You can't really call him Watt because he's a brother, so he just goes full name. John, let me go to you. Did you watch that game, and what were your thoughts on Watt and Nance? I caught bits and pieces of it. Honestly, I was watching more of the tennis, kind of getting back to Chad's point, the tennis. Also the FIBA. Between those two, maybe 5 million viewers in that early window were not watching the NFL. But as far as Watt goes, he seemed pretty nondescript.

9:13The thing that I thought more than anything was his ceiling is lower than Tony Romo's, but his floor is higher. So when Romo's at his best, I don't think Watt can get to that level. But when Romo's at his worst, obviously Watt is an improvement. So it's really a question of if you're trying to figure out who you want to have this role, it's really a question of do you feel like Romo is at his best or at his worst? And are you willing to bet on Romo getting back to his best? Because if you think Romo can get back to his best, he's, in my view, it's early. Watt's only in his second year, only did one game here this season.

9:55From what I've seen so far, I would take Watt at his best. Excuse me, I would take Romo at his best. Before I talk, before we comment on John, sort of the thought process is like, could Watt's best get to Romo's best? Austin, what did you think of Watt and Nance? you know I caught bits and pieces like John did I was coming back I was at the Panthers and Bears game which was played on the surface of the sun here in Charlotte got to watch that throttling but I think it's important what we talked about here in that he wasn't transformational but I think that's a good thing I didn't want him to come out of the gate and try to you know be better than Romo or try to match one of the other A's out there it's going to be a slow build it's going to be a progression there for him getting up to a true number one now he didn't didn't fumble the ball he held he you know he didn't fumble any or fumble too much there on the call i thought he did enough that you can build on it and build on it over the course of this season and then i really think it's still going to come down to a decision by david burson and you know david ellison is this the guy they want to park in that chair for the next couple of decades he has that kind of run if they're going to park him there or do they go free agent and that's the decision they're looking at, especially with so much talent out there?

11:10Yeah, that's a good question. All right. So I tend to agree that I don't know if Watt's best will ever get to Romo's best, but like the real question is, is Romo ever getting to Romo's best again? And I think that's if you're CBS, you have to ask yourself, Chad, what would be an interesting strategy would be that they just play the year with Watt and Nance, right? They settle with Romo. Let's say they're sort of going to part ways. And then like Austin said, do you then really make a full court press to try to get Greg Olson? And it's Nance and Greg Olson as your number one team. And then J.J.

11:51Watt and Ian Eagle as your number two team. And then Ross Tucker and whoever you want to, Kevin Harlan or something like that as your number three team. It could really be pretty deep if you do that. I don't even know if it's called downside when we're dealing with the money that these networks have. But the downside is you're just going to have to pay for another top analyst and still pay out Tony Romo not to work. Yeah. For five more years, right? Four more years. I think, yeah, Romo's four years left. Yeah, a little more than halfway through the deal. I mean, what we don't know is what Jim Nance wants, right?

12:24That seems like a pretty important question here because you could kind of sense, he would never say it, certainly on the record, but you could sense frustration with Romo the last couple of years. And remember that Romo kind of got the riot act read to him. And I think it was before Sean McManus, the chairman of CBS Sports, retired, and then got better, got back to sort of what he was in his first season for a little bit. But then that regressed again last year where it felt like everything was off the cuff and the preparation wasn't what it needed to be. I think that frustrated Nance is very prepared, and I'm curious who he wants to work with.

13:10If he wants him to make a run at Greg Olson, who's as good as anybody doing it right now, or if he's enamored with working with Watt. I thought for the opener this year that he sounded like he was really enjoying working with Watt, and I think Watt's a guy who's going to keep working and working at it to try to get better and already has a kind of a natural, easygoing personality. So that's the piece that's missing to me is what is Jim Nance telling his bosses behind the scenes. We can almost do an entire other podcast just on this topic, but Troy Aikman's contract is up at the end of this year.

13:44And as we are speaking today, there is no contract signed for Troy. Austin, did you watch Ross Tucker and Ian Eagle at all? I happened to. That was the Bills game. So obviously that's my market. I thought they were excellent. But honestly, I think one of you guys have said this, or we've all said this in the past. Honestly, Ian Eagle with anybody is going to be excellent. That's no disrespect to Ross Tucker, who I thought did a great job. So that did not surprise me. But those two guys, Austin, honestly, they sounded like they've been working together for like 10 years. You know, I didn't catch the TV broadcast of that one, but it makes total sense.

14:19They have history together. They've done Westwood radio work together. and like you said like iron eagle just makes anybody feel comfortable but i didn't catch this this first game chad you did right i did yeah i had texans bills on what'd you think uh i'm not the biggest ross tucker guy i think he's fine but i'm not sure he's the number two guy um that's eagle definitely elevated him i i missed charles davis on cbs honestly i thought he i thought the team with eagle charles davis and evan washburn is was excellent outstanding yeah i would have i would have liked to see that stay together but you know he's he's uh solid and and it's going to be a good broadcast with the eagle eagle in the number one chair and that's what it was all right let's move to i'll go to you john lewis here let's go to joe buck's contract andrew marshann at the athletic reported that joe buck had signed a six-year extension for 108 million dollars is a very nice get for marshall to get the the contract dollars and haven't seen anybody at espn contest it so i imagine he's got it pretty much nailed um that's an excellent signing john in my opinion from espn just because you lock up your number one nfl announcer who's helped stabilize your uh networks coverage and then secondly and i marshall had a little bit of this in there too that like maybe if if jimmy pataro is serious about trying to go for a bigger baseball package.

15:46Well, you've got the former voice of the World Series in your orbit as well. So yeah, I get it. It's a lot of money, but this is where the market is. And ESPN has made its decision as we've talked ad infinitum on this podcast. They're going to decide to bet on big personalities in the McAfee, Stephen A. Smith realm. They're going to bet on a couple of stalwarts who are on, it seems like, hosting everything from Van Pelt and Greenberg. And then a guy like Joe Buck gets his big money, and theoretically Troy Aikman could get his big money. So to me, I'm a Buck fan. I think he's excellent. I think he's as good a broadcaster in his generation.

16:30So John, to me, that's money well spent by ESPN. How did you see it? Well, I mean, let's just get to the interesting philosophy at ESPN, which is if you're going to work for ESPN, you've got to do a lot of things. But they make exceptions, right? And this is an understandable exception because the extent to which ESPN failed to ever put together a quality Monday night booth is really amazing, considering it's really their biggest property by far. Even in the days when Tirico was there, they didn't put together a great booth on the first or second try. You were not a John Gruden guy then, John.

17:13Well, no, I was going to say it took until they got John Gruden because he wasn't there from the start. Remember, Kornheiser, Tirico, and then they held Joe Theismann over for Sunday nights. And so, you know, they they I mean, let's let's just get to the booger mobile. Let's get to the miscasting of people who are quality broadcasters, but not Monday Night Football broadcasters like Steve Levy. Right. They just couldn't figure it out. So I understand why they are putting 18 million a year into Joe Buck, because they've now had a stable Monday Night Football booth. This is the fifth season, believe it or not, of Buck and Aikman on Monday nights.

17:58Steve Levy. Who was it? Steve Levy. Louis Riddick. Yeah, thank you. Let me, if you don't mind, I can do that over. I guess you want me to count down? Sure. Yeah, five, four, three, two, one. Steve Levy, Louis Riddick, Brian Greasy, two years. Joe Tessitore, Booker McFarland, and remember they had Jason Witten there for the first year, two years. Sean McDonough and John Gruden, two years. This is actually the longest-tenured Buck and Aikman Monday Night Booth that they've had since Tirico and Gruden more than a decade ago. So that's why Joe Buck is getting$18 million a year, even though he's only doing the NFL.

18:39And as far as the World Series goes, Buck has been very open in all of his interactions about the time commitment that covering baseball on a regular basis requires. He has made it clear, and I'm sure everyone's got their price, but he's made it clear that he doesn't believe in doing something like a World Series or even just major regular season games without being in the season, studying the whole season. And I have a hard time imagining they're going to get him to do that. I'd just go for Brian Anderson because I can't imagine TNT keeps their rights. Let me go to you, Austin. Again, to me, good piece of business by ESPN to bring Buck in.

19:26Your thoughts? Absolutely. For a lot of the reasons that John stated, and there have been long whispers that ESPN wants to get a piece of the World Series, whether it's an every-year proposition or an every-year proposition. There's a lot of calculations going on there because it's not just baseball they want. There's now a 24-team CFP that they're going to have to worry about. and you know they're not they're probably not going to have that all to themselves they'll be I imagine there'll be two maybe three partners there for a CFP but there's just so much coming up they're going to have to extend NFL rights so having Joe Buck in the fold for whatever they do whether it's baseball and more NFL it makes total sense I'm really interested to see what Troy Aikman does I wonder if he wants to really get closer to something like Tom Brady money I don't know if he can get there outside of some sort of personal services agreement with a network like tom brady has uh can he do that at espn does he want to do it at espn a lot of questions there on aiken's future i i think yeah he'll uh he'll be getting a raise it'll just i think be a question of from where all right chad i'll let you uh just weigh in real quick on buck and we'll move on to something else yeah i mean it's uh it makes all sense in the world for them to do that with buck he's always gotten a lot of backlash from people that's been unjust in the latter part of his career in particular.

20:50We had him first stretch here in New England call a lot of big games for the Red Sox and Patriots. With the Red Sox, his calls were better than the local guys were and more memorable. I think that's a real tribute to how good he is at the job, even if sometimes nationally he gets a lot of heat from fan bases. is really wise of them to keep him there. I think they should keep Aikman there too, even though Levitard absolutely buried him this week with how much he says the word football on the broadcast. I'd never noticed it before, and now I'll never stop noticing it. But it's a great tandem, and I think ESPN would be wise to keep those two guys together for the long haul.

21:31Yeah, I think that to me they're the best working NFL broadcast right now. And I actually don't think it. I mean, I think they have a separation from whoever you think is next. There's some other good ones, too. Agreed. That's where I am. All right. The only thing I really want to focus on with the Steve Sarkeesian, Holly Rowe, Arch Manning stuff, because it's been discussed ad infinitum at this point. And you can head on to any social media outfit and find however you feel about it, including being angry about it or not angry about it, whatever. And we wish the best to Holly Rowe, just buried her mother.

22:10um uh this week uh holly's been on this podcast many times i know her for a long time i have a an immense amount of respect for her but austin here's the the one sort of piece of this i want to discuss um the networks whether it's fox cbs espn disney etc they pay a ton of money for college football rights and one of the parts of this agreement until it's not is that you as a coach do halftime and postgame. And I get, like, sometimes, like, delays happen, and it sucks. And, like, these guys have a lot of high pressure on them, understandable, all that stuff. But I find it very hard, at least from my perspective, to have any sympathy for Steve Sarkeesian for having to wait a little bit, like, after a game, if ESPN is late to come down here.

23:02Like, that, to me, is, like, part of the cost of your job. And you are being paid an insane amount of money because of these massive TV rights. Now, I definitely am taking it sort of from the broadcast journalist side. Like, I get it. But he's not the only person who's, you know, sort of sometimes been annoyed at having to wait or something like that. But that's where I weigh in. And Sarkeesian did in a press conference afterwards at Texas sort of say, you know, I could have handled it better. And full props to him for doing that. Same to Arch Manning. but like i know it's easy for me austin to say this from you know my little quiet perch here in toronto but like to me like if you're going to be a big-time college football coach and you want big-time college football money like that's part of the deal man you got to talk to the rights holder and answer their questions whether their questions are great or not that that's part of the responsibility that's how i look at it how do you see it austin it's 2026 and i can't believe we're still having this conversation it is part of the job if you are a big time coach i don't care what sports you're in this is the nature of being part of the sports media ecosystem it's part of being a big-time college football coach he handled it incredibly inappropriately and yes he apologized i'm not going to give him too much credit for that because sark isn't new to this he's been doing this for a long time he's been a head coach in a lot of places in big-time programs and been on national tv so he should have handled it differently uh from from the get-go so uh not really giving him a lot of sympathy but he did apologize and i don't want to conflate sark with with Arch Manning.

24:32That was a kid. He said something dumb and yes, he apologized. That's a kid and a grown man who's been doing this for a while. So yeah, inappropriate. Yeah. John Lewis, to me again, like I'm, you know, I don't want to, I don't want to reissue what I just said, but like whether it's Sarkeesian or Lane Kiffin or Sean McVay or the name, any NHL coach, like This is part of their job. This is why you're making this money is from these television rights holders. So I have very little patience for any coach who complains about this because you're not working in the minds, man. You're just waiting a couple seconds for a broadcaster to ask you a question.

25:18Yeah, I mean, obviously, it's always open season on the media, right? and especially, you know, we can do some obvious aspects that make it a little bit worse for people like Holly, right? I will say this, you know, I don't really care about Sarkeesian or Arch Manning or any of that. I just want to say I got to give Holly Rowe a lot of credit for handling it the way that she handled it because especially I didn't even know she had a death in the family this week, which is such a statement about her professionalism. Somebody who was battling cancer and showing up at assignment after assignment after assignment.

25:52And, you know, we can talk about the lack of professionalism from the coach. I'm going to talk about the professionalism of the reporter who has always maintained her professionalism despite people constantly taking shots. You can go all the way back to Ron Franklin, the amount of unprofessional stuff she's had to deal with, the amount of struggle she's dealt with in her life and still managing to not be the story. At least she's not trying to be the story. Other people try to make her the story. She's not trying to be the story. So I give her a lot of credit for that. That's well said, John. Chad, let me end this with you.

26:27One of the things that I'm sure the three of us have had to bang our head against the wall on is there's a lot of people out there who have the old tired trope, sideline reporters don't do anything. They're just attractive women there for eye candy purposes. All three of us have done embeds, or if you guys haven't done embeds, then you've talked to enough producers over the years to know that there's so much stuff that the sideline reporter provides the booth where the sideline reporter does not get any credit for that on air. But the people in the booth use it because you're part of the team, and they're the eyes on the field, and it's very important to have eyes on the field.

27:07In some ways, Chad,

27:13I can't believe in 2026, old trope still exists, that the sideline reporter does nothing. But man, anytime I'm on social media, anytime something happens with a sideline reporter, I still see it to this day. It's unbelievable. Yeah, I mean, my big takeaway from this is just Holly Roe, she deserves better, which is along the same lines of what John said. But she's got Sarkeesian acting like a jackass, which is just kind of how college football is almost who a man are nowadays for some reason. The Arch Manning thing, I mean, I don't know how he found that funny beyond it being AI crap. But I guess kids like that these days.

27:58And she also, to your point, Richard, is one of the people who's really good at this job. She's better than, I'd say, probably three quarters of sideline reporters, maybe more than out relevant things that not only, like you said, she's bringing to the air, but she's constantly in communication with the booth to tell them this is happening, that's happening, this guy's in, all that stuff. She's as good as it gets at that job in a lot of different ways, and it's just a bummer to see her end up getting dragged into this culture war stuff, and she just deserved way better than what she got here. Yeah.

28:39And again, like I hate to say like this is not this is us white knighting. It is such a fucking stupid term anyway. Like I'm just telling you, you can believe it or not. But like having written about this stuff for more than 20 years, there's a lot of work that the sideline reporter position does that you as a person watching on air never see. And this is the reason why these places still have that position. So anyway, you know, speech, speech over. All right. Last couple here. Also, let me go to you. One thing that really, man, maybe I shouldn't have been surprised about this, but I have to say when I saw the number, I was and that's the Manning cast.

29:20I don't know if it was you, Austin or Marshand or John Lewis, but somebody put out whatever the number was. And it was like a shade over 700 ,000. And again, if you're getting$700 ,000 on first take slot, you're the king. But once upon a time, the Manning cast, you can correct me if I'm wrong, Austin, was drawing$1.5 million,$1.6 million. So when I saw that number, I got to be honest. I was like, wow, that's much lower than I expected. And I wanted to ask the three of you, does it mean anything? Is it just a week one thing or does it mean something bigger here in terms of that alternate telecast?

29:57I think it means a little bit. And I got to give credit to Marchand. He was the first to put that number out there. But it got me thinking. And then, you know, I wrote about an SPJ, what each of these week one audiences have done for the Manning cast, because especially these last couple of years, and I talked to Omaha Productions about this, they've taken a lot of effort to put together that little mini movie, whether it was the auditions or the Manning musical. And this year was the Manning heist. You know, they're putting together a whole 16 minute movies to try to promote this first Manning cast going on and the schedule they got going on.

30:27And to only get 705, that's the lowest week one Manning cast audience yet for E2. And I think it does say it's something to pay attention to. This is the first one of these week one Manning casts to draw under 800 ,000 viewers. I mean, last year, even for a Vikings Bears game, it was 838 ,000. You figure with Chiefs involved in particular, it would have been a little higher. John, one of the things that I've read from some people is that the reason that the Manning cast maybe – the reason that maybe they've hemorrhaged some viewers is that it became too guest-centric, less about Peyton and Eli's thoughts, which was kind of the revolutionary thing at the time, and more about let's just bring famous people on to talk.

31:16By the way, I don't know if that's the reason or not, but that's a thesis out there. What are your thoughts on that? I think it makes sense. I mean, they do the little Saturday Night Live takeoff when they do the little guest announcements with the, I guess, the board where they put the guest names on, you know, kind of losing sight of what the whole point was. The guests are Peyton and Eli. They are the people folks are tuning in to watch. But also the whole concept of the alt cast is interesting to me. I know that the McAfee one during the NBA finals got a seven-figure audience, even though the McAfee guys really aren't necessarily associated with the NBA, and you wouldn't necessarily think of them as being in the NBA demo.

32:04But it still did a pretty sizable audience. but as a general rule i do find that maybe there's starting to be a little bloom coming off the rose for these i mean people want to watch the game now i understand that the idea to an extent is the watch along right that's a big thing on social media where people will watch other people watching things you see people at john boy doing it for baseball or whatever i guess i think barstool probably doesn't but for the most part people do want to watch the game and when you hire joe Buck and Troy Aikman. Now you have created, okay, these are arguably, you could make an argument that they're the best announcers, the best pairing since Madden and Summerall.

32:48You could argue that. And so you've now set the table with a much higher quality main broadcast than you had when the Manning cast started. When the Manning cast started, it was still, with all due respect to Levy, Greasy, and Riddick, it was still Levy, Greasy, and Riddick. And so that is something that the Mannings can draw attention away from. Also, very important aspect with the Manning cast, they have never done that well in weeks where the game is on ABC. Okay, good point. And there's been so many more games on ABC the last few years. When the Manning cast first started, it was like maybe one or two games a season on ABC.

33:30Now it's upwards of 10, right? So I think that's been a big factor, too. When the Manning cast started, these were cable-exclusive games for the most part that featured a broadcast team that really wasn't necessarily the most attractive. It was easier, I think, for the Manning cast to make a dent then. Chad, the last thing I want to bring up on this with you is, and John just brought up what I think was pretty interesting, made a lot of interesting points there, but one thing that struck me is, do you think that because now there's so many independent creators who kind of do the same thing you know you like go watch like the athletics nfl live show right go watch podcast the ringers nfl live show whatever you know what i mean like there's so many people who are sort of doing like the watch along stuff now or even like the post game stuff that i wonder if in some ways where the mannings like once felt revolutionary you really have that many more choices to sort of have a similar experience.

34:30It's not the same experience because they're the rights holder, but you know what I'm saying? A similar experience. And I wonder if that has hurt them at all. Maybe it doesn't, but that did occur to me. Yeah. I'm curious what the viewership numbers look like on some of those things. I don't think, yeah, I don't think they're gigantic depending on the outlet, but they - No, I don't either. Good branding. If nothing else, it's a good branding exercise for all of these places. Yeah, I don't think it really makes much of a dent in what ABC, ESPN or the Mannings have going on. I tend to agree with what seems to be one of the close to the consensus on why those numbers have dropped, which is they've become more of a variety show in a way than what's really appealing about it, at least to me, which is Peyton and Eli freaking out about bad play, bad football.

35:22There was one the other night where Peyton just started going, oh, no, no, no, when Nick's, I think he ended up throwing an interception on the play. But Peyton's reactions to things in real time and their sense of humor and the way they needle each other were the real appeal of this when it started and the magnitude of who those two are in the context of football history. I think they've gotten a little bit too far away from that but I still think I don't believe there's anything that really comes close to this in terms of an all cast or anything like that it's still good yeah and there's no doubt that it's not going anywhere ESPN is going to obviously those two are going to have obviously a very significant run up to the Super Bowl and Super Bowl presence ESPN wants to be in the business with Peyton Manning and Eli Manning and Omaha So nothing's going to change on that.

36:19But that was interesting to me. And again, you know what? Three weeks from now, if they draw like 1.4 million, well, they're sort of right back to where they were. But something to watch, though. I don't think that's going to happen. I don't think it's going to get back. I tend to agree with you, Austin. I do think that the trend has been what it is. So now we're sort of talking about what is the ceiling. I would say, though, if we want to continue on this, Austin, even if the numbers continue to go down, there's still value for ESPN to put that on ESPN too, right? Yeah. Absolute value there. It's still a decent number, especially for an alt cast.

36:52Exactly. But to John's point, the last four week one Monday Night Football games have all had an ABC simulcast. And as recently as 2023, that was a Bills-Jets game. That Manning cast was 1.5 million viewers. So in that short time frame, you've lost half of the audience for week one Manningcast. All right, last one. This is just a fun one, and it really falls into John and Austin's bailiwick, as a fancy word says. John Lewis, I can't tell you how much I love when I start now seeing ESPN's college football press releases for game day. Not only will they tell us what game day did for the full show and the final hour, but they take that little dig on Fox where they say we beat the competition by 200%, 147%.

37:43That reminds me of the old days when Fox and ESPN used to really go at it, like the two PR departments in the Rudy Martzki days. Shout out to Lou D 'Amelio and Dan Bell, wherever you guys are if you're listening. But, John, I don't know. I know you love this stuff. I know Austin collects this stuff too. You've definitely noticed that, right? How great is that that ESPN's just taken the stick to a big noon kickoff because they know they have the big viewership number. Well, I mean, this has happened, as you mentioned before, way back. But, I mean, I think this particular iteration of it, I know that they were mentioning the competition, maybe.

38:18Right. The competition. Why don't you say it? What is with the euphemism, the competition? But you see it everywhere. And, you know, usually Fox is involved. I think Fox is – I see Fox as having made the choice to be more combative the past few years than they were the previous decade plus. and I think the other networks are just kind of responding in kind. So to me, you know, look, Game Day obviously is, Big Noon made a really strong push there for a little bit. And, you know, say what you will about McAfee, and many people will, and say what you will about the way Game Day has transformed, Offal announcing a really interesting piece on that last week.

39:01But the fact of the matter is, all of those things, whatever they've done to game day, they have kind of killed Big Noon. All those changes that ESPN made to transform game day in Pat McAfee's image ended mad TV, right? SNL has now ended mad TV. For the moment, yes. For the moment. Right, for the moment. Mad TV might still be on, but they're in London this week, and I'm not sure if anyone even is aware of that, right? So, look, game day, whatever game day had to do to itself to make this happen, and certainly you can make an argument that they've changed in some pretty interesting ways. They did what they had to do to win that head-to-head, and they're dominating now in a way that I would not have seen coming two or three years ago.

39:54Well, I will say, Austin, at least on the big noon kickoff, if Michigan and Ohio State are ever playing a game of meaning later in the year, that they're going to have a big number for that. So some of it is sort of about the teams. Two, and John makes a good point. I always think now of Flora Kelly and Mike Mulvihull. Flora's at ESPN. Mike's at Fox. They're like the research gurus and sort of geniuses behind the current. They're like, if you watch Game of Thrones, they're like Lord Varys, basically, Austin. They're pushing all that out to their PR department. But I do, I kind of like it. I like when the networks needle each other.

40:34I mean, they're all in business together sometimes anyway. So, you know, it's not like this is not pure hatred. But I have noticed ESPN doing that because they know they have a big advantage. Not right now with college game day. And I love it. I imagine you like it, too. I love it. I love seeing it on the college side. And you're going to see Fox come right back at them when they have the bigger game, when they have an Ohio State game that does incredibly well. So when Ohio State-Michigan sets whatever the regular season top game. They did it with the – I didn't mean to interrupt you. It was just because I was just thinking now.

41:07Like whenever they have the big World Cup numbers, they love to mention that they were just crushing the old ESPN World Cup too. Nothing new. Everyone's doing that. And Fox and CBS, they go at it in terms of the national window. And whoever's leading the national window, they go at it with NBC in terms of which had the better window in terms of football for the season. So, yeah, seeing these behind-the-scenes battles, it's part of the job. And a lot of these communications executives are doing a great job at it, and I love hearing from all of you out there. Chad, I'll finish up with you. By the way, you can't root for either of these if you were a Game of Thrones fan.

41:40It's like the Lannisters and the Greyjoys. There's no good families here. So you can't really root for anybody. That said, I don't know. I don't know if you're as into it as Austin and Jon are because they're viewership nerds. But it is fun to get those press releases these days. Yeah, I was actually looking back. I was looking back on last year and they were doing the more than the competition thing at the end of the year when they did their whole big wrap up last year. They noted that they had more than 2.5 times the minutes watched linearly than their competition, which is just it's petty, but I love it.

42:22And that's great for all of us, right, if they end up getting the sharp objects out on each other verbally in their press releases. Well, no competition here between myself, Austin Karp, John Lewis, and Chad Finn. We're all in the lot together. And, yeah, I believe our employers are paying us slightly less than Joe Buck money, at least at the moment. All right. My thanks to John Lewis at Sports Media Watch. Catch all of his – he has a podcast as well, which I highly recommend. They've been getting some amazing guests, very, very well-known people. Mike Tirico. Mike Tirico, speaking of very well-known, and obviously one of the most well-known broadcasters, the latest guest for them.

43:05So check that out. And obviously the guys from Sports Media Watch will be back on the roundtable over the next couple weeks at some point. Austin Karp, of course, is at Sports Business Journal. Check all his work out. He also has a podcast, which I was happy to be on this week. So check him out. He and Josh Carpenter will do a very sort of similar thing that we do here where they sort of go over whatever the big news of the day. Chad Finn is at the Boston Globe. Chad, I think as of now you don't have a podcast. You have had podcasts in the past, but you are podcast empty at the moment. Is that correct?

43:39I have never been specific podcasts, But I did some recruiting for the one that we used to have for the whole sports department when you came on, Rich. All right. Well, there you go. Something to look forward to in the future. All right, John, Chad and Austin, thank you, fellas. But also, please stick around as we close up shop here. If you like these kind of conversations, head to the archives. There's plenty of roundtables for you to listen to. Last couple of guests, though, Damian Woody, speaking of, you know, in Chad's country, former Patriot, came on this podcast to talk about his ESPN tenure, how that ended and what he's doing now with Trey Wingo and the OG football show.

44:16Highly recommend that. Susie Colbert was on this podcast September 10th. Obviously, that got a crazy amount of pickup where she was gracious enough to come on. And she hadn't talked in many years and told me her story about ESPN and what she is now doing for Scripps Sports Network. network if you're into professional wrestling Maxwell Jacob Friedman better known as MJF on the art of doing media as a pro wrestler that was August 27th and then the rest are a lot of roundtables with these three knuckleheads John's guys and Jimmy Trena so check all of that out and if you like it please leave us a review and some stars always appreciate it want to thank James Jackson for all his hard work on this podcast thank you to everybody for their at Odyssey for their support.

44:59And most of all, thank you for listening. We'll see you soon on the Sports Media Podcast.

45:28From the team with over 35 ,000 five-star reviews. For all your heating, plumbing, and electrical needs, you know who to call. For all the right reasons, call 866-4-SEASONS.