Roundtable: What is Tony Romo's future in broadcasting and The Athletic releases its Diana Russini investigation.

0:09Welcome to the Sports Media Podcast. I'm your host Richard Deitsch. My producer is James Jackson. This is our usual Saturday roundtable and man, there is a lot to talk about. this week. I have brought back the panel that I always enjoy talking to. John Lewis is founder of Sports Media Watch, Derek Futterman, part of Sports Media Watch, Armand Brody, part of Sports Media Watch. Follow all these guys on social media, as well as check out Sports Media Watch. They're, again, sort of the Bible when it comes to viewership and how viewership intersects with sports media and they've been churning out some great stuff fellas welcome thanks for having us it um holy shit there's just so much to talk about i don't even know where to start quite frankly um i think before we get into you know pablo torre or diana russini i'll i want to start with tony romo um and this is something i talked about with train on the last podcast but that was just me and him.

1:09So I wanted to sort of get some more voices into this just to get a little bit more perspective from how other people are thinking. I think everybody here saw Tony Romo's plea deal and statement about his future. CBS continues to decline comment. What obviously was interesting about Romo's statement was that he specifically said, I'd look forward to coming back to CBS or look forward to returning my career at CBS. You know, it's sort of a big statement there. CBS obviously has not indicated as of yet. If Tony's coming back, when Tony might come back, if Tony does come back, what team he would be on.

1:45So there's a lot of factors at play, not to mention the fact that obviously there's a massive contract when it comes to all this and, you know, legalities and other things. All right, so John Lewis, let me sort of go broad with you. How did you sort of, you know, how did you analyze what Romo had to say? And if I was going to ask you for a, his broadcast future in 2026, where do you sit at the moment? Well, he's got a brighter future in broadcasting than Mark Sanchez does, right? And, you know, I do think, honestly, we need to put into perspective what Romo did is inexcusable, but, you know, we're not at the your career can't continue portion of the program.

2:25The fact is that it's worse than I think a lot of people thought. Twice the legal limit is what I read. Am I correct? Twice the legal limit? Yeah, I'd have to double check that. Do either of you guys know off the top of Wisconsin law, if that was correct? You can keep talking, John. I'll double check this. Yeah, I mean, to me, this was if you watch the video, it wasn't 100 percent clear that he was even drunk from the snippets that I saw. And so he seemed, you know, relatively good humored, relatively calm, compliant. So the fact that, you know, this was really this actually was really driving drunk, not just maybe driving buzz, not that that's excusable and having the misfortune of being pulled over.

3:13But he was drunk, right? Yeah, just so we have it. So blood alcohol content level, nearly twice the legal limit when he was arrested in July. So that makes it worse. That makes it worse than it was at the start. And already at the start, it was a circumstance where his position was imperiled. So I think his position is more imperiled than it was at the start. I think, again, it's not this guy can never work again. You know, I've mentioned this before on this podcast. jalen rose went to you know he was he was incarcerated for his gui and then went right back to espn charles barkley was incarcerated in those ridiculous tent cities that joe arpaio was doing uh and he came back to tnt after a bit of a break so i don't think it has to be the end of his career you had mentioned what team he's going to be on be crazy for cbs to bring tony romo back and he's not on the lead team they just can't do that because they've established him with nance now granted Romo with Ian Eagle could you know with all due respect to Jim Nance Ian is you know as Armand wrote in a recent article Ian is the ultimate partner right what was it that they used to call Steven Jackson the ultimate teammate in San Antonio do you remember that I do that's Ian Eagle in broadcasting he is the ultimate teammate and if we're talking just about Tony Romo's quality of work, maybe being on that B team with Ayan could revitalize him.

4:41But ultimately, I find it really hard to believe because then the other thing too, you put Romo on any other team than the lead team, it is conspicuously and obviously to the viewer, a punishment. Okay, Armand, let me go to you. I know you wrote about this. So when I spoke to Trena earlier this week, Trena has the exact opposite take of John. Trena believes that there's no way CBS would pull J.J. Watt once they placed J.J. Watt in the number one spot. He believed that they would try to make the Nance Watt team work as best as possible. And if there was an avenue for Tony to come back, then like John, he suggested an Ian Eagle Tony Romo team could be really, really interesting.

5:21But his thought was, and again, we don't know, just sort of saying what someone else thought. Trina was like, there's no way they're going to yank around J.J. Watt once he's done a couple of games. For a perspective for you and Derek, Armand, both Jimmy and I did agree that we did think something like a week four or week five would be the demarcation line because at a certain stage of the NFL season, you have to make a decision here. You're not going to bring Romo back week 12 or something like that. It doesn't make any sense. So both of us thought you're dealing with a couple of weeks at the beginning of the year and then either he comes back or he doesn't come back.

5:58So that sort of was Trainor's perspective off what John said. How do you see it, Armand? So it's been a long time, about 36 years, but I'm thinking about when Pat Summerall had all of his struggles with alcohol and was eventually hospitalized. And if I recall, CBS placed him on leave. They were committed to him at that time. Like I said, this is many, many years ago. But there was a commitment from CBS to stay with Summerall, even as he worked through all of his issues, which have been well documented. The difference here is that Summerall's quality of work was held in higher regard then than Rommel's work is now.

6:45And so I do think I sensed that there was a certain level of desperation. And maybe that's not even the right word, but an understanding of the seriousness of where his career is at CBS. I sensed that from Rommel's statement. And I do think at some point, even before the halfway mark of the season, we're going to have to know, is this Nance Watt booth? Is this your booth? I don't see this taking a very long time. I don't see this being a thing of, well, even if it takes us into November or December, we're going to hold out for Romo as long as we need to. I don't see it that way. I think that CBS is weighing every possibility.

7:32And I have to also add that there's still this Greg Olson contract situation that's hanging out there. And his contract is up at the end of this season. So do you really want to put Romo in? And now, of course, I'm stretching this way out, that pass down the line. But do you really want to put Romo back in that spot with the possibility of Greg Olson being available and becoming the guy you actually put in the lead booth next year? It's interesting. I do know in terms of Olson, because it's not out yet, but it will be out, a very big piece for SBJ on Fox NFL. Olsen has contractual things in his contract where if he got offered a number one job before the season started, he would have the option to take it.

8:16Now that the season essentially has started, it hasn't started as we're taping this, but it's pretty close. Olsen is locked into Fox, generally speaking, for the year. But you are correct, Armand. Next year could be very, very fascinating with the potential of openings for Amazon, right? Herbstreit's contract's up. I think likelihood is Al's last year as well. And then, you know, if something happens with Romo, CBS would have a decision like his water number one guy or do we want to replace Watt with a number one candidate? And there'd be no better number one candidate out there than Greg Olson.

8:48Absolutely. OK, Derek, you've heard my take and John's take and Armand's take. I gave you train his take. How do you see it? CBS, from a business perspective right now, moving towards a merger where there's going to be synergies between Paramount and Warner Brothers Discovery that probably will result in the loss of human jobs. I know they say differently, but just from experience, these things generally will result in layoffs in that sense. I mean, the report is he's got reportedly 72 million remaining over four years. From a business perspective, CBS needs to get out of this Rommel contract, and this is a potential opening to do it.

9:23I mean, just because you write in your statement that, you know, the expectation of returning to CBS, the fact that the network has not put out a public comment after Romo, I think was, you know, candid in his statement, took accountability and, you know, kind of made a commitment to be better going down the road. I think the no comment kind of tells you they're thinking about the future quite seriously. Don't have an answer right now. I think Nance and Watt is probably the ideal pairing. I mean, you have to consider that CBS has a Super Bowl at the end of next season. And if you're putting together a new lead booth with that short of a run-up, they've got to get comfortable.

9:59I mean, they'll call a championship game this year before the Super Bowl. So that gives them some experience there. But the fact is that just from a business perspective, the Romo contract is looking worse by the day, and at least what it's been reported to be. And we'll see what goes on in the future. I think the fact that Greg Olson is available, I mean, my bet would be Olson takes that Amazon job and they'll probably bring on a new play by play voice as well. If Al Michaels were to retire a new pairing completely. But these are all things that are way down the road to be determined. But for now, I mean, you know, if Romo is going to come back, it probably has to be before the halfway point of the season.

10:38my thinking would be, and this is not based on any inside knowledge, just my own speculation, that it would have to be before the halfway point for it to really make sense to go forward to bring back Nance and Romo as a pairing for the year. Real quick, any of you three can answer this. Do you agree with Marchand that Romo has taken, and Brian Curtis as well, by the way, significant steps back, or do you feel like that's overblown and he is still in a voice in your opinion? No, he's - Go ahead, Derek. Yeah, he's taken steps back. I think the game, I always point back to the call of when the Chiefs won the Super Bowl in overtime.

11:12I believe it was in Las Vegas and Romo stepped all over Nance. I mean, at the beginning, it was interesting. He would predict the plays. Everyone was really interested. But now I think maybe there's a faction of fans out there in a loud group that's more agitated with Romo, more tired with his analysis than really fascinated or enthralled by it. John or Armand, you got a quick one on that? but i'll defer to armand of course who breaks down all the announcer uh uh strategy and and performance for smw but um i will say i've got a thought let me let armand uh weigh in and then i've got a thought so it's part regression but it's also part i don't know if rumbo ever actually nailed the mechanics of being an analyst i was speaking with uh somebody in the business who told me the key to being a really good analyst is to not have to be spectacular.

12:08And I think Romo became so much a spectacle that I think he sort of sidestepped some of the mechanics that make the rhythm and the back and forth of play-by-play and analysis solid. I think Romo was trying too hard to be a spectacle in the booth that he didn't actually find that sweet spot of actually what makes an analyst solid. Things like getting out of the way before the ball is snapped, being done with your commentary close to the time that the replay wipe has moved off the screen and we're back looking now at the huddle being broken. Those kinds of mechanical things, I don't think Rommel ever really mastered them.

12:47And I also think he got so much, he got a lot of pleasure out of leaning into a lot of talk about big picture stuff that I feel like he failed to capitalize on opportunities to break down what was right in front of him. So I think he traded a lot of strategy talk for big picture talk when we needed actually some of those more intricate breakdowns of the game. Interesting. John? You know, I was thinking to myself that the best booth arguably in the NFL and a booth that you could argue rivals Summerall and Madden, and maybe that's crazy, is Buck and Aikman. They agree. They're the best. They're there.

13:24I don't even think it's close. They're the best booth right now in the NFL. And ESPN every week says, you don't have to watch Buck and Aikman. You can watch the Mannings. You can go watch McAfee now this year. Like they have alt casts for the best booth in football. They have other options. And obviously that's not tenable financially when you're doing six regional games every week. But I do find it fascinating that if you're CBS, you have to commit to Romo or to Watt. I mean, there are moments in history, sports broadcasting history, where networks have not committed to a single lead booth. And they have had a rotation.

14:07I mean, the example I always go back to, and frankly, it's kind of crazy. I'm amazed they ever did it. But when ABC on the BCS, one year it was Keith Jackson and Dan Fouts, the next year it was Brad Nessler. The year after that, it was Brett Musburger. They had, and I'm talking about on national title games, they had a rotation of lead booths at ABC for college football. And when you have a play-by-play voice as good as Zion Eagle, who is, you know, probably better than Jim Nance on football, let's be real. You have Nance, who obviously is esteemed and highly respected. You could argue for a Kevin Harlan as well.

14:47I mean, you've got a pretty deep bench to play by play. Let's say, as has been suggested, that maybe Greg Olson finds his way to CBS. You have Olson, you have Watt, you have Romo. to me, maybe I don't commit to a single lead booth and I let the season play out and see which team emerges as the one that is deserving of that honor. Now, that might not be tenable in the NFL, but to me, that might be a solution to some of this. This is not going to happen, I imagine, just because of the contracts, but let me throw something crazy out for you. Let's say it all, CBS doesn't want Romo, that blows up.

15:25Fox somehow picks him up. Brady, Romo, Breeze, your top three analysts for Fox. Serious quarterbacks from a certain era. And Olsen to be number four? No, Olsen in my crazy scenario there is probably at Amazon or elsewhere. Drink up, baby. Fantasy Football Happy Hour is here to get you wins and have some laughs. Matthew Berry here and my podcast, Fantasy Football Happy Hour, has the sleepers, bust, and start-sit advice you need to win your league. We're diving into the tape. We're crunching the numbers to bring you sleepers, bust weekly start-sit advice. Whether you're defending a title or desperately avoiding last place, I've got you covered every single weekday.

16:08The bar is open. It's Fantasy Football Happy Hour with Matthew Berry wherever you get your podcasts. All right. I appreciate that. Let's move on. There was, you know, one of the big stories, obviously, of the sports week, perhaps the biggest was the penalties that the Clippers incurred. A number of people have sort of put out like, especially on Twitter, like what Kawhi Leonard, like ultimately cost the Clippers between like draft picks and players and, and stuff like that, you know, even goes back to Shea Gilgis-Alexander because of it just it's an amazing amount of assets. that the thirst for Kawhi cost LA.

16:55I would argue that the Raptors winning the 2019 title may be the most significant moment in LA Clippers history, right? Because it basically prompted everything that went down from there. All of this is my intro to say that Pablo Torre comes out looking phenomenal on this. His work holds up. Obviously, the NBA imposed the penalties that they did. They found his reporting to be accurate, and in their own investigation, which I thought was very, very good, I read that report, they put the hammer down to Steve Ballmer and company. the this um and congrats to pablo torri and i would say specific and his team as well it's important to sort of know that's just pablo sort of you know mike wallasing everybody like from the old school 60 minutes he's got a big team and one of the things i really admire and appreciate whether it's pablo or uh peter king who i worked with or bill simmons and there's many others i'm a big really big admirer of people who take their sports media fame and then get jobs for others, create something where people actually get real work, real salaries.

18:05And Pablo has done that. So all of this brings up, and I'll start with you here, Derek. Awful announcing, sort of Matt Yoder wrote a pretty thoughtful piece, I thought, that the title of this was, the chasm between journalism and insiderdom has never been wider. While insiderdom becomes a bridge for insulating the establishment, journalism seeks to hold it accountable. And he writes this piece sort of off like the Clippers penalties and Pablo's reporting. And he's sort of saying that like his thesis was to the effect of like what Pablo does is very different than what like, you know, an Adam Schefter does.

18:41And if you actually want this kind of reporting, you have to pay for it and support it. And I think like ideally, that's true. What I say to you, though, Derek, is that the reality is, and I hate to sort of be a cynic or offer a depressing thought, the public has shown that they may want more debate or opinion or bluster or conflict more than what Pablo Torre and others do. And so while I obviously fundamentally agree with Matt Yoder wrote, and I thought it was a good piece, at the end of the day, I always think to myself, it's ultimately the consumer who's going to decide all this. And by and large, more consumers, at least at this moment, are opting more for the other stuff, or in many times the slop, than the quality that generally speaking costs money.

19:30Because journalism costs money, and it's generally speaking not very profitable. So again, I just wanted to, you can go anywhere you want with this on Pablo's reporting or what a lot of this became, which was sort of this conversation between like sports journalism and the ecosystem that we find ourselves in where Lao, generally speaking, or bro is sort of being far more rewarded financially than anything else. ESPN is all about serving sports fans. So if sports fans want the latter, they want the debate, if they want the yelling, that is at this point is proving that's the direction they're going right now.

20:09I mean, the consensus on social media towards ESPN is that the network decided to invest in Pat McAfee and not in Pablo Torre. Pablo Torre is a superstar in this business. And this report won him and his team a Pulitzer Prize. I suspect that they will have more big reports in the future. Again, not based on my own insider knowledge or anything like that, but I suspect that this is not going to be a one-off for him. There will be many more of these down the road. He's had other ones down the road. I think today they released a report on Mark Walter, Magic Johnson, and the Dodgers. So, like, this is a – I mean, what Metal Ark Media is doing with Pablo Torre finds out is kind of this news magazine-style journalism that we have not seen in a while.

20:51You know, we saw the end of shows like Real Sports. E60 is really is not what it once was. Outside the lines, we don't see too much anymore at all. Around the Horns over, we just had Tony Reilly on our podcast. Around the Horns ended on ESPN. You know, journalists aren't getting the platform as much as insiders. Now, you know, insiders, great. You know, you're first to something. You get the engagement. You get people to, you know, read your stuff, more traffic towards your network. But in the end, the teams are just going to announce most of this anyway a little bit later. So and I think, you know, as as Matt cited in the awful announcing piece, which I think was a really good dissertation of the situation, kind of, you know, Adrian Wojnarowski kind of had this enlightening moment towards, you know, his work and the value and all that.

21:33And I don't know. I mean, insiderdom is important. It's become it's become a facet of this field. It's become a facet of just sports media in general. But there is a delineation between that and journalism. I mean, not every insider report is even accompanied with an article. It's usually just citing a source or citing an agent or citing someone close to the situation. So, yeah, I mean, the article really broke it down well. And again, congratulations to Pablo and his team on this one. And, you know, we'll see where it goes from here because, you know, based on what's been said, there could be more to come from this.

22:06But it's a significant penalty. Five first-round picks, Ballmer being banned from the arena for a year, president of business operations, president basketball operations getting a year and six months respectively uh this is one of the largest penalties if not the largest penalty levied in sports history so uh it's it's amazing to see what independent journalism can do and have the real world implication that it does well said um i will say john just to like defend the the insider position there are times where insiders absolutely do journalism it's it's not it's not a it's not an entire uh black and white thing.

22:40Now, I'm with Derek on the fact that if you're just saying Agent X signed Player Y, great job by Agent A. A lot of that, obviously, is just quid pro quo and you're sort of getting the break. But listen, Woj did some really good journalism. In addition to, obviously, breaking stories. There's been time Shams has done good journalism. Schefter has done good journalism. Again, I'm with Derek. There's a delineation between what Katie Strang does and what all these guys do. But I'm just not, I'll go back to you, Derek. It's just not totally black or white. But where, Derek, I know me and you are in sync on this is at least in the last five to eight years, news organizations, particularly ESPN, have rewarded the insider with riches far exceeding anything their equivalents in quote unquote journalism can do.

23:34So the message to the market, at least in terms of for younger people has been come here and be the next Shams, come here and be the next Woj, come here and be the next Schefter, be the next Rappaport. And you too may make$8 million a year and have a CAA agent. That is true. Insiders are incredibly valuable. I mean, the fact is like during a pregame show on television, I think of Adam Schefter on Sunday NFL countdown. You can get those real time injury updates and it's exciting. It's a spectacle. You can watch that, but I don't know. And John, I'll throw this. I guess I would throw this to you, John, because I think you would be the person to ask on this.

24:07Is there really like a hybrid delineation or a way to kind of define it, a hybrid? Because insiders do journalism. Journalists can be insiders. But the trend line is that insiders will be more about breaking news. Journalists will be more about deep stories that hold people to account. I don't know if there's a middle or if we've defined an exact middle between those two extremes just yet. Yeah, I mean, the holding people to account is a great part of that because you're not going to find many sports insiders today doing that, where you will find the Pablo Torres and Katie Strangs and people who are doing that kind of work.

24:44They're really about holding, essentially holding power to account. And that is the real delineation. And, you know, by and large, again, I hate to stereotype all, but by and large, the football insiders are not holding the NFL to account. Like if that's going to happen, that's going to come from outside the football insiders. Maybe they hold the players sometimes to account, but very rarely the owners and very rarely the commissioner. Go ahead, John. well one i'll start with uh do you remember the name of the of the of the journalist who broke the jerry sandusky story at penn state i mean my brain is i actually don't because my brain and i'm usually very good at this stuff but no it's not coming to me you want to she want to oh wait sarah ganim there you go yeah there we go sarah ganim yeah yeah from uh by the way that's terrible for me because she's probably been on my podcast twice um and broke it for you know was a very young journalist in her 20s and broke it for a small pennsylvania paper was not a sports writer by the way was a news side reporter my brain was telling me molly carom so ganim carom sarah sarah ganim who then went to cnn i don't know if she's still there but that's that that's her but yeah yeah g g is sir hold on one second because now now i'm losing my mind sarah sarah Ganim, G-A-N-I-M.

26:08There you go. Pulitzer Prize, by the way, for local reporting on that story. Yeah. So long story short, that kind of says it all, right? So you don't become a superstar with these stories that are meaningful and become important and have long staying power and massive consequences. You become a superstar by saying, Luka Doncic has been traded from the Dallas Mavericks to the Los Angeles. Excuse me. No, that actually did happen. I thought I was getting that wrong. Luka Doncic has been traded from the Dallas Mavericks. It's still hard to believe to this day, John. It did happen. Yes. That's how you become a superstar in this business.

26:40I mean, I don't know what to say about it. Look, the fact is, the big thing about this story to me is you can say a lot of things about Shams. You can't really say them about Don Bandata and Baxter Holmes. It was Don Bandata and Baxter Holmes and Ramona Shelburne who got evidently snookered by the Clippers for their piece on ESPN. It wasn't Shams. It wasn't an insider. It was a journalist and the leading journalist at ESPN, along with Seth Rickersham for the past 15 to 20 years. So, you know, that was journalism, too. That wasn't. Now, maybe it was a combination of journalism and insiderdom, because I think we all know anyone who has followed the NBA.

27:20The Clippers obviously have good relationships with people in the media. They never done anything. The moment they got Kawhi Leonard. Oh, the Clippers do things right. Oh, man. And unlike the Lakers, the Clippers do everything right. They don't have anything to show for anything. And they have this perception helped along by, I would argue, allies in the media that they are like the San Antonio Spurs. And so I think that probably played a role in what ended up happening here. I'm not necessarily saying that saying that about Don Van Nadeau. But I do think that there are people at ESPN who seem to have pretty close relationships with the Clippers.

28:00And that might have been a factor in something like that. And to me, you know, one thing about Pablo Torre is that he, I would imagine, doesn't really have that kind of relationship in the sports business. Doesn't work at ESPN, is not dependent on anybody. And those kinds of relationships that maybe are adjacent to insiderdom, but also can be used by journalists in reporting real stories, Those kinds of relationships might influence something like that erroneous report on ESPN. It could. I mean, Pablo has those with media. But I would say at least, you know, to and then that is a friend of mine.

28:39So, you know, like people in the audience should sort of transparently know that, like he's done enough great stuff where I feel like his reputation is already cemented. However, you feel about this particular story. This is not a guy who's been shilling for leagues and teams. So I do think history has to be a be a factor here. But Armand, let's finish up with you. It was a very, very good day for sports journalism, like sort of when that report came out. What it means heading forward, I don't know. And we get back to – I know Derek sort of talked about this when it comes to ESPN. Like I really appreciate that ESPN has invested in reporters and in journalists, and I think it's really important.

29:23And they have. They have a ton of them there and a ton of great ones. But I never forget that ultimately the first letter of that network is an E. And what ultimately they make their bones and money on is their games, right, their inventory. So I think they like having a journalism component, and I think they like having a news-breaking component. But it's different than what the New York Times' first precept is, or it's different than what the PBS News Hours first – they're never going to make their money on journalism. And so I do think you always have to, as a person who's following this, always sort of have that in the back of your mind.

30:07I'm glad they do it. They certainly have done some great stories over the years. But at the end of the day, they're a sports network, first and foremost. And at the end of the day, honestly, they make their money on their sports inventory. And a lot of times their debate show or studio show kind of stuff. I mean, I'm sure that's true, but I do think there's something to be said about the fact that, you know, I kind of look at it like, OK, my my son or my daughter, they want chocolate. They want chocolate all day. They want candy all day. Every now and then you need some broccoli on the plate. sometimes you need a salad sometimes you need a nice green as my dad would say and i feel like there are moments when you have to give people what they need even if it's not necessarily what they want now the question is what price are you willing to pay journalism costs and i'm not just talking about financially it's emotionally it's mentally yeah i mean if in some cases it could cost you your life because you're doing work that people don't want to be known they don't want it to get out it is interesting to me that we're sort of holding pablo tore up as this champion right now and maybe just maybe it's possible now it's a new flavor it's a different way to do journalism There's it's it's sort of content creation driven.

31:41Pablo does not make any secret about the fact that he sort of wants to engage with you in that way. And he's not like and there's there's an entertainment component to what he does, too. He's not he's bringing you cotton candy in addition to the broccoli. Yeah. And you know what? If they can exist in the same space, maybe that's the way forward. Maybe that's the way people come into journalism now saying, OK, I might tweet out the emoji when I see somebody responding to a post that I made that I know is actually not accurate. Their post is not accurate. I may quote tweeted and post an emoji as a way to sort of draw more viewers into my YouTube channel or my Instagram.

32:24But but like at the end of the day, is the work being done? Pablo Torrey can celebrate not like I don't care about the emojis and stuff. Some people do. I'm sure. I don't care about all of that. What's the news? Tell me what I need to know. And I think even with that, the cotton candy to follow up on the analogy, the cotton candy and the broccoli could coexist. Yeah, well said. And again, we didn't get into this and it would be another 20 minutes, but so much of the rise of the modern insider is also connected to social media. We're basically winning Twitter, winning Blue Sky, winning threads, that's the game.

32:59and ESPN in particular has really, so has Fox. Like they've made that valuable, like in winning the ticker or winning the social media race and there it provides your incentives. Whether they can monetize that engagement or not, I mean, sometimes they probably can and in some ways and other times not. All right, John, go ahead because I'm moved to Kathy Engelbert, but if you have one last thing on this. You know, we talk about whether or not this stuff moves into Eagle. I mean, I look at this particular story. It's a big scandal. But one of the other things, too, is obviously there is significance.

33:37There could be even criminal liability. You know, I mean, there are agencies looking into this. At the same time, we are talking about salary cap circumvention. We're talking about circumventing some made up nonsense that most people would never tolerate being in their business, which is a salary cap on your ability to earn the amount of money that your work justifiably creates. So I think part of that, too, we also have to, you know, we also have to make a real judgment about what the significance of the story actually is as well. Because when it comes down to it, whether you're talking about the Astros and their sign stealing or all these things, there is a triviality to the sports cheating.

34:23There's a triviality to it that I think people do recognize. I don't expect that most people who aren't Laker fans or Raptors fans are going to lose their mind over this. They're probably going to say, you know, maybe even laugh it off because some of some of it is so silly. And that might be a factor, too, as to why it doesn't seem to get the kind of respect you would think. Yeah, the last thing I'll add before we leave this is, man, if you were going to design a business, journalism would be the last business you'd go into in terms of trying to make money. So again, I admire the places that are doing it.

35:01But as Derek said, it is a, or maybe it was Armand who said it, it is mentally challenging. It is physically challenging. It is emotionally challenging. And just beyond that, it's hard. It's not just talking to a mic. Like you have to, if you're doing it at the highest level, there's legwork to do. There's confirming stuff. There's making sure it's accurate. There's lawyers. If it's sort of, if it's something that involves legal, it's, you would never enter the business to make money in 2026. Once upon a time, yeah, classified ads and all that you would. And so the places that do it, I have great admiration for it, but I, there's a big part of me that worries that like, you know, especially if it's owned by hedge funds or owned by corporations that they're, they're going to ultimately make decisions that like, this is just not worth it in terms of the bottom line, but it's never been about the bottom line.

35:51Like it's supposed to be about something sort of broader than that. Um, all right. Kathy Engelberg, uh, announced her retirement as we are taping this today on Friday, September 4th. If you want to believe that she retired, you know, certainly you can, I'm sure there are others who probably believe that maybe it was a little bit of a force out. I think there's probably a lot of online like tell Searcy, I want her to know it was me kind of stuff, basically implying the Adam Silver push. But credit Doug Feinberg, Alexis Philpoo of ESPN, and Howard Megdahl of the Title IX for breaking this and getting Kathy Engelberg and her comments.

36:33Obviously, this was coordinated with the WNBA for sure to get Kathy interviewing before the announcement came on Friday. But good, those are three people who really care about the WNBA, who've covered at the highest levels and are not just joining the WNBA media corps this week to get into culture war bullshit. So who should I start with? I'll start with you, Derek. This job, to me, could be an unbelievably great job, perhaps one of the best jobs that has opened up in big sports media, because Kathy Inglebert, for all her issues with communications with players, got them to a place where they have a new CBA and they have these really great media deals just in terms of reach and all this stuff.

37:17So I look at this and I'm like, whoever makes a selection, whether it's the NBA or the Board of Governors or the WNBA owners, whoever it does, if they choose the right person, they could really take this league to even more unprecedented heights. How did you see what the news, the news that came down today? From a media perspective, the WNBA is arguably in more places than ever before. Of course, you know, you have ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS, ION, NBA TV, I think had some games here and there, USA Network. It's all over the place. You really can't miss it. So the ubiquity of the WNBA is the good thing.

37:55And it's a good thing also that the league did not miss any games this year. I mean, the popularity obviously has been burgeoning the last few years. I mean, it was just a few years back where the WNBA had not had a game to go over 1 million viewers since the inaugural season, I'm pretty sure. And now we're seeing 1 million viewers or more routinely on these national spotlights. We've had some records already, most of which involve Caitlin Clark and the Fever. We've seen a lot of other players rise to prominence in the spotlight with Paige Buchers and Angel Reese, Paige Backers, excuse me, Angel Reese, Sabrina Ionesco, Brianna Stewart.

38:25So it's been really good. And of course, Angel Wilson. So it's been really good competition. But the fact is that the battle for the CBA and the players coming out against Kathy Engelbert, some of them during those negotiations, left a bad taste in many people's mouths, you'd imagine. So it's a very desirable job. The league is on very much a growth trajectory, and I'd be interested to see who the candidates are. Obviously, this is still very fresh news. But, yeah, I mean, in the end, I think she's put the WNBA in a good place business-wise. But the relationships and the perception of the league definitely need some improvement.

39:00Yeah, 100%. And like just they have not handled like they have not been proactive in many of these issues, whether dealing with good or bad faith people. They've just they've blown it in terms of letting others dictate the narrative and the conversations. Armand, it'll be interesting, like from my end, in terms of who takes this job, because like historically, or at least in recent history, a lot of these big commissioner jobs have gone to people with media experience. You know, the Tony Petitis of the world and people like that. So that was like my first thought is like, is there anybody out there like with, you know, a ton of like media deal-making experience and could they factor in, could it be an insider from the WNBA or I don't know if it's an Adam Silver handpicked person, that could be interesting.

39:42Or lastly, is there any former player like with significant gravitas who could like a Cheryl Miller or something like that who could walk into the job. So it's kind of interesting to sort of speculate and figure out. yeah well whoever it is the media aspect of it is very important the media aspect of this is is critical because i'm thinking about even the the uh interview that she was supposed to do kathy engelbert was supposed to do with dan patrick and of course that that went viral because she had agreed to do the interview and then they're waiting for her evidently they're waiting on her the day of they're waiting two hours and she's out somewhere else not too far away and didn't give Dan Patrick and his producers the heads up to let them know in advance that she would not be able to do the interview.

40:28Like things like that. Let's face it. You have to win in the media as well. You do. You have to have that media savvy. You have to know how to answer questions. You have to have a certain level of charisma. You have to have a certain level of sort of handling all the questions that come, especially with a league on the rise as as the WNBA is where have the the interviews been where has I mean on camera with respected people where has that been the opportunities for us to really get to know the the WNBA through her vision through her perspective to counter some of the things that have been reported the relationships the Nefisha Collier stuff that, I mean, just really blew up.

41:15And the things that have been said about Engelbert as it pertains to her relationship with the players, where was she to address those things, to sort of flip the script, to do a David Stern and jump out ahead of these things and drive the car and not be in the passenger seat? Those are the kinds of things that you would definitely think the next WNBA commissioner had better have a better handle on than Kathy Engelbert did. Job one, as Armand was mentioning there, John, is immediately whoever gets that job, call up Brianna Stewart, Nafisa Collier, Caitlin Clark, Asia Wilson, Kelsey Palmer, whoever, you know what I'm saying?

41:52Your top 14 players in the league and like establish a relationship where you can regularly talk to them as Adam Silver does. And even David Stern did with Jordan and Magic and Michael. That's one where Kathy just totally blew it. Like I think business-wise, I really think she has a fair argument to make that she helped save the league. I think you could legitimately say that, especially during COVID. Where I think she just, whether it's her personality or whether she comes from the corporate world, she just did not understand that it's a player's league. And because it's a player's league, you have to have a relationship with the players.

42:24And you have to have the players believe at least that you're working for them. Whether you are or not, it's a different story. But the players probably believe Adam Silver's working on their behalf. And so, John, that's one thing, whoever gets that job, like you got to have a relationship with the players. And I would say also quicker, as Armand said, immediately when something happens, if like players tweet out, like a prominent player tweets out like a death threat or like something like somebody's mad at like who gambled and like is blaming the player. That's the stuff as a commissioner you get out right away.

42:56You become public. You make yourself available to media people because if nothing else it does, it makes the players believe you got their back. And that's what Kathy really – she was very successful business-wise, but she failed on the comms pretty significantly, in my opinion. I think a big problem for the WNBA is the lack of internal growth and the lack of people you can promote from within. So Val Ackerman, the original president of the WNBA, had been working at the NBA for eight years. She had been with David Stern in the same general way that Adam Silver had been. Donna Arendar did not come in through the league.

43:36She came in at least through sports, right, but not through the league. And then they just started doing crazy things. Laurel Ritchie comes in from the Girl Scouts. The Girl Scouts. Interesting. Lisa Border comes in from Coca-Cola. Right, remember that. Kathy Engelbert comes in from Deli. Deli? Is it Deloitte? Whatever it's called. Deloitte. Yeah, Deloitte. And it's like, okay, why are you unable to promote from within? Where is the succession plan from within the NBA and WNBA? WNBA. Because, you know, even it was one, I mean, it's amazing that they had people to promote from within when the WNBA hadn't even existed.

44:16They promoted Val Ackerman from within to be in the, to be the president of the WNBA. It's been 30 years. There should be a long list of executives that you can go in-house to promote, to make the next commission of the WNBA. But I can't think of anybody. And so that succession plan problem, right? No more Deloitte, no more Coca-Cola, no more Girl Scouts. It's got to be somebody, at least in sports, and it really has to be somebody who's already in, certainly at least in the NBA, in my view. And if you have to go external again, I mean, I just don't think that you can just walk in from some non-sports business and be able to understand the dynamics necessary when it comes to all the various stakeholders involved in these leagues.

45:06Yeah. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. The FIBA World Cup is going on now. And I'll also be interested just as a TV nerd, like how the viewership of that is, because you really do have, you have some great players playing in that in terms of like, you know, significant draw type players. I know Asia Wilson's not playing in it, but, But, you know, Caitlin's playing in it. Brianna Stewart's playing in it. You know, Angel Reese is playing in it. So it should be pretty sort of interesting. And, you know, I expect the Americans to get to the semis or the finals against like a France type.

45:37So that should be interesting to follow. Go ahead, John. Yeah, make sure that you get there in time for the game because otherwise they're just hearing that Anthony Davis prank show all day, every day. Is that the lead? That's the lead in? That's the lead out. Lead out. Okay. Right, right, right. Yeah. In Canada, I get this on TSN premium. So it's not – there is no TBS TNT here. So that is who has the Canadian rights, TSN, which has a sister partnership with ESPN. So that's where I will be watching. All right. We'll finish up with The Athletic. So – and who wants to start on The Athletic? Derek, I'll let you start on The Athletic.

46:23The Athletic comes out with this much awaited report. By the way, I should say for transparency purposes, although I would think if you're listening to this podcast, you already know. I obviously worked at The Athletic for eight years, so keep that in mind as I'm talking on my former employer. So The Athletic comes out with its much awaited report on former Athletic reporter Diana Rossini. The company finds her relationship with Mike Vrabel violated newsroom standards, but showed no clear bias towards the Patriots coach. The open quote here from the report, we neither completed an investigation or reached any conclusion about the nature of the full relationship between Vrabel and Rossini, but the totality of the public voters are enough to conclude a violation of company policy.

47:12the investigation that the athletic did. And again, I would sort of, you know, recommend you reading this just so you have, you know, if you're interested in this topic, obviously listen to this podcast, you probably would be interested in this. Mike Semel, who's a very high ranking executives there reviewed like 900 plus stories, 77 videos that contained her byline contributor line, mentioned her reporting, listened to more than 200 episodes of the podcast. She co-hosted. he interviewed athletic staff although we did not find out who they interviewed you know I can take a guess given I work there who they interviewed in terms of her direct editor and other NFL staffers but the athletic does not say who that was did not talk to Diana Rossini herself I think that's very critical to sort of point out never talked to Diana Rossini herself don't believe they interviewed rabel either or i'm not even sure they made the ask um and so um so here i i want to get your takeaways sort of on this because i think there's a lot of ways to go i want to just mention one thing and then i'll try to give my quick take at the end a spokesperson for the athletic declined further comment to the athletic that's always sort of keeps me always raises my eyebrows up.

48:28I don't believe anyone has any fundamental right to answer a question that me, Derek, John, or Armand ask. I also, by the way, don't believe any journalist has any fundamental right to answer a question. So if CNN calls me for comment, I can decline comment. And I feel like I have the right to do that as an American Canadian person, and so be it. They have the right to ask. I have the right to decline. Where I do draw the line, though, is, and this is just me, If you're an organization that's a news organization that sort of makes your bones on transparency and trust with the audience, and that's, I think, what The Athletic makes the attempt to do.

49:06They're trying to do a higher level of journalism or a higher level of trust. man do I think you have to respond to when you're in this case Andrew Marchand who probably does a good a job which one can do if you are if that person is asking to interview someone at your place I think you have to respond even if it's a pro form or quick you know a couple sentences on whatever but that always feels like a red flag to me it's kind of like if I'm a reader I'm like the athletic wants me to you know sort of respect them and what and these questions that they ask of NFL and NBA people, but yet when it comes to this topic, they won't even answer questions of their own reporter who's writing the piece.

49:44Whether their own reporter should even be writing the piece is also an interesting question, whether you should cover yourself. And then finally, another question could be, should the athletic have assigned like a Katie Strang or an investigative type, Nathan Fenno type, to do this as opposed to a managing editor type, where you really like, if you're going to report the story, you hire the investigative reporters to write it as opposed to an internal. Anyway, that's me filibustering on everything that sort of went down. Derek, your initial impressions or your impressions on the report and what it might mean heading forward.

50:16The perception here is a reality. And I think when you think about the perception that it put the athletic and a lot of people look at the athletic in this situation like, oh, there's a clear conflict of interest here. And despite what the investigation may or may not have found, some of the audience, undoubtedly, there's been an erosion of trust. Now, the athletic, I don't believe has directly replaced Diana Rossini's role just yet, which was their lead NFL insider. I know they brought on Jonathan Jones from CBS Sports during the offseason here. But the fact is that, again, it's going to take some time.

50:47It's going to take some stories to rebuild the trust, in my opinion. Again, you referenced Mike Semmel, and he said that Rossini, quote, was noncompliant, end quote, with the standards. you know that the photos that came from the resort and then there were some others from a casino and bar he wrote quote indicate a relationship that puts the athletics credibility in jeopardy and gives the appearance of a conflict of interest end quote so when i think about just the way that this has harmed the athletic uh it's good that they did a thorough internal investigation they published the whole thing for people to read that's being accountable that's you know being responsible to your audience but at the same time it's going to take some time to earn the trust back how do you see it armand uh i want my life back honestly i just this whole thing has been i feel like i've been driving uh in the middle of the desert going nowhere with this and people have these strong responses to it because they want a certain kind of information to come from it.

51:56They want the TMZification of it. They want the paid sixification of it. And when I look on the other hand at the results of this investigation, I don't feel like I came away learning anything I didn't already know. And so I just kind of feel like personally, I feel like this was sort of a waste of time. We haven't really heard from Roussini on this. As we've discussed. She's been non-compliant. Mike Vrabel certainly isn't talking about it. He was asked about it recently and he has nothing to say. He's moving. He's on to Seattle to borrow a version of a phrase from another former New England Patriots head coach.

52:34And so it just seems like it's one of those things. We may hear about it in a documentary years from now. There may be something to come out in some other reporting that much, much further down the line. But for right now, I'm just sort of saying to myself, a lot of this didn't feel like it did a whole lot for me in terms of bringing things to light. And I'm just kind of ready to be done with the whole thing. I feel like some of it was a waste of time. No, I appreciate your honesty on that. John, I want to use you to move it forward. I will say this. I think two things can be true. I actually think the athletic made, at least in this attempt, a good faith effort to ascertain, at least from their end, like, you know, was there any stories that, you know, where on Mike Vrabel that were, you know, influenced by anything, a relationship outside of the, you know, outside of the reporter coach subject.

53:27And also the result is unsatisfying. So I think two things can be true. You could have a good faith examination, but yet there was where we end up is incredibly unsatisfying for the reader. And I think that's where Armand is. He's like, you know, I read this whole thing. I follow this whole thing. And like nothing, nothing's moved for me. There's no resolution. Like I already believed this or nothing was new. What is then sort of, you know, I think another facet of this, John, heading forward now is the future of Diana Rossini. And so I did see front office sports Mike McCarthy put out a note saying that there could be interest from Barstool or they may have interest in her.

54:09She's talking to other places. Diana Rossini, just for people to know, is a CAA client, or at least was, I imagine still is, because her agent was on this podcast, Matt Olson. And so I have no doubt there'll be offers for her. The interesting thing would be, what does that look like in sort of a post-athletic, post-ESPN universe? and could you even possibly return to insider dumb or will this you do become just an opinionist or something like that and you know join the ranks of 5 000 other places one last one john and then i'll let you finish up on all this you can go as long as you want ben strauss wrote the story for espn about this very tough situation to sort of write because espn i think if they really want to do the public justice should have done the same kind of investigation.

55:02Do we agree? Like Rossini was working there, the same elements and issues would have existed at ESPN. But to my knowledge, they have not done that, nor have they put out any kind of internal thoughts on how they saw the reporting. So in that situation, and Strauss wrote it straight, he didn't make any comments on that. But I think you are well within your right as a reader. And just like if you are Stafford the Athletic to be like, hey, you know, we did this. We put the we put the research in. We assigned our guy to go through all this stuff. Where is ESPN here in terms of doing the same kind of investigation?

55:39So I wanted to make that note, John, and I'll leave it to you at the final word. Well, I'm sure the ombudsman will have something to say about it. Which one? Pointer? Maybe I'm waiting for the Craig James piece. I've been waiting for 13 years. ESPN's not an obligate. I mean, look, look, the question of what all of this is, is a really important one, because we have a certain high minded expectation of what all of this is to be and that there is some level of requirement and expectation of journalistic integrity. But people are just wanting to tune into games. And so we also have to deal with the reality that a lot of people aren't going to care.

56:23Now, maybe more people than most will be, you know, banging away at their keyboards angry because you can get into the gender politics of it with Rossini and all of that stuff. But, you know, I think most people just want to watch the game on Wednesday, right? It's tough. It relates back to the same thing we talked about before with the insiders and Pablo. And I don't know how much any of this kind of moves the needle. I don't know how much the insider stuff moves the needle, to be honest. I mean, does ESPN really need Shams? Do they really need even Schefter? And I don't necessarily know how much the journalism moves the needle.

57:06I don't know how much anything moves the needle other than I'm sitting down and watching a game. And I think we arguably get to a point of overthinking sports media. Sports media is, I want to sit down and watch a game at the end of the day. Now, there's a lot of other important stuff because sports media and sports is part of society. But when it comes to the business of all of this, I wonder how much we overthink the significance of all of it. And, you know, as far as all this goes for The Athletic, this is not the worst crime against journalism in the history of The New York Times. Right. You can go back to Jason Blair, obviously.

57:43Right. And I mean, look, the fact is that as long as the as long as the facts were accurate and the worst thing you can say is that Russini had a bias. Well, frankly, a lot of these folks kind of do it. Just like what I just like what I said before with the Clippers. Not that I'm not that I'm inferring anything untoward there, but there are relationships that are built there. There is trust that is created. And when you create a certain amount of trust with a source, you might buy a little bit more of what they're selling and be more easily led. So, you know, I mean, obviously the ethics of it are bad.

58:23The ethics of a lot of stuff in this industry are bad. And so I get back to that same point of I don't know how much it moves the needle. And for that reason, I don't necessarily see any reason why Roussini won't come back in some form. You know, maybe she'll be anchoring the juked my chronics halftime report, you know. That is, we'll see how many people can pick up that reference. Although, again, to be fair to, that's a Stephen Glass reference, correct? Right. To be fair to Diana Rossini, she has unequivocally said she stands by all her reporting. Stephen Glass, far and away, was exposed for being a fabulous.

59:03So I just want to make that very, very clear. Diana Rossini has said that. And again, the athletics report, generally speaking, back that up like they could not find and they find some gushing over that, but nothing that was like at least from their end inaccurate. it. All right, fellas, thank you. I know this was a long one. There was a lot going on. I really appreciate you giving me an hour on this. John Lewis, Derek Futterman, Armand Brody, check out all their work at Sports Media Watch. Follow them, obviously, on all their socials. Check out the podcast. And their podcast continues to get significant and high-profile guests.

59:45So, check that podcast out. Is Tony Raleigh the last one, Derek and John? Is that right? Anybody you want to promote before we get out of here? May not be by this time. Who's going to be next? Well, we have Mark Jones coming. Armand and I talked. I'm muted. No, no, no. You're good. I would say leave it at Mark Jones because we still have a TBD after that. Yeah, don't give away. Don't announce anybody, John, if in case it doesn't happen. Take it from someone where that's happened a lot, too. You don't want to announce somebody and they never show up. All right, so Mark Jones, which actually should be really interesting given his career.

1:00:18I think I've told all three of you this. Paul Jones, by the way, his brother is the Raptors radio announcer and a great guy, like a former high school principal. He's like, whenever I see him, I call him the mayor of Toronto because everybody loves him and knows him. But that is, Mark Jones comes from a fascinating family of serious educators. I believe his parents, one of his parents, I think, was a teacher. Paul was a principal before he went into sports broadcasting. And throughout that whole family, they've just exceeded in all their endeavors and all have significant degrees and stuff. The Jones family is really, really interesting, and I just happen to know that from living here in Toronto.

1:00:59So check that out. Okay, head to the archives if you like this kind of stuff. Before this one, Jimmy Trader, we went through Romo's future and other sports media topics. Liz Robbins on our new book with Billie Jean King. John was part of a podcast with Chad Finn and Austin Karp where we went through sort of college football and Pat McAfee's presence and what teams moved the needle, etc. In terms of guests, Jason Hare on his newest film Novak Djokovic, The Wolf and Winner AEW's Maxwell Jacob Freeman on the art of doing media as a pro wrestler and then if you go back a couple weeks you can catch Gino Aramma who was fantastic on this podcast with his thoughts on many different things.

1:01:44Also, Neil Everett and Linda Cohn were on this podcast either the last month or two months ago. Linda Cohn just continuing to be in the news daily, getting that YouTube juice. That's a podcast for another day, fellas. We'll leave it at that. But again, reviews and star ratings are always helpful and appreciated. Thank you. I want to thank James Jackson, particularly on this episode, overall is hard work because we had some issues with the stream yard. So James, thank you for your editing on this one. I want to thank Odyssey for their support. And most of all, thank you for listening. We'll see you soon on the Sports Media Podcast.