Roundtable: Who is the face of ESPN? The answer might surprise you.

0:09Welcome to the sports media podcast. I'm your host Richard Deitsch. My producer is James Jackson. This is our usual weekend roundtable and we have the three most regulars for this roundtable. John Lewis, founder and editor of sports media watch Armand Brody, part of the sports media watch family. He can hear him on there. you can find him on that site. Works obviously on the podcast, etc. Armand, I've had much better intros than this. I'm already apologizing to you. And Derek Futterman, of course, who is a multimedia writer, producer, and on-air talent for Sports Media Watch. Fellas, welcome. Thank you.

0:52Thanks for having us. All right. Don't thank me for that intro, though. Trust me, I've done better. All right, let's start here. I realize that we'll probably be one of the, you know, that would be the 15th sports media podcast to talk about this. But, you know, it's a topic that people are very, very interested in, and that's Pat McAfee and his expanding empire at ESPN. We just passed the last couple of days, and the news that has come out is that he has a new role. Monday night countdown so he'll be part of that grouping obviously Monday night football's pre-game show Andrew Marchand also reported the fact that a Pat McAfee Monday night football alt cast will be on the horizon if the league uh grants ESPN's approval um that would be you guys can correct me if I'm wrong like I think on the weeks where the Manning cast is not going to run So that's, you know, the NFL has already granted alt casts for Monday Night Football.

1:56So, you know, I can't see them not green lighting that. This from John Lewis, and then this will kick off our discussion. Pat McAfee would appear to be, according to John, the first ESPN analyst to hold simultaneously full-time roles on both college game day and Monday Night Countdown. And obviously, you know, along with Sunday Night NFL Countdown, that's their highest profile ESPN produced studio shows. And I'm agreeing with John. The Monday Night Countdown edition sort of guarantees that he's going to have a significant presence on ESPN Super Bowl broadcast, whatever sort of that may turn out to be.

2:36But it's very clear that I think at this point, and not that this necessarily means anything, it's a tag, but I would say that Pat McAfee is the face of ESPN. If you're going to place one on-air talent as the face of a place, I believe Pat McAfee is absolutely now superseded Stephen A. Smith in terms of that for ESPN. Let me go to you, John Lewis, and ask you this. One, do you agree? And two, what does that designation mean to you, if it means anything to you? Well, I would say, one, I noticed on the College Game Day promo tweet that they put out, McAfee is front and center. This is a show that has Nick Saban on it, right?

3:22Nick Saban was a pretty significant addition. This is a show where Kirk Herbstreet's been doing it for, what, nearly 30 straight years? And Pat McAfee is front and center. I think that's notable. You know, face of ESPN is such a fascinating question because one, ESPN is so many things to so many people that a singular face. and look, let's be real, they're kind of, you know, putting McAfee in a lot of places, making him inescapable. But we're still talking about Monday Night Countdown, a show that a few years ago was not necessarily the biggest show they ever had. They've obviously made some major changes to it since then.

4:07But it's, you know, I mean, it's a pregame show. We're talking about game days more than a pregame show. Definitely. Game days. I didn't mean to interrupt you and say, but game day is their identity. Would you agree? Like that's their college football. They do games. I get it. Ultimately, they're a distribution for games. But in terms of like when I think of ESPN and if you were going to ask me sort of like for a personality identity, college game day would be part of whatever that answer is, I think. Yeah, I mean, I think game day is a higher profile gig than even most of the games that ESPN puts on.

4:46So game day is not a normal pregame show. I will admit that. But Monday Night Countdown is a normal pregame show. And obviously, Pat McAfee's actual show, you know, I don't want to end up getting getting embroiled in whatever. But we know the viewership is not like spectacular. right although although to give them it's up it's up from where it started right well everything is everything is up in this era of measurement to be completely honest but you know i know they mentioned the youtube hits and whatever we know youtube is now changing the definition of hits of views so i don't take that all that seriously i'm not saying it's not popular i'm just saying the fact is you say is pat mcafee the face of espn well if he is he's pretty easy to avoid You don't like, I mean, the level of ubiquity isn't there.

5:37You know, with Stephen A. Smith, ESPN's force feeding of Stephen A. Smith is beyond because you click on an article about anything and you get Stephen A. Smith's face in a video accompanying it. It could be an article about literally anything in any sport. Here's a Stephen A. Smith video. I don't think McAfee's there yet because McAfee, for all the criticism he gets, I don't know a single opinion Pat McAfee has. He doesn't do opinion. He does interviews and whatever other things, his little shows, his game shows. But because he doesn't do opinion, you can't just slap a Pat McAfee video into every single topic, and he's got an opinion on it.

6:19It's just, with Stephen A., you can do that. Interesting. Okay, that's, well, first of all, I'm not a McAfee hater by any means, and I actually admire the business he's built. One thing I think McAfee does that Stephen A. does not do McAfee brings you in. I think he's far more engaging to – I think he's – how do I say this? He – his – I think the audience can engage with him, even though they don't really engage with him, in a far easier way than Stephen A., who feels, I think – there's a separation between Stephen A. And the audience in some ways where I think McAfee brings people in. At least that's my sort of anticipation.

6:58Armand, let me go to you because John said something that was pretty interesting. and that is um and i and maybe we're all guilty of this but like you can escape anybody at espn if you wish like that is very true like if you're a if you're simply a tennis fan like stephen a and pat mcafee will never be part of your world if you're just somebody who watches like you know the majors and and like the cincinnati open or something like that so i know what john is saying that i think that's an interesting point that said um mcafee traffics in football which is far and away their most popular sport and it is hard to avoid if you're like a habitual espn um viewer and steven a is their flagship morning show host so if you happen to turn it on in the morning or if it's your background noise in the morning also hard to avoid as well and then as john said um offers opinion everywhere including non-sports so how do you how do you see this question that we're we're talking about i think espn is trying to capitalize on mcafee just being a vibe i think there's something to be said about him just being a vibe it is somewhat similar stay with me here it's somewhat similar to like whose line is it anyway you remember when oh yeah Yeah, I remember the show.

8:18Drew Carey and Wayne Brady and Ryan. It's like ESPN is trying to capture this. We're just going to have a good time and everybody's going to get along. There's going to be no controversy until there is, of course, and then we'll find a way to either address it in an album or something else. But we just want a good time. We want a good hang. And Pat McAfee, for all of the things you can say about him, nobody knows how to have a good time. like pat mcgby the same guy who can take a stone cold stunner and spit beer in the air is the same man who can entertain on college game day the same man who can create this welcoming environment for anybody on from al michaels to aaron rogers on his daily show he's a good vibe he's a good hang and so i think espn is trying to go after that will it just do i need to see him on everything?

9:14No, but I do think, as John said, it's easy to avoid. You're not going to get much in the way of meaningful substance from these pregame shows. Anyway, it's just content. It's just talking. But I think overall, McAfee represents a vibe that ESPN is trying to capture. And that kind of vibe, Stephen A. Smith doesn't provide that. McAfee's sort of good time, Drew Carey, let everybody just chill and vibe and hang and laugh. That's the vibe they're going for. And McAfee represents that. I think that's well said. I do think, and again, that's what I was sort of trying to get at with whether it's engagement or something.

9:54But it's like his connection, whether real or imagined, is, I think, stronger with an audience because he allows you to be part of whatever his it is. And I don't think it's an affect. I mean, maybe one day it becomes it, but I think that's sort of him. It might be hard as you get bigger and bigger and bigger to sort of continue to be like, maybe the everyman isn't the right expression, but I think you guys know what I mean. You get so famous, like Tom Brady might be the greatest guy in the world, but he's so famous that it's hard for you as an average everyday person to really grasp someone that famous.

10:33All right, Derek, let me go to you. Some of this, I think, obviously, in terms of the addition of McAfee stuff, if they're negotiating new contracts, you're trying to justify the money payment to McAfee, so you're going to want him to do more stuff. I also think he wants to do more stuff because I think he's very clearly driven to, whether it's the album, whether it's his interest in film, I think he's driven to do more. I don't know if he's trying to prove something to himself or something, But like that's sort of his ethos is he wants to keep doing more and more and more. I'm not surprised that he's continuing to go on.

11:10But again, I want this is sort of like the theme, at least of the first segment of this podcast is I wanted to get to this idea of like, is there a face of ESPN? Can you singularly be a face? Does it matter if you even have that tag? And was that tag even me? So I go to you. Yeah, the whole face of ESPN thing to me is very subjective. It depends on what programming you watch. It depends how often you're watching. if you're a football fan watching ESPN, you can make the argument that Joe Buck is your face of ESPN because you're watching the Monday night football games. But if you're watching all of the shoulder programming around football, then sure, you could say that Pat McAfee is the most ubiquitous personality there.

11:47Very good point by John earlier. Undoubtedly, that's not a mistake in my view that Pat McAfee is at the center of that college game day graphic. He is their A1. He is their number one attraction. So it's in the middle, right? Yeah, Pat McAfee probably will end up getting that designation on Monday Night Countdown too, I'd imagine. Jason Kelsey was the big hire when he came on board last year. Now the fact that you're bringing on Pat McAfee and then you'll have Altcast presumably if that report is accurate to go to afterwards on the non-Manning cast weeks. But to be honest, if we're talking just as an overarching face of ESPN, the answer to any of these questions, who's the face of the network, is the top executive in charge.

12:24And that's Jimmy Pitaro. And this is clearly, Jimmy is running the show. He's the boss here. He has a lot of people under him who are making these important programming decisions with his input, with his guidance, you'd imagine. And the fact is that ESPN sees that Pat McAfee is a draw. ESPN sees that Stephen A. Smith is a draw. And they're investing in those talents as businesses. Pat McAfee is his own business. I know Lucas Shaw of Bloomberg reported earlier this year that Pat brought on Ari Emanuel to land him film and TV roles. And the fact is that I would have to imagine you're starting to see a little bit of that effect pay off in the market.

12:56Stephen A. Smith is his own business. Besides, you know, being the featured commentator, the EP on First Take, he also has the Sirius XM radio show. He has his own straight shooter media business that he's building out. And the fact is that I think what this really demonstrates is a paradigm shift in sports media. We're seeing talents work with companies rather than for companies these days. And I think that's the biggest change right now in this representation space and why we're seeing McAfee have all of this sovereignty, I guess, in the way that he's operating. And the fact is that you got to give McAfee, you got to give Stephen A, you got to give them credit for being driven to do these things because you'd imagine they've already made enough money to be comfortable.

13:33But the fact is that they are driven to do well in sports media. They're driven to do things. I mean, Stephen A, Pat McAfee, these guys, especially during football season, don't seem to have any time off. I can't I can't really put my finger on where Pat McAfee is going to have a chance to breathe over the football season in terms of, you know, even on Sundays, it seems like that one day he won't be on TV. I could see him doing a sports center hit. I could see him being a guest on Sunday NFL countdown. And he's got to watch all the games and be ready the next day. So it's a tremendous responsibility.

14:04And if everything we're hearing is true, that he's going to be on Monday Night Countdown, have the Alt-Cast Stale Game Day, do his weekly show, I would just like to see how Pat makes it to the end of the season. We'll see how sharp he continues to be on football. It's a lot to follow. But, you know, I think he's up for the challenge, and I'm optimistic he'll do well. You know, I'll stick with you, Derek, real quick, because I think you agree on this. One of the interesting things that we're seeing, and ESPN is following other media entities on this, is they entered a deal with Josh Pate. They have Will Compton and Taylor Uwan, which is that Bussing with the Boys show.

14:38So we're now in an era where you're seeing ESPN and other places where if you've established your own business elsewhere, or if you've established your own audience elsewhere, ESPN can essentially either buy you or lease you and bring them into their ecosystem. And McAfee is probably the biggest winner of that kind of thing. And Stephen A is interesting because maybe Stephen A goes the other way. Maybe somebody buys the Stephen A experience in a post-ESPN world. This is to you, Derek. There are different tranches, in my opinion, in sports media. And we're seeing a schism form between the lower, middle, and upper, specifically between the lower and middle and the middle and upper.

15:16Lower tranche of sports media, you're going to be cheap talent. You could be someone that could be put on the air, worked really hard in terms of a lot of programs, be versatile and be an asset for a network that you're working for. Whereas if you're at the top, some people at the top want to work more, some people don't. I could certainly think of examples in both. But you're very valuable in the sense that you have brand equity, you have recognition, and you're just ubiquitous presence. That's kind of where I put, as I was saying before, McAfee and Stephen A. But those in the middle, I feel that's where you're most susceptible to being cut.

15:48I mean, we look at the recent ESPN layoffs, and a lot of those people were very recognizable but weren't bona fide stars that were being laid off and you know it's hard to believe we're saying that about people like carl ravich and ryan clark but it's just like espn has gone star hunting and the fact is like you don't need to be on so many things to be considered a star at espn peyton manning for my knowledge is not even an espn employee but he has that deal with omaha productions you consider him an upper tier talent and someone who's very important to their strategy especially in a super bowl year where You know, he's anchoring the Manning cast.

16:19You're going to have, I know Andrew Marchand reported the return of the breakdown with Luke Kukli on there. So the fact is that, you know, there just seems to be a real separation of talent these days. And if you really want to make it in sports media, specifically DSPN, you've got to do everything you can to get out of that middle and to get to the upper tier of talent, because that's where the network seems to be investing its dollars. we'll end on this and i'll ask you this john do you think you like that strategy for them now they're very unique in that like this is not the strategy per se it's cbs sports or not very true espn because it's a 24 7 network and it has to do with their content john but derek is correct i i think actually he really um analyzed that well and we've talked about this on this podcast there there really is like a very very upper uh you know penthouse class now mcafee steven a mike greenberg van pelt making a lot of money very very significant prominence as derek said there's sort of i mean again we're all talking first world here problems like there's a lower tier of people who are sort of starting out they can do a lot of reps and stuff like that and then it's the middle who really were the sports center anchors of the past you can make half million dollars 750 000 they're clearly cutting that groupings and and investing in six or seven or people.

17:39I don't know if that's the right, I'm not, I'm not knocking their strategy. I honestly just don't know if that is the right decision. Um, because it's very hard to analyze an ESPN viewer because I think so many ESPN viewers as well are just, you know, they'll, they'll pop into the network on certain occasions. Certainly if there's a game they want to watch, but, and maybe this, I'm showing my age. I don't just don't know many people who habitually watch ESPN 10 hours a day anymore. So I don't even, it's hard for me to determine if the strategy is an accurate one, but I do know that's their strategy, John.

18:10So how do you see it? Well, first, let me go back to what Derek said. Derek suggested that Jimmy Patara was the face of ESPN. I think ESPN is the face of ESPN personally. The company is the face. Well, if any executive is a face of ESPN, I don't think it's Patara. I think it's probably Burke Magnus. I mean, I might even, you know, if I wanted to be cheeky, I'd actually suggest that it's Mark Shapiro over Jimmy Patara at this point. Look, the fact of the matter is everything in this industry is determined by whichever set of executives gets to establish their fiefdom, right? And so a few years ago, you have the John Skipper fiefdom and ESPN was very, you know, very academic, very grad school-y, right?

18:53And hey, we're going to make Pablo Torre happen. We're going to make Katie Nolan happen. We're going to A lot of progressives types, too. Yeah, all fair. And I don't necessarily know if there was really that much of an appetite for any of them. Flash forward a decade now, oh, we've got a different environment. We've got different politics going on. And now we're going to make Pat McAfee happen. We're going to make Stephen A. Smith happen. We're going to get all these podcasting guys. And it's pretty much the exact same thing that happened 10 years ago. It's a certain set of executives with a certain set of preferences, force feeding everyone talent that I don't necessarily know anyone is clamoring for.

19:34Because when you turn on ESPN, you want to see a game. The face of ESPN is LeBron James. Yeah, that's a great thing. You know, to me, if I'm turning on ESPN, I want to see an athlete competing in a sporting event. And frankly, that to me should be the primary purpose of a 24-hour sports network, not necessarily the people talking about it. Because as I said, these new assignments for McAfee, other than game day, which again is its own thing and is akin to a game itself, other than game day, there's nothing McAfee is going to be on that a sports fan is going to seek out. because sports fans are seeking out live games.

20:23Yep. 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. The bar is open. It's Fantasy Football Happy Hour with Matthew Barry Wherever you get your podcasts I'm going to let you finish up, Armand But I just want to say, this is a great job by you two If we're in court, I'm on the jury You and Derek have won me The face of ESPN remains their games Remains their inventory of, arguably, at least in 2026-7 Perhaps the greatest inventory of any of the different networks I don't think perhaps, I think they have it So I'm with you, John.

21:18I think that's the face ultimately is the product, and the product is the games. But we can't connect to the game the way we can connect to a personality in a certain way. So that's why I like this discussion. Armand, go ahead. Can I make a motion to interject if that's a such thing? Because we're in court now. A motion to interject or just give you a quick – You can interject. Armand, I apologize. I don't know if that's legal jargon. I'm the judge, and I'm bringing Eric up to my bench. I will make it very quick. who determines what is on ESPN in terms of game inventory? Who leads that? Yeah, that's fair.

21:50That's Magnuses and the Pitaros and the – Roz Durant, who's running programming. That's who's putting the games on the screen ultimately. So if we're assigning a face to it, that was my logic behind Pitaro. Once upon a time, they actually had real reporters when they did the sports reporters. I'd like to see Roz Durant, Burke Magnus, Mike Foss, and Jimmy Pitaro. I want a Sunday morning show hosted by Bob Lee. All right, Armand, go ahead. Please. Yeah, I think John's point is important that ultimately it's about the games. And so I laugh when people get into these arguments about, oh, McAfee shouldn't be on TV this much.

22:29And what time's the game? we are at a point now where there's so much content there's so many podcasts there's so much stuff going on the more i can block out all this foolishness and all this sort of mindless chatter and get to the game the better so i'm i'm not upset at pat mcgfee for for taking what he's been he's been offered i'm not upset at pat mcgfee he's now now we'll say this he is creating a template that is producing some cheap imitators. We'll have to live with that as we go forward here because there are people who think they can have McAfee's impact and McAfee's popularity and they won't.

23:09They'll try to do the kind of viral things he does to try and gain the same kind of attention that he can gain. We'll have to endure that, but there are ways around that. Just wait until the game. That's basically what I'll be doing unless I have to do something for the site. All right. Well said. All right. We'll go to the next topic. Derek, I'm going to go to you because you wrote a lot about this. Nielsen has introduced passive co-viewing, right? In addition to some other data measurement changes, and that has seemingly upset the NFL because the NFL maybe believes that it will reduce the viewership numbers of its games.

23:47Can you give my listeners just sort of a very brief overview of the Nielsen changes and how that might impact exports. Yeah. So Nielsen, essentially, this is going to be the second full year of big data plus panel being recognized as the national currency. And the fact is that they're trying to refine the system. There's been co-viewing previously is required to my knowledge, logging in to register. This is now going to be more passive measurement using wearable devices. Nielsen ran a pilot on this program earlier in the year around marquee events that provided an average 4.19 % lift to events that have a high degree of co-viewing, such as the Super Bowl, such as the closing and opening ceremonies of the Olympics and things of that ilk.

24:27There are also some changes in terms of the estimates of the universe. We saw this, the viewing universe, television universe. We saw this earlier in the year surrounding the gauge when there were some sudden trend changes and Nielsen reverted in that sense. But the fact is that Dash, which is essentially a study, comes from NORC, which is a research institute to my knowledge at, I want to say the university of forgetting exactly which, but it's a research study that's essentially a better estimate of the television universe and its demographic makeup. So Nielsen is now going to make some refinements there, and it will probably, from our conversation with Brian Furrer, who's SVP of thought leadership at Nielsen, minor decline in terms of streaming viewership, while cable will either stay flat or have a slight increase.

25:16essentially the way he put it it's that latency amplification it'll be a little more muted because it's going to be using more recent data with cable so it's a series of changes but those to me are the two headliners obviously the NFL feels that its audiences are being undercounted and I know that Paul Ballou has gone on the record this week with numerous outlets saying that the NFL believes that this change is rushed and we'll see I mean I know that these leagues right now on these networks. We see so many press releases about record viewership, just the ratings and all. The fact is, and as John mentions constantly on our podcast or on this podcast, the household rating really tells the story as somewhat being a normalizer in this sense of ratings that we can't really make a genuine comparison to years past.

26:05So the fact is, I just, the numbers are probably going to continue to rise, but maybe we'll see a little bit more normalization with these changes and that's something that leagues that are looking to continue to amplify and augment their media rights fees are not going to be thrilled about so i mean the nfl is obviously a very important client to nielsen you'd imagine so i'd be curious to see how we move in the future here but i know there seems to be frustration john you want to uh add your two cents and obviously this is this is this is your specialty well it's um it's it's a fascinating scenario because I think Nielsen's perception is that they are making the numbers more accurate, obviously.

26:47My expectation is that these changes will, at the very worst, cancel out if there's more offset such that maybe there's a slight increase. I'm not expecting declines. What I would want to know from the NFL is, is the issue one of, oh, our numbers are lower under this measure, or is it our numbers are less reliable under this measure? Because that's a very different conversation. I think we all assume the most important thing is more and more people tuning in. But, and I do believe NASCAR's motivation for going away from Big Data Plus panel and back to panel only. Obviously, if you've been reading my work, you know that NASCAR numbers are lower under Big Data Plus Panel than panel only, which would be the obvious reason why they don't report those numbers anymore.

27:39But I actually do believe what Brian Herbst at NASCAR told me earlier in the year, which is that the biggest issue is that the numbers that they're seeing under Big Data do not reflect the makeup of the audience that they understand to exist. And that has been an issue with Big Data Plus Panel since forever. That's been the main problem that people have had. You can read all there's tons of complaints about it outside of sports. Now, it could be the case that for the NFL, it's not so much, oh, our numbers are lower under this. It might be, oh, man, these numbers don't at all represent what we know our audience to be.

28:16We're seeing wild deviations in X and Y and Z. Now, I don't know if that's the case or not, but I'd be curious to know if that's the case or not, Because, you know, we look at that top line number, but there's a lot more to Nielsen ratings than that. And people have to strategize based on those nitty gritty numbers that the public often does not see. And if those numbers are no longer reliable, well, I mean, people are trying to strategize in the NFL more than any other league strategizes based on the television ratings. It's kind of difficult to do that if the numbers are not showing you what you expect.

28:53So that is kind of top of the line, top of mind for me as far as what I would want to ask Paul Ballou if I if I happen to speak with him. And look, the fact is, the other the other aspect of it is we have two different conversations about TV ratings. One is the ratings in relation to the past, which are ever inflated. every single comparison to the past at this point. And when I say the past, I don't mean 1996. At this point, comparisons to 2022 are pretty, you know, unreliable. I wouldn't necessarily go with them. I mean, when I reported earlier this year that WNBA viewership was up 15 % from last year, someone in the comments asked me, well, isn't that within the range that'd be affected by the methodology?

29:43And my initial instinct is to say, no, I mean, 15 % is pretty high for methodology alone to account for it. But when I really thought about it, that's not that far out of the range where you could attribute all of that to methodology. I mean, 15%. I don't think any future changes will have that kind of impact, but it just kind of says it all. So that's one side of it, the inflated comparisons to past years. But even though the comparisons are inflated, the fact is the numbers are still almost certainly undercounted. There's no universe where Nielsen has finally gotten to the point where they get all sports viewing tracked.

30:19So both things are true. The comparisons to past years are inflated to the point where pretty much every single ratings press release you've read over the past three or four years is deeply, you know, not necessarily. Well, let me not say deeply. It's it's it requires some caveats, right? It requires some caveats. Every single ratings press release you've seen for the past three, four, five. Well, really, since out of home became a thing and especially the last two years. And at the same time, all of these sports numbers are still undercounted. I think the NFL's argument is correct that they still have not gotten to that point yet.

31:02And it's probably a North Star that Nielsen will never be able to reach. I mean, it's almost impossible to do. I mean, it's the same thing with pollsters. You think there's ever going to be a pollster who gets the election exactly right every time? I mean, it's a really difficult task. So it's complicated. And ultimately, I don't see it normalizing necessarily anytime soon. I appreciate that. Armand, I want to change subject with you. And that's just to get your quick thoughts on the casting, the announcers for the NFL Network games. There's an announcement that Jason Kelsey will join Dave Pasch and Kurt Warner in what is likely the NFL Network's lead booth.

31:53They'll call, I think, maybe four of the seven games that they have. That might even be from your site, John. And then NFL Network will have a second broadcast group, and that will be in the booth Bob Wushusen and Louis Riddick. Am I – I should know this. Do you guys know who the sideline reporters are for each of those? Yeah, it's going to be Molly McGrath on both crews, and Peter Schrager is going to fill in for one game on a doubleheader. Don't want to let the – don't want to not mention the full crew. Thank you for that, Derek. All right, so Armand on first blush, Pash, Kelsey, Warner, and then Wushuzen, Riddick with Schrager and Molly McGrath, depending on the games.

32:37What's your thought? I'll use this opportunity to shamelessly plug a column that should be coming out on our site this weekend where I break down each of the lead broadcast crews across the NFL, so be on the lookout for that on sportsmediawatch.com. um so i recommended about four months ago that pass warner be the nfl network crew so uh i feel pretty smart right now now the kelsey piece is the that's the that's the x factor i don't think espn has used him as well as it could have uh the late night show was a thing that happened And hardly anyone remembers. And I don't like how much they've allowed him to lean into his Philadelphia Eagles sort of ambassador-like role and presence.

33:29This is a Hall of Fame offensive lineman. And I want to hear him actually be able to break the game without him having to be Travis's brother or without him having to be a former Philadelphia Eagle. So, Pash and Warner, you're going to get a great broadcast from those two. They are professionals. I think Pash has an opportunity here to really prove to people why he is one of the better play-by-play broadcasters in sports television. I felt Warner should have been a lead analyst for some property a long time ago. I thought ESPN could have solved a lot of their troubles by giving Kurt Warner and maybe Ian Eagle the Monday Night Football job years ago.

34:05And a lot of the headaches they went through, they wouldn't have had to endure. So I like Pash and Warner a lot. Kelsey's the X factor. If he commits to really doing this as more, he doesn't have to lose his humor, but you have to go within the flow of the broadcast and really commit to doing this at a high level. He'll be the X factor. With Susan and Riddick, I mean, with Susan is another solid to really good to great even football play by play announcer with decades of experience with his time with the New York Jets. So he knows the NFL. Louis Riddick is obviously one of the smartest minds ESPN has.

34:40And ESPN did a smart thing by not giving Riddick a second analyst, which was one of the problems with that Fowler-Orlovsky-Riddick booth. There was just too much competition for airtime. So I think viewers should notice a cleaner sounding broadcast without the congestion of Orlovsky and Riddick talking over each other. And Wischusen is, of course, one of the best play-by-play announcers that they have. ESPN, they really nailed this in terms of the play-by-play announcers. They finally chose passion with shoes and two announcers who have covered the league for decades and who are two of the stronger play by play announcers they have.

35:15Yeah, that's all well said that they'll both. When I see both of those groups, like to me, I just think like that's professionalism on both sides. I bet you're correct. My passion is great. So he's been great with shoes and is a total poor, like literally everybody in that booth like is a pro. And I think Jason Kelsey will be fine. Like, I think in that setting, I think he will probably hit the people around him will make that work. He doesn't have to be, you know, Travis and Jason Kelsey, Jason Kelsey. I think he will be like game analyst, Jason Kelsey. So I would expect, I really would like those booths.

35:48The one thing I would just say, Armand on Kurt Warner is like, you know, it does lead the Westwood one package right on radio. So, and the reason I bring that up is because he's always been praised for that for years now. Like he's always I hear from a lot of people who say, like, I'll listen to the radio coverage because I just think that's a that's an 18. Derek, it seems like you wanted to say something. Yeah, I'll just say, like, you know, a lot of people will also argue that Bob was shoes and should be ESPN's lead hockey voice. And we've had that debate on our podcast before we've interviewed Sean McDonough on there.

36:19We all feel that Sean is very good at his job on the hockey side. But some people prefer with shoes and style as someone who lives in New York. I've heard with shoes and for many years calling games. games. And, you know, obviously Lewis Riddick, as Armand referenced, a very sharp mind, very astute insights into the game of football, and we've heard him for a long time. And then keeping Kurt Warner on the NFL Network side is probably good in terms of the consistency. I know he used to work with Rich Eisen on those lead games. Eisen more of a talk show host. I know he got some criticisms over the years for his play-by-play.

36:48So overall, I think these are strong pairings. I think Jason Kelsey will do well, could take some time for an adjustment. I don't believe he's done color commentary before during a regular season game. I know he's generally so far been on the studio cruise and has been someone used for vignettes and skits kind of. So it will be interesting to hear Kelsey in that setting. But I'm optimistic he'll perform well, and I think these are good choices. Yeah, and it's not a full schedule. So you give Kelsey the chance to sort – if he's horrific, it's not a 16-game, 17-game horrific. It's four or whatever it is.

37:20So that's the way to do it. And then – oh, yeah. I did want to just weigh in really quick because you guys talked about it. I like McDonough on hockey. I actually think he gets a lot of shit unfairly from people online. I actually think he's a good hockey broadcaster. Especially with the cup, I thought he was excellent in terms of the Stanley Cup calls. So I stand with Sean. Go ahead, Dave. And one more NFL Network note. Tom Pellicero going over to Netflix as a sideline reporter on the games. Yeah, he was part of those ESPN layoffs or reported to be part of those ESPN layoffs. So interesting to see him being added as an insider for Netflix.

37:56Netflix only has five games and they've brought on an insider. I think that's a little bit that demonstrates their investment in the National Football League to have someone breaking news on their side. And, you know, you put him with at least for the week one game thus far, it's been announced. Noah Eagle, Luke Kukli and MJ Acosta Ruiz. So will be interesting to hear that pairing for game two of the season in week one. And I'll be curious, like what what Pellisaro breaks on Netflix, you know, because it'd be interesting, sort of like what is Netflix interested in? Right. Even when it comes to that position.

38:24Like I'm always rooting for people to get jobs. So I'm glad they made the hire, but that's what I'll be curious about is like, what does that position mean for Netflix? And is it, is it going to be the same kind of idea what we see on any SPN or, or a Fox, you know, like, is he going to, is he, is like the, the Glazer stuff like, or is it just transactional stuff or injury stuff during a game or something like that? But I appreciate you bringing that up. All right. I got three quick ones here. I'll do these before we finish up with the stuff we're going to do. Just a couple of notes. Jesse Daugherty wrote a really beautiful piece for Esquire titled The Job That Loves You Back on Being a New Father as he just got laid off from his dream job as a sports writer at the Washington Post.

39:05I absolutely recommend that. Beautiful, beautiful piece. I know Jesse's wife, Joan Neeson, is a great writer herself. She used to work with me at Sports Illustrated. So highly recommended. Next, and we'll talk about this in the last segment. I told Jimmy Trena I would publicly praise him for saying that the football game on the NFL network would beat MLB Field of Dreams, which both John Lewis and I did not think had a chance of happening, but it absolutely happened. So all hail Jimmy Trena, who has a new podcast that you should absolutely subscribe to. Go search it on wherever the hell you search your podcast, but sign up.

39:44I mean, you'll make Trena's day if you sign up. I just, quite frankly, sign up and download it for like two minutes. I don't even think he's going to care if he wasn't the whole thing. He just wants to download and he wants to sign up. So please do that. Just happened this week recently before we taped this podcast, Matt Calkins, who's a sports columnist for the Seattle Times, resigned after his editors refused to publish a column that he wrote on transgender athletes competing in women's sports. He told the New York Times that he had arrived at the decision after his editors declined to publish a couple of columns that he wrote.

40:17Seattle Times spokesperson did not decline to comment on his resignation. Matt Calkins wrote a piece on Substack on what happened from his perspective, including the spiked column. I would encourage people to read that for sure. My quick take on that is this is a column that's written hundreds of thousands of words for your paper. It's not an outsider writing an op-ed. I'm always a belief in sort of giving the people the benefit of the doubt at your place some institutional trust. And to me, as long as the piece was factually accurate and offered fair context, I would have run it. And then you let the public decide how they feel about it.

40:55I will say certainly as a sort of a concurrent to this story, Kathy Engelberg just came out not too long ago saying, we're being the center of a political football for people who've never watched the WNBA, never have written about the WNBA or reported on the WNBA. and this is not specific to Matt Calkins because he has written about Seattle but there are plenty of people out there who do not give a shit about women's hoops they pay no attention to the play on the court they haven't been around the sport at all I say that as someone who's written women's basketball going back to Sports Illustrated since 2001 you also see a lot of politicians who are absolutely using that league for their own political purposes so that part is true it's a very hard conversation now to have with nuance but Kathy Engelbert is right but in terms of the Matt Calkins stuff I absolutely encourage people to read his stuff on his column on Substack.

41:42Lastly, former Alabama basketball player, Kai Spears, won his defamation lawsuit against the New York Times and was awarded by a jury$9.25 million in damages. They had a 2023 article incorrectly reported that he and he was a university basketball. he was an Alabama basketball player, was at the scene of a deadly shooting, and as it turned out, was not at the scene of a deadly shooting. So he wins a defamation suit against the New York Times. First one I think they have lost in 50 years. Michael McCann, who's been on this podcast many times, the great Sportico legal analyst, wrote about this case and related issues in a new law review article published by the Harvard Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law.

42:26I can't highly recommend that enough. Just go on McCann's socials. It is fascinating how he diagnosed this case and how in his and I think his co-writer's opinion, Kai Spears was not sort of a public figure in the way you might think of public figures. So it's pretty fascinating to read about that. let's let's finish up with this um the the fever the indiana fever atlanta dream game averaged 2.58 million viewers on espn um largest wmba audience ever on cable uh previous high was like a shade under that for the fever sun in the 2024 playoffs john i know i ask you this a lot But we have not seen, correct, any drop off in terms of WNBA viewership, right?

43:18I mean, I don't know if you have these numbers in front of you, if you know what the increase is for the year. But once again, the leak continues to grow in viewership. And not that this should be a surprise to anybody. The interest in the Indiana Fever, and let's be blunt, the interest in Caitlin Clark remains and perhaps is even growing still in 2026. Yeah, no, I mean, obviously the WNBA is doing better than anyone could ever have imagined. You've been covering the league forever. You know the days when an audience of 400 ,000 was like, oh, wow, that's not too bad for the WNBA. And now you're talking 2.x, 2.y million.

43:59I do think the thing that fascinates me is as well as the WNBA is doing, it still hasn't gotten an all time record yet in this era, which is kind of fascinating to me. It's still the most watched game still had Rebecca Lobo and Lisa Leslie in it. It's fascinating. But look, these numbers are incredible. You know, I said that just now about Rebecca Lobo and Lisa Leslie. I also think it's fascinating that the most watched women's basketball game by far this year involved Lauren Betts, right? Every year, the WNBA still hasn't gotten to where college is. So there's definitely, you know, not necessarily an element of slow your roll, but we don't want to overstate how big the league is because it's still not as big as a women's college game.

44:49And it's still not at the highest level it's ever been, at least in terms of individual audience. But, no, it's been a spectacular, spectacular run for the league. I know John O 'Ran reported earlier this week that viewership is up 20 % compared to earlier in the year. I don't really know what the comparison points would be. I think since the whole Sophie Cunningham thing, that little story started. You know, that probably is helping a bit. I think, I mean, you guys will probably do this on the site, But at a certain point, hopefully you guys will do like a little bit of a deep dive into like where maybe you do right before the playoffs start or something like that, where things are, what the regular season was.

45:30Armand, let me ask you this, because like this is interesting to me. I'm probably not the best person to ask this because I'm a big fan of the league. So I'm always interested in the league. But as a viewer, like are you finding the viewership experience like interesting? Like I find these athletes to be incredibly skilled, more athletic than ever before. Like it's an interesting sport for me to watch. Is it for you? And maybe that's what we can glean from the viewership continuing to go up. Yeah, it is. I mean, and people that I talk to, they appreciate the competitiveness of the sport, of the game.

46:11I mean, I have people who watch the WNBA, I mean, faithfully. And we've had conversations on our podcast with people who work within the game and just love it, love it. And maybe it took something like a Caitlin Clark or maybe even some of the controversies around Angel Reese or Sophie Cunningham to bring some eyeballs to the product. And then people watch the product and they realize, oh, I actually like this. There's passion, there's skill, there's competitiveness. And then you've got these outstanding players like an Aja Wilson, like a Caitlin Clark and so on and so forth. And so I think that the WNBA, for all of the things that are sort of swirling around it, the reality is when the games are actually being played, which is what matters most, not only are people interested, but they're being given something that entertains.

47:03And they're being given it on platforms that are readily available and that people turn to on a consistent basis, the CBS, the ESPN, the ABC, the NBC. And so as a result of that, you're getting the kind of viewership numbers that you're getting. You keep sort of bumping into the WNBA because of the networks they're on. And that's a good thing regardless of the controversies that surround the sport. Derek, let me ask you this because I know you've written a lot about hoop streams and stuff like that for ESPN's WNBA coverage.

47:37There's so many more outlets that have started that are covering women's sports, which is good. Now, the viewership or the engagement might not be nearly as high as ESPN. Just women's sports, that site, it's obviously not the same as ESPN.com, but a place like that exists, which is awesome, and it's new. I'm always thinking to myself that, like, could a non-ESPN place own the WNBA conversation over an ESPN if it didn't air games? Or are the games themselves ultimately so important that whoever sort of has that inventory has the automatic advantage? And that's not just ESPN. You know, that's whether it's ION or Prime Video or whatever.

48:26But that's something I always think about where like you could like and we have seen this like like, for example, like part of my take like became a massive institution. The Barstool podcast, they don't have any they don't have any NFL rights. But you know what I'm saying? They were able to create a format where they can gain massive audience. And so I'm wondering, Derek, would like the WNBA could something like that exist where somebody really comes in and kind of owns the conversation, but they have no game inventory. so to speak. I don't think that's the case right now. I think the league has really experienced an explosion in popularity of late over the last few years.

49:05A lot of that has to do with Caitlin Clark. I mean, I believe it was just a few years back that we hadn't seen a game average 1 million viewers in nearly two decades. So the fact is, like, there's still room for growth. I think the WNBA avoided a catastrophe and the fact that the CBA did not affect the season to the point where there was cancellation or delayed games. I think that was very important to get that labor agreement done. But look, you see the networks investing right now in women's sports. ESPN has Women's Sports Sundays. The fact is that the games are still the draw right now. We're not seeing a dedicated WNBA studio show on the main ESPN network of linear television just yet.

49:42I think there's still room for investment where you can have those weekly women's sports shows. I know CBS has We Need to Talk, but there needs to be more routine programming. I mean, I'll just tell you. You never hear it on sports talk radio, like ever, unless it's a controversial topic. But it's just it doesn't even exist in that world, generally speaking. Yeah, I would tell you two things based on recent in-person experiences. One, going to Fanatics Fest. I was surprised at the lack of WNBA there. There was definitely a basketball presence, but there was not enough WNBA, in my opinion. And that is somewhere where they could improve.

50:15And then the second thing, I was recently in Los Angeles for a series of reasons. And I did watch I went to Amazon Studio in Culver City and saw the studio show with Ali Clifton, Ty Young and Lindsay Harding in the studio. And I will tell you, like, there's legitimate investment in how that is produced. It's produced at a very high level. It's the same studio used for the NBA. A lot of graphics, a lot of personnel behind the scenes. And there's real investment there from Amazon and how they're producing that show and how they're leading into games and double headers. So the fact is, like, these networks are investing.

50:46It's good for the WNBA that they have a broad national presence, many places discoverability. It's kind of hard to miss the WNBA right now, especially this time of year when the league's in season. I would just like to see more organic coverage, more earned media instead of the paid media that comes through the rights deals. I love that Derek, John is saying like, I'm in LA for like unexplained reasons. Like, I think it's like, I think it's like the opening scene of like William Peterson to live and let die in LA or like stay tuned to sports media watch or it's like heat. That's all I'll say. chino and futterman meeting in the diner um all right last one um i did sort of tease a little bit in uh early and think john tell me what happened with field of dreams how did that thing just how was that that thing was a disaster in terms of viewership like again i feel like maybe i'm just out of the loop here and i'm not saying like everybody's like you know they're like waiting for a kevin costner uh you know soundbite or something like that but like the game is kind of a cool idea.

51:44Like it's a fun thing. The visuals are awesome. But that thing, no one watched that thing. What happened? Yeah. I mean, look, 1.66 million viewers by a wide margin, the worst Netflix number we've seen, right? Because we haven't seen that many Netflix numbers. We've seen these Nielsen rated events in the NFL and in baseball. And then of course, the non Nielsen stuff for boxing. Every Netflix number we've seen has been pretty good. Even, you know, I know People made a big deal. Home Run Derby was least watched since 2003. That's still 5.3 million viewers. That's not a bad number at all. But this was, as you said, I said on the podcast with Jimmy Trena last week that it would be a ratings disaster if Field of Dreams didn't beat the preseason because the preseason, which actually did better than I would have expected, I guess I should have known Packers-Steelers are a pretty good matchup, but preseason NFL on NFL Network is low two millions even at the high end.

52:41well field of dreams last time out in 2022 was 3.1 million on fox and netflix numbers have not been dramatically lower than their linear equivalents so my expectation would have been maybe 2.5 2.6 something like that a reasonable number but 1.66 that to me you know i haven't checked i i probably should check i wonder if espn did better for yankees mariners i think maybe the night before. I mean, that's within range of one of these ESPN weeknight games that ESPN is not even slightly promoting or letting people know about. The Netflix factor needs to be considered because we have not seen a Netflix game yet on a busy day.

53:28Netflix has had games on Christmas. They've had opening day by itself, home run derby, but this was a nine-game day in Major League Baseball. We'll go to you, Derek, and then we'll finish up with our mind. I have a question to throw back at John. Do you think that the game would have done better if we had more marquee teams from larger markets, if we had Yankees, Dodgers, and Field of Dreams? Is that what was necessary here, or do you think it came down to the game being on Netflix? Interesting. Well, that's a good question, because the first Field of Dreams game that did so well, nearly 6 million viewers, was the Yankees-White Sox.

53:59So New York Yankees, you have Chicago in there, the Chicago market, although I'm sure the White Sox weren't very good then. Well, actually no, they weren't. But you also had the tie-in that the White Sox were the team in Field of Dreams, so that's kind of an easy thing. Derek makes a good... And a storybook finished, by the way. Tim Anderson hitting that walk-off. That's right. Who just retired recently. The Twins don't have a star. No. So that's an issue, right? The biggest star on the Twins is whoever the player is on the Yankees who's sweeping them out of the playoffs. No love for Byron Buxton.

54:30Buxton can play. He can. Armand, what about you? Do you have any thoughts? I mean, first of all, John, it pisses me off that we have to praise Jimmy Tray even for a second on this podcast. But Armand, again, there's usually viewership numbers. Even if it's a low one, I'm usually like, all right, maybe there's weather or something happened. But I did see that number, and I was like, that is a bad number for Netflix. No way around. Yeah, the White Sox won the division that year back in 21. And then the following year, you had the Cubs in the game versus the Reds, if I recall correctly. So, you know, you got the Chicago market again.

55:03And, of course, everybody loves the Cubs on national television. So, yeah, I had no enthusiasm for this matchup while even while it was being sort of promoted. Twins have no stars. There's nobody for me to connect to. There just isn't. And so, yeah, I do think if you had bigger marquee names here, bigger markets involved, I do think that would have played a factor and given this number of boost. But, yeah, I mean, I wasn't given. I know that the Twins have been competitive, and I know the Phillies are also competitive over in the NL East this year. And so one would say, yeah, this should produce for us.

55:42This should really do something. But not every matchup, regardless of how much you try and dress it up, not every matchup is going to just going to – it's not going to give you the numbers you want just because it's a special game. There still has to be more juice behind the matchup. and Philly, Minnesota just didn't have it. And also the first interleague game in the history of Field of Dreams, but I think Yankees-Dodgers could have broken through that and it could have supplanted that fact that you had a team from the American League and a team from the National League and maybe even put a rivalry there next time that's more desirable.

56:12Maybe we get Mets-Phillies or Red Sox-Yankees. I mean, there are possibilities up and down the board. Maybe it does show you that as cool as the setting is and the scene is, the setting can't sell it anymore and you're going to need teams. John, what do you have to say? Well, exactly that, which is you don't want to waste a great matchup if the setting alone is going to get you a great number. That's the whole point. As you said, it might be the case that maybe that setting. Now, remember, they're bringing it back next year. They are going to be on the NBC broadcast network. It's Red Sox and Royals.

56:42Now, the Royals were good at one point. They do not appear to still be good, based on my understanding. I don't necessarily know if they are an attractive team to put in there. The Red Sox obviously are having a great season. They've had an incredible run. But, you know, I mean, they also are a very up-and-down franchise. You know, you could be going next year, what, two teams way under.500 and out of the playoff race, entirely possible. So we'll see if the broadcast network factor plays a role. And what I'm going to be interested to see, how does baseball compensate Netflix with another special event game?

57:17That's a great question. They're supposed to have a, that's supposed to be their third matchup. I'm almost, I almost wonder if maybe Netflix gets two games on opening day or something, because every other league is starting out. Well, that's the end game NHL actually, but the, the other two leagues out of those non NFL pro sports, they're starting out with a matinee and then a primetime game for their openers and baseball. There's no sport that should start in the afternoon on a weekday more than baseball. So maybe instead of having, you know, Netflix carry, you know, another Speedway classic in August, let's give them two opening day games.

57:58Yeah. Or you just, I know, maybe you just do, you go for some crazy setting for baseball that we've never seen, you know, some game in Paris or something like that, you know, figure out like something that hasn't been, hasn't been done. All right. My pre I, these guys went long and I really appreciate it. John Lewis, Armand Rohde, Derek Futterman of sports media watch, check out all their stuff. John, go ahead. If you have something to say. I thought Armand had something. Did you have something to say, Armand? Yeah, I just wanted to add real quick that baseball could learn from the NFL. The NFL has Kansas City Buffalo on Thanksgiving night this year and put Kansas City Dallas on Thanksgiving last year.

58:32Having a sense of occasion is great, but you got to give me somebody to watch. So those two things can work together. Right. And that's the case of your baseball. They can learn something from NFL. It's like, OK, you know what? Let's put one of our marquee matchups on like one of our marquee sort of events on the calendar. And yes, maybe Sunday Night Baseball doesn't get a Yankees Red Sox, but the Field of Dreams does. I'm with you on that, Armand. I actually like what the NFL did there. I don't know if the networks that might have had that game probably don't love it, but it's still a good move.

59:02All right, John Lewis, Armand Brody, Derek Fardiman, catch all of their work on Sports Media Watch. They have some, as they said, they had some cool stories coming up. Always great podcast guests. Who's up this week, guys? So I'll give you some pop. Next podcast up, we did Noah Eagle. earlier this month. So we have Noah Eagle, we have Tony Reale, and then we have a special return guest. We have Mark Jones, who is talking about his post ESPN career. I like it. All right. I like that very much. All right. Check those out. All right. Head to the archives. Hopefully there'll be stuff here that you'll appreciate.

59:36Last podcast before these guys, Jason Hare, the director of The Last Dance on his newest film, Novak Djokovic, The Wolf of Winter. That's on Prime Video. I recommend that. did stuff on the Premier League with Pierre Moussa, the coordinating producer of NBC Sports' coverage on the Premier League and what they have planned in store for that. You can head back to the archives, including with these guys. We've done a ton of stuff on Tony Romo and what we think CBS may or may not do. And then July 30th, Linda Cohn and Neil Everett on this podcast together. Thank you for the nice notes. Got a couple of very good reviews lately, so much appreciated for that.

1:00:13and it's appreciated. As I said, thank you very much. Shout out to my buddy Trena. Go check out his podcast. He's taking a big leap, leaving SI, so I hope that works out for him. I admire him for going for it. I want to thank James Jackson for all his hard work. Thanks to everybody at Odyssey for their support. Most of all, thank you for listening. We'll see you soon on the Sports Media Podcast.

1:00:44Thank you.