Why CBS locked up J.J. Watt; should WNBA broadcasters be more critical?

0:00DraftKings, an official partner of the NBA, is now available in all 50 states. So wherever you live, follow your favorite NBA stars, get excited about the biggest matchups, and lock in on those buzzer-beating moments. And with DraftKings, it's all in one app. Download the DraftKings Sports app and use code 2400. New DraftKings customers can spend five and get 200 in total bonuses paid within 21 days. New DraftKings customers can spend five and get 200 in total bonuses paid within 21 days. Includes all markets. That's code 2400 in partnership with DraftKings. The crown is yours. Bet with DK Sportsbook.

0:41Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER. 1-800-MY-RESET. Connecticut, call 888-789-7777. Or visit ccpg.org. On behalf of Boothill Casino in Kansas, BetTax Passed who may apply in Illinois, 21 and over. Void in Canada. Event contract trading with DraftKings predictions involves risk of loss. Availability varies. Predictions offer void in New York. Bet to get bonus bets that expire in seven days. Trade to get predictions dollars that expire in one year. $50 in rewards issued every seven days via click to claim for 21 days. One non-withdrawable reward redeemable. Terms at dkng.co slash offer. Limited time offer.

1:13Nationwide based on sportsbook predictions and free-to-play sports contest availability varies by state. You know, Dan, losing weight can feel a lot like getting so close to the end zone and then losing the ball right before you cross the line. Winning the game is great, but maintaining that success season after season, that's where the real challenge lies. That's right, Ceci. Noom, the leading behavior change company, pairs GLP-1 medication with behavioral tools, bite-sized daily lessons, and coaching to help you build sustainable habits. It's like having a full coaching staff to help you lose weight and keep it off, even if you stop the meds.

1:45The Noom GLP-1 program starts at$39, and medication can be delivered to your door in as little as seven days. Get a real game plan for lasting success. Start your GLP One journey today at Noom.com. That's N-O-O-M.com. Noom. Lose for keeps. Initial one-month subscription from$39 plus tax and$99 plus tax per month thereafter. Cost of medication not included. Final pricing depends upon program selection.

2:19welcome to the sports media podcast i'm your host richard deitch my producer is james jackson this is our usual weekend roundtable and we have three of the regulars back people have given phenomenal response particularly when this group is on and there is a lot that has happened this week so i'm very excited to have john lewis founder and editor of sports media watch jerek futterman also part of sports media watch obviously does a lot of writing for them uh produces their podcast um is the designated person when there's fancy conferences he heads out there and swans with all the millionaire sports media types and armand brody of course also doing multimedia stuff for sports media watch you hear him on the podcast as well and you can to catch his writing on Sports Media Watch.

3:05Welcome, fellas. Thanks for having us. All right. I was talking to Derek before we started. A very significant week in our world. And the biggest story, I think, unless you guys disagree, would be CBS naming J.J. Watt as its permanent lead analyst for the NFL on CBS. They specifically told you it's a multi-year agreement. very notably they told you jj watt will be calling the super bowl in atlanta when cbs has the next super bowl and whatever the you know year plus or whatever the the the the numbers are um i'll save my thoughts till the end because i have a lot of different ways i want to go on this but john let's just start with you and then i'll go to the to the three of you when you saw that give me your your first kind of instincts and broad, broad take on it?

3:56Well, I thought it was interesting because obviously we know there's going to be a lot of big names on the free agent market. This is basically like, you know, actual sports now, right? You have these free agents, they're coming up, Greg Olson, Troy Aikman, combined seven Super Bowl broadcasts between them. They are obviously way more seasoned than JJ Watt, who has yet to work a playoff game. So this is something I mentioned when we did, when we taped our podcast, Armand, Derek and I, we still don't know what JJ Watts is going to sound like when the pressure is highest. And we also know that Drew Brees really, you know, failed under that pressure when he did a playoff game for the first time with NBC all those years ago.

4:36Now, I don't think Watts is going to be like that, because Brees obviously was also a first-year analyst at that point and hadn't even been doing a lot of NFL games. They've been working mostly Notre Dame. But still, there's a lot of questions that need to be answered about how good J.J. Watt can be in this role that he's occupied for a season and a third. And so getting into the Super Bowl, that's obviously an enormous assignment. We've seen relatively young analysts get that before. Greg Olson got it in his second year. Tom Brady got it in his first. But it's a significant commitment at a time when we don't really know yet how well this is going to work.

5:17I mean, he and Nancy for it, like six games together. So it's really fast. And I think it tells you, and I'm borrowing a point that Armand and Derek made as well on the podcast we take yesterday. It tells you that the era of the big money analyst is ending because you could go on the free agent market and get someone big, or you could just be satisfied with what you have, right? Sports TV, it's not like actual sports. You don't need to win the championship. The goal at the end of the season is not to win the sports semi. The goal is to put on a professional broadcast that's the best that you can do.

5:53And if you can do that with J.J. Watt and not spend, I think Troy Aikman's asking price for Dylan Byers at Puck is$30 million a year. If you can do that with J.J. Watt and not break the bank, that's probably the better solution. Armand, when you saw that press release pop in your inbox, what were your first thoughts? I thought about 2017 when Sean McManus rolled the dice and hired Tony Romo, who had no television experience at all. And man, no one expected to be given that opportunity. Now, granted, Dallas Cowboys quarterback, that helps. But really a surprising decision back in 2017. And I compared that to what David Burson did here.

6:41they went to the safe route with jj watt somebody who's all already within the company and somebody who is still a bit unproven but cbs said we don't want another romo situation we want sizzle and steak if we can get it and towards the end romo had a whole lot of sizzle but not much stake. And so CBS played it safe here. It's not a surprising move. It's a little disappointing for those of us who cover this stuff because we want trauma and chaos and, and all the things, but CBS played it safe. I am concerned about how, how strong Nance and Watts sound as a team. They have not been, of course, it's only been a handful of games.

7:29I know that, but you're always looking for those clues, those traces of chemistry. And right now, Jim Nance and JJ Watt are two good broadcasters who are trying to work together as opposed to a good broadcast team. And it's important to have your lead team. Your lead team ought to feel different. There ought to be something about it that causes it to stand out over the other teams. And right now, anyway, Jim Nance and JJ Watt do not have that. They have time before next year's Super Bowl, but they don't feel like a unit just yet. So I'm looking to see how they perform now that this move has been solidified and announced.

8:09I'll be listening to see if Nansen Watt sounds like more of a unit as we march towards the playoffs. All right, Derek, I'll save my thoughts. Your thoughts. This is a big gamble on J.J. Watt and Jim Nansen that they're able they're going to be able to figure it out. I kind of echo Armand's sentiments. I don't think they've been bad, but there's room to improve. And this certainly is a good runway to do it. I mean, you think about when Tom Brady joined the Fox booth with Kevin Burkhart and he was calling a Super Bowl at the end of his rookie year. You now have an extra year for J.J. Watt. And on top of that, J.J.

8:41Watt was part of the NFL today and the year before. So this is his third year in television after retiring from the NFL. And you have time to really, you know, with this runway to improve and to get yourselves to a point where you feel like a lead crew and you're calling the Super Bowl. And John, I think you made this point yesterday when we recorded that CBS has its Super Bowl broadcast situation figured out in a better spot than ESPN's does right now. Because while I don't think this is ultimately the case, the more and more we hear about the Troy Aikman and Joe Buck things, the more and more we have to think about could this booth sustain till the end of the season.

9:12So I think this is a smart move by CBS, now part of Skydance, smart move by CBS Sports to get in front of this. And we know that Jim Nance and J.J. Watt will be the lead team for the Super Bowl next season. All right. You guys hit on a lot of very similar things that I think. So let me throw a couple of things out there and any of you guys can respond. You just put your hand up and I'll move to you. One, I totally agree with Derek on the sense that I think there was motivation on CBS's end to get in front of this and to solidify the booth as fast as they could. They are traditionally, I think, as all of us have covered them, a pretty conservative group.

9:53I think that's fair to say. They don't like drama. They're not ESPN. They don't want to be in the news. In some ways, Fox, same thing. They're pretty stable, too, in that sense. And I think if you're David Burson, you're making a calculation that J.J. Watt can grow into this role, even if it doesn't sound off the top best booth right now. We already have him under contract, so we don't have to bring in someone new and pay whatever that dollar figure would be. I have no idea what Troy Aikman is asking, but he's certainly asking a significant amount of money. If you're Greg Olson, if you're going to get the number one job, you're definitely getting double digits in terms of the millions, 10 million plus.

10:34So my thought is, if you're David Burson, we have a guy under contract. We just give him a raise. We pay him a little bit more. We don't have to bring in new salary. And we're already at this company, which is under significant debt. I don't know how much Skydance wants to be paying big money for an NFL analyst when they've got all sorts of other stuff to figure out. Although I did just see Elon Musk, I think, threw them a ton of money. So maybe money's not as much of an issue as it used to be. So that's sort of part one. Secondly, this is the other thing. and I'll go to you, John, after this, that I've heard just from talking to people in the crew.

11:07J.J. Watt has a really good reputation of being like a camaraderie guy. Ian Eagle told me this. People on the Nance team have told me this. He's hardworking. He's really well-liked. People like being around him, and he's going to do the prep. And I do wonder, John, if in management's eyes, there was some thought like, we've gotten bad press on Roma over the last couple of years. There's questions about how much he's prepping. I always thought he prepped more than was out there, but clearly it was an issue. You just got to be honest. And so we got this guy who is the opposite of what we've been hearing with Romo.

11:44Everybody on the crew already likes him. If he's not like slam dunk right now, we have confidence in our production people where we'll bring them into the slam dunk place. So that's how I think Burson was thinking about it. and that's why I think they did this and I think it hits on everything all three of you have said. What do you think, John? Well, I tend to agree. I mean, look, the other thing too, at a time of unbelievable instability at CBS and the company broadly, it is a good idea to get something that you just have stable. And the fact is that, you know, there is this idea that you have to have superstars in the booth.

12:25Prime Video, whose NFL viewership continues to grow, and this year they're having their most watched season. Al Michaels at 81 going at 82 years old and Kirk Herbstreet, who has always been primarily a college analyst, nobody would consider that with all due respect to both of them to be the best booth in the NFL or even the best booth Amazon could have put together. But if you have a booth that works and people are tuning in, you can spend that money elsewhere or at the very least just be stable in what you have rather than ever changing because stability with a booth that's not the best is still better than ping-ponging from one to the other.

13:06Let me, I'll go to you, Derek, and sort of get your thoughts on this. By the way, they would never do this because I realized that internal politics are involved. But if you're going to be honest, the best booth that CBS could put together is J.J. Watt and Ian Eagle as their number one team. That would be the best NFL booth. No disrespect to Jim Nance. He's been on this podcast, total legend. I actually think he's a good NFL broadcaster, but I think Ian Eagle is their best play-by-play NFL broadcaster. I might even be able to make an argument Kevin Harlan is their second best, just in terms of the NFL.

13:35I don't think people would think I'd be crazy on that. But Derek, this gets to something now interesting in that with J.J. Watt now solidified at CBS, the potential for the musical chairs of the offseason is now a little lessened because there's one less big job out there. The big job clearly now looks to be ESPN Monday Night Football. Unless something dramatic happens, I don't see, given everything I've been reading and hearing, how that relationship with Troy Aikman is fixed. Never say never. Things can happen. But I don't think people are this public, unless they kind of know that they're going to be a free agent at the end of the year.

14:17So now that the CBS job is off the table, if you are Greg Olson or Travis Kelsey or Sean McVay or Peyton Manning or whoever potentially could be the analyst, how are you looking at that ESPN job? And if you're ESPN, perhaps this is a more interesting question. If you're Jimmy Pataro, you really now have your choice of anybody like for that spot if you want. So if you're Pataro and Burke Magnus, who are you thinking about? All right, who best fits what Monday Night Football is about and who best fits it with Joe Buck? I mean, I could give you my prediction. I think we're going to have a booth of Joe Buck and Greg Olson next year.

14:56Which is sort of what most people or observers think, but continue. Yeah, that's kind of the way I'm leaning right now, not based on any inside information, just my own observations. And I think, and I believe we mentioned this on our podcast as well, that it could be the case where Troy Aikman is not working in television at all next year. I don't know if he would take a non-lead analyst job or he would join a studio show at this point. He may want that lead chair. And if the lead chair is not available, he just may be willing to walk away. And that could kind of be the way that it does unfold.

15:25I mean, the situation at Amazon could be interesting based on what's been reported about Kirk Herbstreit's contract and the potential outs in it. But I think at this point, the only bona fide lead opening that could be coming seems to be, based on the reporting, the ESPN seat alongside Joe Buck. And I think right now, just based on what we've heard, the most likely thing seems to be Buck and Olsen. um armand let me go to you if i was amazon i i would absolutely now again it's very easy for me to say it is not my money but if i was amazon and both aikman and olsen are available i would absolutely upgrade over herb street and then i'll obviously figure out who my play-by-play person do i know if they're going to do that i don't and the fact that they already re-signed herb street per Andrew Marchand's reporting, tells me that the only way they would switch that is if they have somebody really in mind, which feels like a Sean McVay type or Travis Kelsey.

16:21So Armand, I'll ask you the same thing I sort of asked Derek, if we're going to sort of play this out musical chairs. Derek may turn out to be correct in his assessment in that the only move in terms of the analyst chair that happens is the ESPN chair. the McVeigh piece is so strange because when Tom Brady went to Fox, they signed him ahead of time and had Olsen as the lead voice, the lead analyst for a year, knowing Brady was coming. Amazon seems to be of the belief that whenever Sean McVeigh calls it quits, we're going to get him. And so we are okay with dating Kirk Street while making it clear that there will be no ring because we really want to put a ring on Sean McVay's finger.

17:13Now, does that change with Troy Aikman? I don't know, but I will say that McVay and Olsen have something Troy Aikman does not have. That's youth. McVeigh, early 40s. Olsen, early 40s. Troy Aikman turns 60 next month. Now, 60 is hardly old by broadcasting standards, but it ain't 40. And so because of that, I was thrown off by Aikman's behavior with you on this podcast and in other places, because if you want to work in television, 60 is much older than 40. So there are many more miles ahead for these younger guys than exists for Troy Aikman. So I would have thought Aikman would have sort of kept some of this stuff quiet so that he could make sure that he wouldn't burn bridges and ruin or sabotage potentially another opportunity with another employer.

18:11Don't know if that's going to be the case now, but you've got Olsen, these younger voices, potentially McVay, potentially Travis Kelsey. These are more modern voices, and that's what the networks are always going after. So I do believe there's a strong possibility that Troy Aikman is out of television next season. I think I'll go to you, Derek. The thing about Troy is he's just so transparent, which is one thing I love about him that I just think he's not capable of answering. He's going to answer the question that he gets asked. He's not going to be a diplomat on that. We haven't really gotten to Netflix, and I'll go to you, John, on this after I go to Derek.

18:46Because in terms of Aikman at least doing something or someone doing something, there is always that factor with potentially five games. But Derek, what did you want to add? Yeah, I've got one more thought on ESPN. I kind of want to hear Armand's opinion on it based on this. ESPN has shown a penchant for going after stars the last few years, stars coming right off the field. And the Manicast numbers, based on what's been reported, have been down this year overall. So Armand, in the event that Travis Kelsey decides to retire from football, could you see ESPN going with a new Heights altcast with Jason and Travis Kelsey and then moving Peyton Manning, if open to it, to the Monday night booth with Joe Buck?

19:20I think that's a really smart thought. What do you think, Armand? Yeah, I do see that happening. The problem is, if Peyton wasn't willing to do game analysis 10 years ago, what would change his mind now? Now somebody would say, well, the money. They were offering him money. They were trying to reportedly in 2016. And Peyton is now 10 years old. I would love to see Peyton Manning in a booth. But he's also got the potential for the Colts job, right? I mean, we've read that, too. So who knows if he even goes a different direction? But I could certainly see ESPN doing some sort of new heights, something, something, something with Jason and Travis, because there is value in being in business with Jason Kelsey and with Taylor Swift's husband.

20:07Yes. The ESPN would love to be in the Travis Kelsey business in the way that Fox is in the Tom Brady business. It's not just calling games. It's being in the business. John, I want to go to you on this one. Again, we'll see what Netflix does in terms of how – like Luke Heckley, if he's the absolute guy next year. But if you're a Netflix, and Netflix has always been about stars and inventing and sizzle. money's not an issue for that company. So if you really wanted to get some buzz for like five games, Troy Aikman would be an awesome selection for that, as would Greg Olson. Now, I don't know. I think Olson's got very smart representation, and I don't think doing Netflix five games, if you just were going to leave Fox total, is sort of what Olson would want.

20:58That doesn't really make sense. If you're Olson, you want to call a full season a game somewhere. But that is the one wild card here, is that, yeah, I get it. It's not a full season. It's not the playoffs. But if you're an Aikman or an Olsen type or whoever, Travis Kelsey, Netflix is sitting out there with inventory and potentially high-profile inventory. Oh, don't forget Romo. Yeah, great point. Should have mentioned him. Yeah, because I think that would be the perfect place for Romo to kind of mount his comeback, right? Low-key, low-stakes, not a ton of games. And it's Netflix, so you still have the opportunity to feel like you're part of something cutting-edge and new.

21:37And of course, Romo is Romo. So, you know, one of the things about the Romo scenario, not to go off on a tangent, and this kind of relates to Aikman as well. NBC gets more out of their guys than anybody else, right? Because you, you know, Tara and Johnny might do figure skating, but then they're going to be at the Kentucky Derby too. Collinsworth is always doing the Olympic Games. One of the reasons why these contracts are so untenable at this point is that these guys are only doing the NFL, which is only on for half the year. They're not even doing stuff on morning shows. Aikman's not doing Get Up.

22:12So you've got to get more out of these guys. Netflix is one place where you can get more out of these guys. They haven't really pushed the issue yet. But if Netflix ever decided, hey, we want this relationship to extend to X and Y and Z and these other things that we're doing, and we want you to be part of the next guy climbing a skyscraper video that we do, You know, there are some other opportunities there that might not necessarily be there at CBS or Fox, which, you know, they don't they don't really do a lot of stuff outside of their actual game. There are a lot of reasons Chicago homeowners have chosen four seasons since 1971 and a plus rating with a Better Business Bureau.

22:54That's one. Two, BBB Torch Awards for ethics. That's another. And service around the clock every day of the year. That's a big one. For all your heating, plumbing, and electrical needs, you know who to call. For all the right reasons, call 866-4-SEASONS.

23:19Hey, football fans. It's Vaughn Miller, Dallas Cowboys linebacker and host of the Free Range Podcast. come hang out with me and my guy TJ Banks as we give you the best analysis, insights, and guest interviews from around the league each and every week. New episodes drop each and every Wednesday. Be sure to follow or subscribe to Free Range wherever you get your podcasts. Yeah, if you're a Tom Young or a Matt Kramer, you know, CAA guys who have a lot of these and a big time NFL guys, and these are smart people, you know, I'll say that because it'd be nice to get him back on the podcast. Maybe I'll call him smart so they come back on this one as opposed to always going on all rants.

24:05But what I was thinking about is that if you're looking at long-term planning, which these smart agents always do, Collinsworth's deal, I believe, is up in 2930. He'd be in his 70s, I believe, if I'm correct about it. I think he's 67, right? Still good. Certainly not knocking Chris. But at a certain point, he's going to move on or they're going to move on from him. I think that's just logical. So if you're an Olsen or a McVay or, as we mentioned, the Kelsey's or a Manning or even an Aikman, you probably should keep your eye on that just in terms of long term and maybe to sort of see where that is because that could be a good gig.

24:45But now, Derek, here's the big caveat on this. What if Sunday Night Football is not Sunday Night Football anymore, right, in 2030? and it's Netflix is Sunday net football. So I don't know if it would actually be with NBC. Well, NBC is going to, NBC Universal is going to be a standalone company by that point. So the balance sheet could look a little different. That's, but I was just going to say like, that's the one, well, there's two booths. That's the one booth that could come up after this. And I'm now at this point, and I was, again, I'll own it because I was dead wrong on this. Everything I now believe, I think Brady's going to maybe do the duration of his contract, or at least it looks that way.

25:17So if you're looking to go to Fox, you're cooked, right? We probably have the guy in there for eight years. So if you're looking a little longer term, that NBC job could be a phenomenal, I should say not NBC, the Sunday night football job could be an amazing job. John Armand, I think we mentioned this on our pod, but a little thing I'd throw out there. Do you see any of these networks ever going to a three-person booth again as a lead booth? I mean, because you could easily, I mean, if Peyton Manning doesn't want to do analysis in the booth full time, but ESPN wants to potentially, you know, down the road, maybe if they move on from the Manning cast, just throwing this out there.

25:54Could you see like Peyton Manning going in certain weeks with Joe Buck and Greg Olson? It'd be interesting. I mean, I don't think it's a crazy idea. You know, look, the fact is that the NFL is not a sport you want to experiment on. NBC is not going to do what they did with baseball on the NFL, right? You are also, I talked before about they're not trying to win a sports Emmy, but you are trying to show the NFL that you're serious. And for whatever reason, the NFL and all the leagues care about how their product is presented and the NFL cares a great deal. So at a time when the money isn't necessarily the tiebreaker, because if you really want the NFL, you'll pay whatever they want.

26:34The tiebreaker can also be how good is the product that you're putting out there? Yeah. So do I think that you could have a booth that wasn't the same every week on the NFL? I think that might be pushing it a little bit, to be honest. The one thing I would say is the NFL can say, hey, the networks make these hires. We don't make the hires. But you're not putting anybody on the air unless the NFL broadcasting group basically greenlights it. And so the interesting thing about all the candidates we've mentioned, they all have great relationships with the league. They're all deeply invested in the league manning i mean troy aikman's got his dolphin deal right manning's so still close to the cults uh mcveigh is a former coach uh if he ever answered the booth the kelsey's obviously a royalty they all know goodell they all know the broadcasting group so the one thing about that is there is no way i think we will ever see a tony kornheiser dennis miller jimmy kimmel someone from the outside where i just don't think the nfl would ever green light that anymore because I think they would see it as too much risk.

27:35In the same way, I don't think you will ever see a Bob Costas type be like the host of any NFL show again. I think they are – you agree with me, John? They're protecting their product where I don't think you would ever have somebody who would be that critical of the product. I also just don't think you will have people who are that critical in general sports TV roles anymore. Yes, I agree. Yeah. I mean, the, you know, Mike Tirico gets praise for his work at the Olympics, sometimes human rights and stuff like that. He did a good job, but it's even still levels below Costas in terms of sort of where that is.

28:14And I think, you know, there's, I think you hit it right, John. There's a line you can go to. Go ahead, Armand. Well, this will be the last thing. And then we'll move on to a different topic. somebody's going to have to take on the studio role though everybody can't do games and this is something terry bradshaw did brilliantly because he realized cbs was not moving john madden john madden's place was firmly established at the top of nfl broadcasting on cbs so bradshaw smartly became a studio analyst and he's been there for the last 36 years but he's coming up on eight years old. And at some point, somebody, some of these current players or recent retired players are going to have to take that spot because not everybody can do the lead booth.

28:59So somebody is going to have to be willing to take a studio role as well. It's less money. By the way, I'll just leave you with this. If I was Brad Zager, head of, president of Fox Sports, I would bring Romo into Fox NFL Sunday if he's willing to do it to try to stick it to CBS and to juice up that show. And I actually think Romo could be pretty good on the studio. I have no idea if he wants to do it, and it would be a very big pay cut. But that, to me, would be a nice piece of business if Zager could pull that off. All right, we're going to move on to the WNBA finals. And so we're not going to, you know, by the time you listen to this, there may be a little bit more in terms of viewership numbers.

29:44I haven't seen game three numbers yet. Maybe that comes out later today. But game four is being held tomorrow, if you're listening to this on Saturday. So the ratings part of this is incomplete, but they had a very, very big number for game one on NBC. And they had a very good cable number on the USA Network. So I'm interested in having a discussion on two things, fellas. One, what we think of the viewership so far, and then secondly, what we think of the presentation. So I'm going to go to you, John. In terms of the initial data that we have for viewership, what do you think? Well, I mean, obviously, it's very interesting because 2 million viewers for a WNBA Finals game.

30:26I know that doesn't compare well to some of the highest regular season audiences, but the WNBA Finals Game 1 had 239 ,000 viewers in 2019. Wow. Right? And it's actually been steadily growing. I'm pretty sure every WNBA Finals Game 1 has been up since that 2019 low. And it's 2.1 million. I mean, that would be the kind of number you would, if you had presented that to me in 2022, I would have thought that something crazy happened to cause that. Uh, so let's not, you know, that's not ignored the unbelievable growth here. I do think it helps to be on broadcast television on a day when there are no NFL games and college football is really tough competition.

31:12Don't get me wrong, but it's not quite the NFL, uh, even in that three 30 window. So, uh, but the fact that the WNBA was able to hold its own in that three 30 window opposite big time college football on ABC and CBS is pretty amazing to me. So impressive numbers. Game two, honestly, was more impressive to me because that's opposite Monday Night Football. Yes. And the WNBA wasn't going up against Monday Night Football in the ESPN days for obvious reasons. And it won't next year when ESPN has the finals again. But one point three million on USA Network and CNBC and E and, you know, these are these are not the big cable networks.

31:48I mean, none of them really are anymore other than ESPN and I guess Fox News. But these are not the big cable networks. We get 1.3 million on opposite Monday Night Football. It tells me that people are seeking out this finals because it's not you don't stumble upon USA Network and you don't stumble upon CNBC. You have to choose to watch those channels with all due respect to folks at Versan. So the fact that they got that number is impressive to me. I'll be intrigued to see the game three number because it was a blowout and obviously the NBA competition. And then game four will be interesting as well.

32:22One o 'clock start. But the most interesting number to me is game five, potential clincher, the first ever WNBA finals game, the first ever WNBA game period to go up against the World Series. Wow. And so both the World Series, which would be, there won't be any rain outs, by the way, that World Series. There won't be any rain outs at all with those domes. So game three of the World Series in Tampa and also Cowboys, Eagles on Monday Night Football. That's going to be tough. Derek, let me go to you. Whenever the, not whenever, but for these WNBA finals, I have heard from some people who've slid into my various direct message functions, you know, talking about the presentation because we're in a non ESPN finals, right?

33:06And, you know, oftentimes it's like from people who are not part of these networks, you hear from other network exec types, et cetera. But I think there's a fair discussion to be had is that has the WNBA finals presentation sort of, I don't know if it's improved, evolved is the word I want to use, evolved to where both the studio show as well as the game broadcasts are critical when criticism is sort of warranted. and there's a couple of interesting things just for this year renee montgomery is one of the usa network analysts right and she's a i don't know exactly what the ownership structure is she's like a part owner of the dream that's kind of interesting even in itself that they were cool with that and i think you can make arguments on both sides yes i know you know whether it's shaq and and tom brady obviously the perfect example there are people who are on the air they don't always do those games but you know that's sort of an interesting one i think renee is a very good analyst by the way but whether an owner should be there who knows but the thing is and i think this is a fair one derek and i'll leave it to you i think for the wnba to continue to evolve i do think there has to be sort of more critical thought sometimes during games whether that's criticizing coaches whether that's being critical of the league whether that's criticizing players the one thing i took note of was rebecca lobo and ryan rucco um you know were the and the reason i took note of it because I almost never heard it.

34:33They mentioned when the Liberty coach did not call the timeout at the end of one of those games to move the ball into the offensive side of the court. And it was very controversial because Brianna Stewart said the referee said we didn't have a timeout. But indeed, they did have a timeout. My point is there was a few times where I actually heard broadcasters on the air actually be critical of something going on. So let me go. I know you watch this stuff very closely, Derek. What has been your sort of broader thoughts on this year's finals presentation? Well, let me go back to that Liberty moment first.

35:07I remember watching that in real time, and it's kind of confusing as a viewer. Does the team know? Was this a really bad mistake that could have cost the season in an elimination game against Atlanta? Of course, it's one of those things where you just have to wonder, like, did they know? And I think the broadcast tried its best at that point to communicate. But Ryan Ruko and Rebecca Lobo have been calling the finals together for more than a decade. So this is the first time in a long time that we've had different voices. You have Zora Stevenson doing the play-by-play with Sarah Kustak on NBC. And then you have Kate Scott with Tamika Catchings primarily over on USA Network.

35:39So the presentation, I think the way I look at presentation is storylines. And the fact is the WNBA has really proliferated in its popularity and its reach and relevance in the last few years as the leak has really exploded. So I think the presentation will improve as the storylines become more relevant to the average sports fan that is paying attention. And it's great that people are paying attention to WNBA. It's a very strong product. This is a very good finals. You have an expansion team in the Golden State Valkyries taking on the Atlanta Dream, a very enticing series. I'm just, again, I'm kind of going between the two, like, you know, what NBC is doing consistent with its NBA presentation to its WNBA.

36:16And then you have USA Network, who does not have does not have NBA rights, but has the WNBA. So it's interesting. But ESPN with the finals next year should provide a more consistent presentation. But I think it's been strong across the board this year. I want to get Armand your ticket. I should mention that was the reset timeout, not a full timeout. But that's always kind of interesting. And it's an interesting quirk in in basketball. Well, Armand, when you've watched this stuff, and I happen to agree with Derek, I think some things USA Network can improve on. But as a first time, I think they've been pretty decent, actually.

36:45What about you, Armand? But again, I'm with, I'm sure all you guys. I do think ESPN's broadcasts are outstanding. And I think part of that is because Ruko, Lobo, Holly Rowe have been together forever. They have all these people who've done all these NBA finals. It works. But anyway, I didn't mean to interrupt you, Armand. What were your thoughts on the presentation? so i'm thinking about something imagine if a charles barkley type were in the studio for the wnba can you imagine that i can't and i think at some point if the wnba wants to what's the best way to put it if the wnba wants to be treated like every other league because we have heard these criticisms from WNBA voices that they're almost reprimanding fans and commentators for not watching the league earlier and now coming in and having opinions.

37:42You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to be treated like every other league, the criticisms that come, the conversations that come with that, you have to take them. At some point, you have to shift from being more of an advocate than an analyst, because it's not your job to serve the game. It's your job to serve the viewers first. And so if that means criticisms are necessary, now for all the criticisms we've had of Charles Barkley on our podcast and other places, and criticisms we've had of Inside the NBA, when serious conversations need to be had about strategy, about larger, broader issues within the sport.

38:27They tackled them head on. And I think at some point, WNBA coverage needs to shift a bit so that people are not just trying to fight for the league or stand up for the league, but to treat the league with the legitimacy that is already there and address it as the league that you claim it is. That shift needs to happen. Interesting. The Barkley thing would be that kind of person on a studio show. That's really, really interesting. What about you, John? I'll leave you with the final word on this. You know, it's interesting because oftentimes when we talk about women in sports, a lot of it is in regards to men's sports.

39:04And there's a certain concept called gatekeeping. Right. And, you know, women who are being subjected to having to prove they're bona fides as a fan. It's interesting because that kind of happens in the WNBA, too. Like, I can tell you, remember that time when Nikesha Sales and Betty Lennox said that duel in game two of the finals. And you know exactly the series I'm talking about in the year, right? And that means that I have credibility that somebody else who wasn't watching a game that had probably maybe 300 ,000 viewers in 2004, okay, might not have. And I understand it at a certain point, but gatekeeping is never particularly productive.

39:43It's never a great thing to do, right? But I get it because there's a lot of folks who are watching now who also are not watching honestly. So they're coming in just trying to make trouble. And so if you are somebody who recognizes that, you might want to not necessarily contribute to that with criticism. There might be a fear that being open and honest and critical in the way that you can be in other sports is simply fueling a fire that is being caused by folks who are not being genuine. I'm not saying it's good, but I'm trying to put myself in the mindset of why there is a circling the wagons in the WNBA and the WNBA media.

40:29Look, there's no universe where the owner of a team should be the studio analyst for that team's finals run. It just should never happen. There has to be a higher standard than that. And there is an element of maybe not recognizing that this is a pro sports league that needs to be held to a high enough standard where you would never even think that, I mean, Rene Montgomery, you know, I mean, look, we have Brady, obviously, in the booth for Fox. We have not had a circumstance yet where the Raiders are playing in a big box game. And it's really going to be a rare scenario where that ever happens.

41:06But as a general rule, the practice has been if your team is in the game, one, you probably shouldn't even have a national job. And if you do, you're not doing the national game. So that's one way to raise the standard. But I get it. I get the fear of, I mean, you think about Charles Barkley just yesterday diminishing LeBron James' entire career when they put forth the idea that LeBron has had four Hall of Fame careers. Well, he didn't win five or six championships. who are trying to tell me he's better than Michael and all that stuff. If you did that to Caitlin Clark on a WNBA halftime show, holy smoke.

41:40People would lose their mind. The studio wouldn't be standing after the end of that segment. So there's a limitation to what you can do. There's a limitation to what I think people are comfortable doing. And the fact is, the WNBA isn't there yet. Even with all the growth, the WNBA isn't just one of the other leagues yet. Because that growth is predicated on a lot of weird, abnormal stuff, right? This isn't normal growth. I mean, if anyone who grew as a human being the way the WNBA has grown the last three or four years, it'd be like a medical journal scenario, okay? So to me, until the WNBA gets to a point where everything is stabilized, it's not like one of the other sports.

42:26It's a different category altogether. Yeah, I just double check to make sure of this. So Renee Montgomery partner, which means ownership stake and vice president. So, I mean, that's a significant role in that. All right, let's move to, we'll do a couple of quick ones and then we'll get out of here. We'll do the Rays Brewers, just in terms of our broad thoughts. I'll start with you, Armand. Again, this podcast, we'll talk about this because it's a media podcast. I get it. Like the actual matchup should be awesome baseball to the most two deserving teams for sure. neither team or neither franchise has ever won a world series the milwaukee story is awesome like so no one's questioning here like the the both teams are absolutely legitimately where they should be it should be i think a pretty good series a lot of compelling figures but for our purposes the reality is these are two small markets and my expectation is the viewership is going to be low like i like i i hope i am incorrect on that but that's what history tells me i think if you're fox and mlb you are absolutely rooting for a game seven or six i think that's your only way to sort of um to to not have that but armando like i'll go to you are we talking historic lows or do you think we're just more of like kind of a middling kind of world series in terms of viewership i don't want to say it's as bad as texas arizona from a few years ago i just don't want to believe that there's so much talent on both these teams and the story is so great with the fact that one of these franchises is going to be a champion for the first time but it is it's hard to say that this is going to be a well-received series nationally unless you get to that sixth or seventh game.

44:12I think the other thing that would help is if you get early drama, right? Early, an early game one walk-off winner. You remember, obviously it's Yankees-Dodgers, but man, when Freddie Freeman hit that home run in game one, oh man, did it just set, it set the series on fire. Now, of course it disappointed because the Dodgers smashed the Yankees, but there was something special about that moment. Can you get something like that to just generate more interest in this thing. That's what I'm hoping for. I'm rooting for a long series. I'm always rooting for that. But just looking at these two franchises and what you lack in terms of star power in big markets, it could be a little bit of a struggle or bigger struggle than folks might want to admit as we look at the overall outlook here.

45:02John, you wanted to say something. The one thing I'll just point out is like, historically, the rays just don't draw. And that's a big reason why I'm thinking that. But go ahead, John. Well, I mean, Armand, you mentioned the walk-off game one. Well, there was a walk-off game one in Rangers Diamondbacks, remember? Oh, yeah. It was the exact same kind of game as Yankees-Dodgers. The year before, Adoles Garcia with the walk-off home run. And nothing. Derek, let me go to you. What are your thoughts on this series in terms of just, we're talking like viewership interests, kind of broader interests, not just the play on the field.

45:42I mean, when we think about Brewers Rays, this is a great matchup from a baseball perspective. It's the two number one seeds going at each other, but I don't think it's going to do that well, personally, in the ratings. You have the smallest market in the league in Milwaukee. You have a team in Tampa that, as you mentioned, has not historically drawn well. It's not going to reach the lows, in my opinion, of Rangers Diamondbacks. That series averaged 9.1 million viewers, and I believe that's the first time in a very long time if ever, that the World Series dipped below 10 million. And the fact of the matter is that, look, these teams, if you go up to an average baseball fan, I'm not sure they can name a player on the Rays.

46:16Maybe they can name one or two Brewers. It's one of these things. I mean, there are bona fide stars in this series, and I wish it was the case where people could name players. You have Jacob Mizorowski on the Brewers, Jack Centurio, Junior Kamenero, and Yandy Diaz, Jonathan Aranda, Drew Rasmussen, Freddy Peralta on the Rays. You have a lot of names that people should know and that are really doing well and have made an impact on this postseason. So I would imagine, though, with the Nielsen methodological changes at the same time that have come into play as it relates to big data and co-viewing and out-of-home viewing, that this won't dip below$10 million.

46:45But I'd be surprised if it comes close to the levels that we've seen the last two years, especially last season with Dodgers-Blue Jays, a non-American team in the World Series, and you still have the viewership over$15 million. So I would probably, if I had to put a number on it, 11 to 11.5, maybe it hits 12 if it's a long series. But otherwise, I think what this is, though, is that it's a very healthy series for baseball and that fans can become more familiar with these teams that have really deserved the attention that they're about to get. That's well said. It is fascinating that these are the two teams that happen as we're on the precipice of a work stoppage lockout because it does blow up a little bit of the owner's contention that only big market teams can win the World Series.

47:30we will have a significantly smaller market team win the World Series. All right, we'll finish up on this. Good reporting by a lot of different places, including my buddies at Sports Business Journal. FIFA is now accepting formal bids for the U.S. broadcast rights to the 2030 and 24 World Cups until November 19th to submit offers per Austin Carpet and Alex Silverman at SBJ. the process is specifically for the 2030 world cup but they'll all apparently you know it's fifa so they'll expect bids for both 2030 2034 they've said they prefer to sell english and spanish rights um uh as to a single bidder where in the past they would split these up between the english rights and the spanish league rights as a general rule and i'll start with you john when it comes to fifa the only thing i believe is is money they're an incredibly greedy organization and I think generally speaking, the highest bidder usually wins out.

48:29What's fascinating here, of course, is that Netflix has the Women's World Cup, so we're going to get a real preview of how a streamer can do it. I imagine they'll be successful, and I would think they'd have to be interested in the rights to the World Cup, although they're more interested generally in global rights as opposed to just like U.S. domestic rights or the domestic rights in one country. I'll be curious if Fox still wants this. They've built their reputation on doing these World Cups. I would be stunned if Skydance is in, just given how much soccer they do. I would expect that. It also seems to fit as an NBC portfolio, just given their global portfolio.

49:04I guess what I'm trying to say is I expect a lot of people, including ESPN, to be interested in this. And so we have a real genuine story here where we don't really know who's going to get this. It could go to a lot of different places, and that could mean a lot of different things for soccer fans. i did want to actually i'll get into this in a second but i actually had another point to make on the world series sure go ahead all right yeah how difficult would it be to go all the way back and and you can keep the intro the question you just let right no no keep going you know just whatever you think this is a professional podcast which i appreciate on that but just go ahead with your your thoughts all right so i'm going to do the little countdown and actually i think armand you would have something you wanted to say right yeah okay so maybe maybe armand can do his first and then I go in.

49:50One thing that I wanted to add with the difference between Texas, Arizona and what we have this year is although you had a walk-off in game one of that series, you had a five-seed versus a six-seed that year in 2023. And this year you have two number one seeds and you had Texas, Arizona go just five games. I'm certain that had that series gone seven games, there would have been a much stronger viewership number than what we ultimately saw. For sure. All right, John, what was your World Series point? Well, yeah, I mean, that's kind of along the lines, right? This is not a five versus a six. This is a one versus a one.

50:26And it is the two best teams in baseball. I do think it is important to keep in mind when we talk about Texas, Arizona, and bringing in the NBA as well, OKC, Indiana, last year, those were under different methodologies. Derek mentioned it. Texas, Arizona was panel only, so not big data plus panel, and before the expansion of out-of-home viewing to 100 % of markets. With those changes in place, that series is probably over 10 million. And then Pacers, Thunder, and the NBA also before Big Data plus panel. With Big Data, that series averaged about 10 million, I think 10.27 million panel only. With Big Data, that's almost certainly over 11 million.

51:05So I look at this series coming up in Milwaukee, Tampa Bay, anything under 10 million would be, even if not officially, worse than anything we've seen from those two. And just one more thing on that. Even the bubble in baseball, even Dodgers race in that bubble in Texas was better than Rangers Diamondbacks. Anything lower than that, I just can't see it for a one versus a one. Yeah, you just have the Dodgers in that. Okay. And so let's go back to the World Cup. What's your broad thoughts on that right now, John? My point of view is obviously, you mentioned it, tons and tons of contenders and all of them kind of good fits, right?

51:42Out of the major players, nobody is unable to do this. I mean, the company that I would look at and say is least equipped to handle the World Cup is the one that's had the rights all these years, Fox. They're the least equipped of all of them to do it. And they've done it, obviously, successfully. So CBS, especially now with all the money they're getting from their manufacturers, can probably afford it, even with all the debt. And they certainly have lots of experience on both the CBS and TNT sports side with soccer. ESPN can do anything. ESPN can do anything. They could do an Olympics. They can do whatever they want.

52:22And of course, NBC with the Olympic Games can do it as well. So there'll be a lot of options. What's going to be interesting to me, we know where the industry is going. We know where the future is. One company that I wouldn't necessarily say I know can do it, Netflix. We don't know if Netflix can do it. Prime Video. We don't know if Prime Video can do it because these streamers have never had to do something like that. And so we know the future is in streaming, but I don't know. They have not had the opportunity to prove they can handle something of the size of a World Cup. Armand, do you have a particular, if I was going to make you Gianni Infantino, do you have a particular favorite that you would like to go with?

53:05don't man i mean i should have some perspective on this given you just asked me the question but i really think there are a lot of options here i'd be curious to see i will say this i'd be curious to see if espn really shows some significant interest here i think back to the coverage they had in 2010 and 2014 they had chris fowler and bob lee and mike tariko hosting and it felt like the biggest thing on earth. Coming off the 2006 World Cup coverage, which had Dave O 'Brien, the baseball voice, as the lead voice for the World Cup at that time, to see the transition there from 2006 to then 2010 and 2014, I would be really curious to see how much commitment ESPN shows to this if they are really serious about getting back into the business of the World Cup.

53:59Yeah, it's great. I mean, to me, their South Africa World Cup coverage, that's the best coverage I've ever seen in my lifetime for a broadcaster doing the World Cup. I'm like you, Armand. I'm curious to see how deep they go into it. All right, Derek, I'm gonna give you the last word on this podcast. Do you either have a preference or do you have a thought as to where it might go? Yeah. Netflix already has the rights in Spain and Andorra for 2030. That's correct. Great point. Yeah. But also that was under Bella Bajaria. Bella Bajaria is gone. It's Peter Rice now running content on Netflix. So I'm not sure.

54:29But more of a sports. Yeah. Rice has sports background. Right. So very true. But I'm not sure how the strategy would change. I mean, Ted Sarandos came out, I believe it was at Bloomberg Screen Time and said that the platform is not growing as fast as he wanted it to. The engagement numbers are a little off. YouTube continues to grow, whereas Netflix doesn't. The World Cup may be the event to remedy that problem for Netflix to get a lot of people involved, a lot of people to sign up. But I find it hard to believe that if Netflix was to land full rights for the World Cup in the United States and also Puerto Rico, the tender process is going on there right now as well with that deadline, I'm pretty sure.

55:00But if Netflix were to land those rights, you have to, in my opinion, have a broadcast presence in the United States. And I think the credibility that Fox has built, Fox Sports has built over the last few years with the World Cup, the last few tournaments, rather, I think that will probably be that combination of Fox Sports and Netflix doing the World Cup. I like that. I could totally see that. I think if you're Fox, that's, that would be great for them as well. Cause you, cause you've built up all this equity doing it. If you're Netflix, you get the benefit, obviously of a place that's done it before.

55:27And then Netflix, like you said, they are, they have some engagement issues. I mean, the one thing that seems very clear for all these streamers is they're, they're going to continue to go big in sports. It's like the one thing where I think they can bring new people in, um, on the, you know, into the 10. And it's also something that's, you know, unlike if you roll the dice on some hit film. I mean, like the NBA or MLB or whatever, and it felt like it's guaranteed you already have hit, right? People are going to watch it. There's already an audience for that. And I would and I would just add also like this quarter for Netflix is a big one for sports because you have three NFL games taking place in this quarter.

56:02So the engagement as it pertains to sports, you'll have the two Christmas Day games and the Thanksgiving Eve game. We're really curious to see if there's a market impact in the next earnings report there. And if you think sports media is like 11th or 12th grade in high school, go read people like Matt Bellany in Puck. Hollywood, what? I mean, it's just all potential backstabbing and people trying to get into certain offices, right? People trying to protect their kingdoms and stuff like that. It's unbelievable. All right, before we go, you guys want to promote anything? John, what do you got to promote?

56:37Obviously, you've done a podcast on the J.J. Watt stuff, so definitely listen to that. Yeah, and of course, we have our usual set of guests. We taped with Scott Hansen. He'll be in our next episode. We also taped with Balmonte Jones this week. He'll be in a future episode, and we still have our Evan Washburn episode to come. So looking forward to all of that. But I do want to ask you one thing. We brought up the ESPN World Cup. Yep. If they were to get the World Cup again, they'd have to include Stephen A. Smith and Pat McAfee. Like, I'm not even joking. Unquestionably. I actually don't even think that's...

57:07I mean, I see Armand and Derek laughing in the background. I'm not laughing. they're they're going to include every big name person that they are paying to do that as they should yeah and mcafee would not bother me as much but like i'm near the end of my stephen a sort of experience i have to be blunt um and so yes john i mean like i have no idea how they would incorporate that like my guess is it would be studio-ish kind of thing but for sure don't you think greenberg greenberg mcafee smith van pelt buck because you're paying him a fortune of money who else is a high price it would be all hands on deck in my opinion yeah yeah but john is correct particularly like the big high salary people i think you have to get something out of them armand is just his face on that it's just making me laugh on that because he's not he's not happy but yeah i mean i don't i know there's like old school types like bob lee who'd be like, oh, they wouldn't do that.

58:05They're going to keep soccer sacrosanct. No chance. I'm with you, John. We'd see all of these guys. I actually think we'd see Jason Kelsey on there, too. He would be doing... If Jason Kelsey worked for NBC, let's not pretend all the other networks are above this. NBC would have Jason Kelsey out there doing the man on the street stuff. Jason Kelsey and Snoop would do Brazil-Columbia. James Winston just did the World Cup. Correct. Hey, You could have Michael Strahan repeat his football versus football segment. Might as well bring Piers Morgan back and just do Fox 2004 again. James Corden doing a World Cup late night show.

58:48You would have a field pass. A McAfee field pass for certain somewhere. Hey, I know the viewership wasn't good. The viewership wasn't good for the one they did this past Monday night. Yeah, I did too. It's not a viewership play, though. It doesn't matter. Yeah, I do think, I hate to say it, but I think you're right. I think that would be the branding on it. All right. Well, anyway, check out Sports Media Watch for all that. I do like that Scott Hanson, Bomani Jones, those should be very, very good episodes. All right, please stay with me, fellas. As always, my thanks to Derek Futterman, Armand Brody, and John Lewis for their time and insight.

59:23And as always, please check out all their work on Sports Media Watch. Those guys do a phenomenal job. If you like these kind of conversations, head to our archives or my archives. We just had Michael Grady, who's been awesome in terms of NBA play-by-play, and Miren Fader, who's the editor of the Year's Best Sports Writing 2026. I'm trying to think who else guessed. Oliver Wilson, who is calling Westwood one games on the NFL, he's a Brit and he's been doing a phenomenal job. So if you want to listen to the overseas games on the radio, Oliver Wilson's the play by play. He talked about how he got that job and he's been great.

1:00:00Peter King was on this podcast October 8th. I believe Peter King at this point has done 17 ,000 podcasts. So congrats to my old colleague there. and as I always mention I believe what started this I think Troy Aikman on September 20th go back and you can see the start of what has become quite the news cycle story. I want to thank James Jackson for all his hard work on this podcast. I want to thank everybody to all see you pay their support most of all thank you for listening we'll see you soon on the Sports Media Podcast.

1:00:40The Burna Black and Orange sale is here with up to 25 % off site-wide. No tricks, just a way to treat yourself to serious savings on serious protection. Because when something goes bump in the night, it's good to have options, including less lethal launchers, sprays, and alarms. The sale runs October 19th through 26th. Shop at byrna.com slash protection before these savings vanish into the night. Must be 18+. Plus, purchase and shipping restrictions vary by state and municipality. We've all been there. You stop listening for a second to jot down a note and suddenly you've missed the most critical part of the conversation.

1:01:16That's where Plod comes in. Plod is an AI-powered note-taking device built for real-world conversations. With the hands-free NotePin S, one tap captures everything so you can stay fully present. Afterwards, Plod's AI automatically generates structured summaries, key insights, and action items. Don't let important details slip through the cracks. Get 10 % off at plaud.ai slash podcast with code podcast. That's plaud.ai slash podcast with code podcast for 10 % off.