October 20, 2024

Read in Browser [[link removed]]

POWERED BY

Good morning. When Tom Brady calls Sunday’s 49ers-Chiefs game, he will do so as a part-owner of the Raiders. While the approval of his ownership stake was all but preordained, the list of broadcast restrictions on him now is extensive and, in my view, a problem. While many or even most fans will shrug, I think it’s worth discussing.

As always, I welcome your thoughts at [[email protected]]. My last missive on the NIL era brought in lots of responses; check out the mailbag below Brady.

— Dan Roberts [[link removed]], FOS EIC

Tom Brady’s TV Restrictions Cast His 10-Year Fox Contract in Doubt [[link removed]]

Scott Galvin/Imagn Images

The vote from NFL owners this week on whether Tom Brady should be a part-owner of the Raiders was unanimous: 32–0 yes.

Public opinion over whether he can and should continue as a Fox broadcaster now is far from unanimous. Brady signed a 10-year, $375 million contract with Fox, and just six games in, 71% of readers in a Front Office Sports newsletter survey [[link removed].] think he won’t still be in the job three seasons from now.

As a formally approved part-owner, Brady faces the following restrictions [[link removed]] to his Fox broadcasting job:

He can’t criticize teams or referees. He can’t enter team facilities. He can’t attend practices. He can’t join pregame production meetings with teams or players—in person or virtually. He’s subject to the league’s gambling and tampering policies.

I have seen other commentators point to the “no criticizing the refs” rule as the biggest problem, but Brady—who has been rather vanilla in his commentary so far, on brand with his press conferences when he was a player—shouldn’t have a hard time curbing his criticism.

Not being able to criticize the teams is a bigger problem. When Deshaun Watson throws his third pick of the game and Brady can’t say boo about how massively the Browns screwed up by giving him, at the time, the most guaranteed money in NFL history, that is a major blocker to Brady doing his job.

And it seems to me missing out on those meetings with players and coaches is the biggest blocker. Those meetings clearly matter and yield fruit—we constantly hear Buck and Aikman, for example, referencing nuggets they got from their conversations in the days before a matchup. (The Cowboys told ESPN this week [[link removed]] that they do want Brady in their production meetings; but league policy trumps teams, so the Cowboys cannot get an exemption from the Brady Broadcast Rules.)

Of course, defenders retort, his people (Kevin Burkhardt, colleagues, Fox producers, other insiders) will feed him the intel anyway, so what’s the difference? Oh, just extra work for all the people around him to cater to his complication, and the lack of context that comes from learning things firsthand.

Another retort from those who think this is all fine (cue the dog in a bowler hat sitting in a burning house): Brady has been operating under these restrictions already all season (since the Raiders deal was pending), and he’s been able to do the job anyway.

O.K. Has he done it well? Your opinion probably determines whether you think the restrictions are a problem. In my view, the the color commentator having a $200 million financial interest in one of the league’s 32 franchises is a very obvious problem, and it’s not nuanced or complicated.

At the very least, surely he won’t call Raiders games, right? Wrong: He’ll still call Raiders games, the NFL confirmed Thursday [[link removed]].

To be clear, I say all this as an unapologetic Tom Brady fan. I grew up in New England, and my high school and college years coincided with the Brady-led Pats dynasty; I’ll be grateful to the guy for the rest of my life. But he’s never been a particularly charismatic personality off the field. Being the greatest or one of the greatest to ever play your position does not itself mean you will be great on television. (See: Emmitt Smith, Drew Brees, Jason Witten.)

My take: The restrictions will be his out. Maybe not this season, maybe not next season, but at some point, long before his 10-year deal runs out, Brady is going to retire early as a broadcaster; he can say he enjoyed the experience and wants to focus on his role as an NFL owner and his other business interests.

Duke basketball legend turned 20-year ESPN analyst Jay Williams’s take: Tom Brady isn’t about to give up so soon. Speaking to me onstage [[link removed]] at our Tuned In sports media summit in September (after Brady had called just two Fox games and was not getting great reviews [[link removed]]), Williams said, “I love that Tom Brady got flak [for his debut]. Good for Tom Brady. The one thing Tom Brady needs more than anything is ammunition. … I want Tom Brady ready to blossom and be that guy that I know he is once we have a couple of pops.”

For the Brady we see on Fox to become the Brady that friends and teammates have long said comes out in private will require Brady getting more comfortable and relaxed. It’s hard to imagine all these restrictions, and the added scrutiny that will come with them (raising the already very high level of scrutiny) will help get him there.

SPONSORED BY U.S. BANK

Principal to Peloton Instructor

Behind every great athlete is a team of mentors and supporters who help turn dreams into reality. From coaches and mentors to family and friends, this support system plays a crucial role in their success. That’s the power of us [[link removed]].

For Jess Sims, that support has come from many places, but none more significant than her high school coach, Jim Ridley. His belief in her potential helped shape Jess’s path from a three-sport high school athlete to a beloved Peloton instructor, inspiring countless people with her energy and resilience.

From her early days in sports to her time as a teacher and principal, Jess’s journey has been defined by the people who’ve supported her every step of the way.

Learn more about Jess’s Untold Team [[link removed]].

Notes From the Crowd Mailbag: Name, Image, and Mishaps

Christopher Hanewinckel/Imagn Images

Readers quickly responded to my column last week on NIL problems [[link removed]]. Here are a few selections from the inbox and LinkedIn comments.

“The rules are there are no rules. Let the entire thing implode or explode, start from scratch.” — Keith Rodriguez on LinkedIn [[link removed]]

“It’s 100% the NCAA’s fault. When you don’t plan for the future, and the future arrives you’ll be unprepared. It’s showing big time right now.” — James Motón II on LinkedIn [[link removed]]

“The original solution to college athlete pay was like $300/month so that they could go out to a movie, get some pizza … that if you are under scholarship, you are unable to work under NCAA guidelines. If they would’ve stuck to that, this whole NIL mess would’ve never occurred. Now the largest universities with the deepest pockets can buy and stockpile all the good players.” —Mike Catanzarite

… And plenty of you disagreed with my take:

“I have no problem with the current NIL structure, and I don’t recall there being any scandals that have had any negative impact on universities. The NIL issue is about free market economics and the right of individuals to exploit their own intellectual property. Before NIL, colleges and universities were engaging in anti-competitive behavior to profit off the backs of young athletes while pretending that the cost of an education made this predatory behavior okay.” — Brian K. Johnson on LinkedIn [[link removed]]

“College Football is most certainly not broken. It is not the players’ fault that the NCAA has been operating like a cartel since the 1984 Board of Regents ruling. And it is not the players’ fault that the NCAA did not digest and understand what the 2021 Alston ruling meant. The NCAA has been fighting against reality since the O’Bannon case. And the oversimplified version is that the NCAA and all those who think NIL is a bad deal want the players to pay for the dumb decision-making by the NCAA. … Players have the upper hand now. They can transfer whenever they want and they can make whatever they can convince other groups to pay them for their NIL. Seems fair to me.” —Abraham Sarkis

“I’m very much in favor of college athletes being compensated and NIL. If universities can realign to make more money from television contracts then the ‘means of production,’ the players, should also participate in this equation by being compensated monetarily!” —Beryl Allen

Good Week / Bad Week Netflix Cashes In, Boston NWSL Steps on Toes

Stephen R. Sylvanie/Imagn Images

Good week for:

Netflix ⬆ The streaming company reported third-quarter financial results Thursday [[link removed]] that included a 15% lift in revenue to $9.8 billion and a 41% boost in net income to $2.4 billion. Both figures beat Wall Street expectations. The company also touted the importance of live event advertising to its future, just two months away from its biggest sports gambit yet: two exclusive Christmas Day games [[link removed]], including one with the NFL’s biggest draw, the Chiefs.

WNBA Finals ⬆ The first three games of the Finals averaged 1.29 million viewers, up 77% versus the entire 2023 Finals. While the viewership number is still much lower than the 2.2 million average of the two postseason games that featured Caitlin Clark and the Indiana Fever, the growth—especially considering competition from the NFL and MLB—is further proof of the league’s overall rise during the 2024 season [[link removed]].

Bad week for:

Bos Nation FC ⬇ Boston’s NWSL expansion franchise launched its team name and branding Tuesday—but it was not greeted warmly [[link removed]]. The campaign, titled “Too Many Balls,” took aim at male sports domination in the city of Boston. However, social media came after the campaign, with detractors claiming it disrespected the other professional women’s teams in the city, including the PWHL’s Boston Fleet and the Women’s Premier League rugby team Beantown RFC. By Wednesday, the campaign material had been scrapped from social media, and the team also issued an apology.

NFL ⬇ While the WNBA Finals saw a ratings bump, the NFL saw a rare dip in viewership as most of the league’s partners declined [[link removed]?] versus comparable 2023 games. There were several factors to the slow week, including a bye week for the Chiefs, a blowout loss for the Cowboys, and a Sunday Night Football matchup between the Bengals and Giants—two teams with losing records.

You Might Have Missed Skechers Hits Its Stride on the Court With NBA Stars

Front Office Sports

Skechers has never quite had the cool factor—let alone a presence on the basketball court. But the sneaker brand has gone all in on scooping up big names, including Joel Embiid and Julius Randle. Now that pros are wearing them, Skechers has gone from a brand you’d get “made fun of” for wearing to one that’s “so dope.” FOS’s Alex Schiffer spoke to NBA stars Embiid and Randle [[link removed]] about Skechers’s unlikely ascent and where the company is headed.

Advertise [[link removed]] Awards [[link removed]] Learning [[link removed]] Events [[link removed]] Video [[link removed]] Podcast [[link removed]] Written by Daniel Roberts [[link removed]], Colin Salao [[link removed]], Meredith Turits [[link removed]] Edited by Or Moyal [[link removed]], Meredith Turits [[link removed]], Catherine Chen [[link removed]]

If this email was forwarded to you, you can subscribe here [[link removed]].

Update your preferences [link removed] / Unsubscribe [link removed]

Copyright © 2024 Front Office Sports. All rights reserved.

460 Park Avenue South, 7th Floor, New York NY, 10016