Are Tom Brady's restrictions unfair to viewers? Sports Media Mailbag, Part 1

Welcome to the 39th Media Mailbag for The Athletic .

Thanks for sending in your questions via the website and app.

There were more than 125 questions, so this is Part 1 of a two-parter.

( Note: Questions have been edited for clarity and length.) Is it unfair to viewers that Tom Brady has so many limits placed on him by the league no production meetings, no pregame interviews, no practices, no criticism of refs, etc.? As the lead analyst he seems severely limited, which may be part of the reason he is so lacking at least in my opinion.

Why didnt Fox pull the contract or why didnt he put his ownership ambitions on hold so he could give fully to his $375 million gig? Larry S.

Advertisement Weve had a half-season of Brady, including several games since the league approved his ownership stake in the (Las Vegas) Raiders .

How much discernible improvement have you noted in his booth performance? (I remain unimpressed.) Is his inability to take part in production meetings noticeably impacting his work or the overall quality of the (Kevin) Burkhardt/Brady booth? Barry S.

I wrote a piece last month that argued that the restrictions are unsustainable for the long haul and predicted Brady will depart the booth long before the end of his contract.

Its not just the conflict of interest.

There have long been conflicts of interest in sports media jobs, including college football analysts still employed by schools.

Thats just modern reality.

But predetermined restrictions on what you can say leave no workaround.

Its subconsciously self-censoring things because of the ownership situation.

Thats a mess for everyone and especially viewers.

As far as performance: I think Brady has improved significantly since the beginning of the year, but hes not a transcendent analyst.

Maybe thats too much to ask in Year 1.

Hes also had some terrible games to call, to be fair.

SBJs Ben Fischer has done a great job on the topic of Bradys broadcast restrictions and reported last week that the restriction rules for Brady may be expanding following his Oct.

20 interview with Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes that aired during Fox NFL Sunday.

It is absurd to think that NFL owners would have an issue with a softball interview, but, per Fischer, some owners could find an issue with Brady receiving information as a Raiders partner and thus want to limit Bradys interaction with players to live or recorded interviews for broadcast only, to ensure the content of their conversations is known publicly, and prohibiting private one-on-one interactions before or after the broadcast component.

Fox has been fine with all of this, by the way.

They (and I understand this part) like being in the Tom Brady business.

But Ill keep saying it: This isnt sustainable long-term.

Free, daily NFL updates direct to your inbox.

document.querySelectorAll(".in-content-module[data-module-id='scoop-city-newsletter'] .in-content-module-img img ").forEach((el) => { el.setAttribute("style", "pointer-events: none;");}) Free, daily NFL updates direct to your inbox.

Why do networks do in-game interviews? They are filled with meaningless platitudes about staying focused and playing tougher.

The coaches and players correctly cant wait to run back to the huddle.

The questions are so leading that the interviewee usually just repeats their substance as the answer.

It reminds me of the nonsense Mean Gene Okerlund used to do with Hulk Hogan.

I mute them.

Can we make it stop? Thomas S.

Advertisement First, Id argue Okerlunds interviews were genius and entertaining.

The best stick man in the history of wrestling.

But networks do this because ultimately more access is better than less access.

They want to take you inside the game.

Thats worth it and I tend to agree for one good answer even if the other 99 are banal.

How much difference do commentators make to ratings or revenue? Except for peak Bill Walton paired with Dave Pasch or Jason Benetti, I dont think Ive ever chosen a national broadcast for the commentators.

Jack M.

Sports broadcasters do not increase viewership (maybe Howard Cosell did in his prime given the love/hate-watching).

The reason you hire quality broadcasters such as Benetti is that you want your product to come off as professional and entertaining.

That produces a quality product that keeps people interested and coming back and advertisers (or subscribers) investing money in your product.

How is the schedule set for the final week of the NFL season? Currently, all games are listed as 1 p.m.

ET start, but do certain networks have priority in choosing the matchups and windows the games are played? Harvey C.

Two games are played on a Saturday, and then start times and networks get selected after Week 17.

As a general rule, the most-anticipated game will go to NBC in the prime-time window.

The 4:25 p.m.

window often sees CBS and Fox each getting a prominent game, or a game with that has a proven viewership team.

Last year, the Buffalo Bills and Miami Dolphins met on NBCs Sunday Night Football for a game that determined the AFC East title.

Thats the ideal you want the last game of the regular season having meaning.

Can womens college basketball continue its viewership momentum in the post-Caitlin Clark era? Corinne R.

The long-term answer is yes.

The sport is on an upward trajectory, it produces new stars annually (e.g.

USCs JuJu Watkins and Notre Dames Hannah Hidalgo), and the programming windows keep getting better.

But the numbers in the Womens NCAA Tournament will unquestionably be down this year because Clark was a once-in-a-generation viewership unicorn.

Its simply not realistic to expect the NCAA womens championship game to duplicate last years 18.9 million viewership number for South Carolinas win over Iowa .

But its a great sport that will only go up in viewing audience long-term.

Seems like this year brought more MLB broadcaster complaints than any since Joe Buck left.

Even Bob Costas took some hits, which was hard for me to believe.

Did you perceive homerism from Joe Davis (calling lots of Los Angeles Dodgers games for FS1 and Fox, or Costas calling the New York Yankees series with longtime New Yorker Ron Darling? Is there any chance we will ever see Fox or other networks add local TV voices during the World Series again? No Name Advertisement I heard no bias from Davis.

I am sure he would like the Dodgers to do well, but national broadcasters take great pains to call games in a neutral tone.

Forget about the ethics or anything else it would simply be dumb business to favor one team outright.

I dont think we will ever see local broadcasters added to call championship games because the networks will always want their broadcasters to have the assignment.

Is there a reason ESPN doesnt use Joe Buck and Troy Aikman all that much in anything except Monday Night Football (and Aikman does an occasional hit on Pardon the Interruption).

It just seems like a wasted resource.

I mean, Buck didnt even come on to talk about the World Series, and hes called a few.

It just seems odd to me that two of their very expensive employees really just do one thing.

Mark H.

Its all contractual.

Those kind of hits are built into contracts (e.g.

a certain number of appearances on ESPN airwaves), and Aikman and Buck had massive leverage with ESPN when they signed.

At this point of their careers, they dont need to do hits on ESPN shows unless they really want to.

AEW has a nice, safe new contract that Warner Bros.

Discovery appears to be happy with.

But they just got beat pretty bad by WWE developmental on their own night.

How low of a rating is too low for WBD? Benjamin A.

WBDs approach at this point is to load up with as many second-tier sports rights as they can get, a list that includes Mountain West football, the French Open, the new Unrivaled 33 womens basketball league and its acquisition from ESPN of Big 12 football and basketball games.

AEW fits into that bucket.

Second-tier rights are good.

Its not Tier I like the NFL or NBA , but it builds inventory.

I dont think WBD is going to be concerned even if the linear numbers continue to tank.

(I will say, AEW really needs a restart of some kind with storylines.) This is all part of the larger play for cable carriers to keep WBD programming.

Where is an online go-to source that we can look at to see who these play-by-play and analyst commentators are on each game on TV or streaming? I accidentally stumbled onto a college basketball game and I had no idea who the play-by-play and analyst was.

I think this would be a great service for all sports fans.

Wayne B.

Its a good question.

For the NFL: The gold standard here is 506 Sports, which has coverage maps of every NFL game and all the broadcasters.

One tip I have is most major places with sports rights have a website dedicated to their PR efforts, such as this one for ESPN .

Youll always find weekly press releases here that provide who is doing the games.

Why do the Fox networks not make a greater effort to grow the U.S.

market for Australian football? I think its an amazing sport, but FS1/FS2 never show AFL or AFLW reruns despite having hours to fill (Canadian Premier League soccer anyone?).

Rowan B.

Its very hard for sports that are fully based away from the U.S.

to break through on big U.S.

outlets.

You often need a global footprint (e.g.

Formula One, Premier League ) for places to offer decent program windows.

Even though its very fun to watch, I cant see Aussie rules football getting big traction for a U.S.

network.

Advertisement With the Rogers Communications deal being the sole national TV rights holder in Canada and expiring after the 2025-26 season, what do you see the next deal being? Is Rogers deal with Amazon Prime to cover Monday night games in Canada a glimpse into the future? Morgan B.

I think Amazon is going to be a major player in the next NHL deal in Canada, and I have no doubt the league wants that to happen.

They would not have invested significant resources in Monday night hockey unless they wanted to go bigger post-2026.

Will we ever see womens volleyball get any kind of traction as a TV sport, or is the fall sports calendar too cluttered? In the past month, Ive seen Purdue sell out 15,000-seat Mackey Arena twice for home games, once on NBC, so there has to be a market.

Ive also seen D1 matches played in what appeared to be half-full high school gyms.

Dan.

K.

Depends on what your definition of traction is, but womens volleyball interest is soaring when it comes to broadcast outlets.

The Big Ten Network has made it a staple of its coverage, and last year we saw the Fox broadcast network air both Minnesota-Wisconsin and Ohio State-Michigan during an NFL week.

The AP recently wrote a story that girls volleyball has never been so popular in the U.S.

Its arrow up for the sport.

I noticed that Fox has removed the out-of-town ticker from all of their NFL broadcasts and it does make for a cleaner viewing experience.

I appreciate getting updates from the studio when someone scores in another game, but I can also follow scores of any other games on my devices whenever I want.

Do you have any insights on how/why Fox made their decision? Marc L.

I sent your question to Fox Sports PR for some insight.

Said a spokesperson: Good eye by the reader.

And that reader also answered his own question.

Its for a cleaner look and makes the game feel bigger.

Itll stay this way for the foreseeable future.

(Top photo of Tom Brady: Patrick McDermott / Getty Images).

This article has been shared from the original article on theathleticuk, here is the link to the original article.