Connect with us
Register for the BSM Summit Now

BSM Writers

Meet the Market Managers: Chris Oliviero, Entercom New York

“People who know me know my two passions are radio and New York City. So this job actually combines those two passions.”

Published

on

Chris Oliviero is a titan in the radio world. I mean, how could he not be? The prestige that comes with being the market manager of Entercom’s New York cluster alone is enough to make the industry listen when you speak. But his history of making big decisions goes back well before May when he took on his current role.

Chris Oliviero Addresses Craig Carton Rumors, State of WFAN On BSM Podcast  | Barrett Sports Media

Chris had the professional privilege of spending most of his 22 years with CBS Radio, working with stations in different formats and locations as the company’s head of programming. Under his watchful eye, CBS Radio built and maintained the industry’s best sports audio portfolio, and became the envy of many operators. The company’s results and reputation are what ultimately made it an attractive acquisition target for Entercom.

But one side of the business had an even bigger impact on Chris, negotiating and making deals with hosts and agents. It was the talent relations side of the job that first gave Chris the idea that he might want to have more influence over a cluster’s entire operation. He had a front row seat to Howard Stern exiting CBS for satellite radio. He had the same seat for watching Chris Russo do the same thing. He then saw things from the other side when Jim Rome left Premiere Radio Networks to help launch CBS Sports Radio.

When someone spends over two decades in a competitive industry like radio in a top corporate position, it’s likely they’ll be thrust into the middle of some our industry’s and format’s most high profile upheavals. Chris knew that came with the job, and though it didn’t teach him everything he needed to know about being a market manager, he learned more than enough about every aspect of the business during his time with CBS and Entercom. His lengthy experience as an executive combined with his passion for the business, intelligence, ability to lead, and stellar reputation, are a big reason why Susan Larkin and David Field had faith that he could take the reigns at Entercom New York during the height of a pandemic, and continue leading their brands to success.

In our conversation below, I spoke with Chris about everything from becoming a first time market manager during the most abnormal year of our lifetime, the media’s coverage of sports radio’s most iconic brand, and what he is looking for in Mark Chernoff’s successor.

The conversation starts though at the most natural place I could think of. Sure, Chris is an extremely accomplished and talented guy, but he isn’t the only extremely talented and accomplished programmer out there. So why don’t we don’t see more programmers earning opportunities to ascend from PD to market manager?


DEMETRI RAVANOS: Few market managers in our business come through the programming side of the building. You saw firsthand in 2005 how Howard Stern leaving terrestrial radio impacted local stations. The same could happen right now in the News/Talk space following the death of Rush Limbaugh. Having a feel and understanding for programming I think helps in some of these critical situations but yet there are more people in these roles who’ve come thru the sales side. Does that need to change?

CHRIS OLIVIERO: I totally agree. It’s something I’ve always felt passionate about. We are a content business. We are in the entertainment business. So why should people who come up through the content side of the house somehow automatically be disqualified? Which by the way, if you look at it, it almost was like that was the case that hey, the percentage of leadership that came from the sales side was so high, it almost seemed like it was an automatic disqualification, even though there were a handful of great programmers who became leaders like Dan Mason, Scott Herman, but the vast majority were out of the sales side of the house.  

I think if you consider where the industry is today, where we live and die with creative content that’s not only compelling to an audience but also to clients, why not have that point of view and perspective? Now, that said, what I’ve always said to my colleagues in programing, if you want to make that leap, you’ve got to be able to balance the show and the business in show business. You can’t you can’t go at these jobs, like market manager, all about the show or all about the business. You’ve got to find that middle ground. Can you marry your creativity with a discipline, a financial responsibility, and with an understanding of a P & L? If you can balance that, I think the more programing people that get into market manager positions, the healthier and better the industry will be. 

Obviously, sales leadership, it’s the same thing. Great managers have come out of the sales side. My only point is it should be balanced.

DR: The other example I can think of is Mike Thomas in Chicago. It’s weird to say this about those two markets in particular, but I do wonder if you’ve ever felt like you are under a microscope for the industry as a whole to see if programmers can do the very top job in a building? 

CO: I don’t feel that, and I’m very good friends with Mike. I know he doesn’t feel that either, because if you start thinking like that, you’re just going to set yourself up for frustration and disappointment. Just focus on doing the job. And I think in my case in particular, coming from my corporate position for so many years, though, the job title was Head of Programing for CBS Radio, I was lucky enough to be very involved in business and management and P & L’s, so I felt like I was coming from an experience that was more than just programing and content, which sets me up, I think, hopefully for success in this job, knock on wood. 

DR: You took over as Entercom New York’s market manager in May 2020 when we were at the height of the pandemic and many people didn’t know what to expect day to day. How were you able to provide leadership and make sure everyone was on the same page and understood your vision during a time when no one was in the building?

CO: Still to this day, most people are not (in the building). I have stressed to our team, and I firmly believe this, if I didn’t have a history with the company, Entercom and then obviously before that CBS Radio, and knew a vast majority of the people and clearly was familiar with the New York properties immensely, as a joke I say ‘if I didn’t know where the bathroom was located’, I don’t think I could have started this job in the midst of working from home, virtually, during the pandemic. I think it might have been overwhelming and I would have been in the fetal position. 

It was the fact that I went in with a base already. I knew the company shorthand. I knew where the third rails were. I think it gave me the ability to, at minimum, hit the ground running as opposed to having to take time to kind of learn the cadence of the operation. So I think that was a huge advantage selfishly for me. 

DR: So let’s talk about your history in the building, because in addition to your run with CBS Radio, you did spend time with Entercom after the merger and then chose to leave. What changed either in your life or at the company that you were willing and ready to come back when the job was offered?

CO: After the merger happened, I was very upfront with people close to me, including the leadership of Entercom. I think I was itching for a little bit of a break. You know, we just went through the sale process on the CBS side. That was a very emotionally and physically draining process, preparing a company for either a potential IPO, spin off, a merger, all these various scenarios that could have played out. 

So that was really a personal decision. That wasn’t a decision like, ‘oh, I’m done with radio’. That wasn’t the decision. It wasn’t like, ‘oh, I don’t want to work for Entercom’. It was more of a personal decision where I felt like “Hey, you know what? I think I’m going to put a nice stamp on this chapter. It feels like closure. It feels like a really good time to put a period at the end of that sentence and say it’s time to move on.” And that’s that’s what I did. It was very amicable, very friendly, which you know, clearly if it wasn’t, I don’t think I would have wanted to come back nor would they have asked me to.

So during the year and a half or two years after I left, I stayed in very close contact with the people at Entercom personally and professionally. And then when this opportunity presented itself, as you said in the midst of the pandemic, I wasn’t looking for it. It just kind of presented itself. Susan Larkin was kind enough to reach out and explain the opportunity. I just paused and I was like “huh, this might be something for a next chapter”, because to your point, it’s very different than my first job.

This was a chance to get back to a local market. This was broadening, the core responsibilities beyond programing, and doing it at a place that I just have a passion for. People who know me know my two passions are radio and New York City. This job combines those two passions.          

I think it’s the best job in local broadcasting anywhere in the country when you think about the assets in the cluster. So I said, let’s jump into it. And again, I was looking for a challenge and let’s be honest, local radio in the midst of a pandemic? Yes, it’s going to classify a challenge. 

DR: So I’m going to need you to answer or I guess settle a running joke/debate between JB and I. So the BSM summit was in New York three months before you were announced in your new position. I have jokingly told Jason that Susan Larkin owes him a finder’s fee. Did the conversations begin backstage at the BSM summit? JB doesn’t think they did. 

CO: No, they did not. So you owe Jason whatever you wagered. Please pay your debt.

It started a few weeks after that. Actually, the date was the final day you were allowed to have indoor dining in New York City. So that was like mid-March. I had lunch with Susan and that’s kind of where it came up. So it did not happen at the Summit. 

DR: So we can’t put that on the poster for next year, then? 

CO: You cannot put that on the poster. That would be a lie. 

DR: So as you look at Entercom as a whole, podcasts are obviously very popular. It’s a space the company believes in and it’s continuing to gain popularity. In New York, you have local and network radio brands. There’s also a digital network with Radio.com Sports. I wonder as you think about all those assets where sports talk is happening within your building, where you think most people immediately associate sports talk these days? 

CO: Immediately, I still believe it’s terrestrial broadcast radio. Without a doubt, especially when you go market by market. If you were in New York and you said to somebody on the street “sports radio”, I think unaided, they’re going to say FAN. If you go to Boston, they’re going to say EEI or the Sports Hub. Chicago The Score, WIP in Philly.     

So clearly, I still think radio is that first initial reaction but again, you’ve got to define radio differently. Someone might consume WFAN exclusively as a digital product now, streaming on Radio.com or time shifted podcasts. So when we say FAN, we don’t necessarily assume it’s AM or FM at that point. So, shifting the definition of FAN from a radio station to a brand, but the brand is still, I think, the most influential local sports media brand. 

DR: I do look at Entercom and their sports presence around the country, and notice that there have been major investments made in sports betting content. Do you see that as not just a strong part of the future of sports audio, but could it be the future of sports audio? 

CO: I think it’s a part of the future of sports audio, but I don’t think it is the entirety of it. We have to think about it. Is there still a significant portion of the population that doesn’t wager on sports? I think it’s important for all of us in the sports media business to balance that approach, not make assumptions, and serve both audiences.     

So how do you serve the audience that does not bet on sports, but then also serve the audience that does? Then you have to break it down even further – the section of the audience that casually bets on sports vs. the subsection of that audience who are daily players and view it like the stock market. I think that’s the secret sauce. That’s where all these additional platforms come in where you’re able now to bifurcate your programing and serve everybody what they want, as opposed to 10, 15, 20 years ago where you just had one platform and you’re like, “OK, I have to make a choice. I could do gambling, non gambling, baseball, football.” Where now you could say “I’ve got the FM, the AM, the stream, the podcast, social channels.” There’s enough shelf space now in terms of platforms, to serve the appetite of every sports fan. So I don’t take it as like you have to choose one or the other anymore. 

DR: Since you returned to the building, WFAN has seen a number of changes to the roster. Whether it was Mike Francesa re-retiring, Joe Benigno retiring or Craig Carton returning, does that mean that WFAN has gotten an outsized amount of your attention compared to other stations in your building? 

CO: You sound like all my colleagues at the other stations, because they do remind me of that. 

DR: I will defend myself and say mine was a genuine question. 

CO: OK, so yes. I might move my office because I realized just by the nature of where the office is located, it is in the FAN section of the building. I might move to another part of the building to lessen that perception, but you’re right. And everybody understands that.      

It’s a very complicated operation, and right now, there’s been significant change that requires additional focus. To me as a manager, it all ebbs and flows. Once we get on the other side of this hill, maybe 1010 WINS or country or CBS FM will get more attention. It’ll just ebb and flow in terms of the needs.

The good thing about it, and if you were to ask me what’s the most important thing a market manager needs to be successful at it’s that they need great managers for each department. If I’m pulled in one direction, let’s say FAN right now, I know I’ve got great sales leadership across the board. I’ve got great engineering support. I’ve got great brand managers across the other properties. So if you’ve got the right people, it allows a manager to move from fire to fire. 

DR: I read around the time that Mark Chernoff announced he was retiring this spring that you were looking for a sort of brand executive instead of a traditional PD, somebody that could really think about what WFAN is going forward. And I wonder, what is the WFAN brand right now in 2021 in your eyes? 

CO: I’ll answer that in a second, but I just want to clarify that what I said at that time was I am “open to that”. It doesn’t mean I’m going to disqualify what some would say is a traditional radio brand manager, but I’m just saying that because we have the benefit of the time and because Mark’s not going anywhere immediately, why not take advantage of that time and look broadly and then figure out where the process naturally takes us? If it takes us back internally, great. If it takes us externally, that’s great, too.         

So in terms of where the state of the FAN brand is, I think for a brand that is now 30 plus years old, that started in a traditional broadcast medium like radio, it’s still so compelling, so strong. And again, I repeat this a lot. I will win this argument. It is the most influential sports media property in New York City, more influential than any newspaper, more influential than any local television station, more influential than any other radio station, local digital asset or regional sports network. FAN is synonymous with New York sports in a way no competitor is regardless of momentary hype. That hasn’t changed in 2021. It’s the same way it was in 1991, 2001, and 2011. So the brand is strong. It’s just different and it’s different because platforms are different. Also, the talent is evolving and different. But the brand at its core is still the most influential in the market. 

DR: Are people inside the building already letting you know who or what they want to see in the next PD at WFAN? 

CO: Yes, absolutely and I seek that out! I reach out to people and say, “Hey, give me your point of view. Give me your perspective.”     

The good thing about “inside the building,” and this is a testament to Entercom’s strength in the format, I broadly define “inside the building” as inside the company. If you think about all the sports radio properties that Entercom has around the country, those are also internal conversations. So, be it a PD in another market who might express interest, that’s a blessing in the process. Clearly, from a format standpoint, I guess dominate is a fair word to say for the Entercom footprint for sports radio, so the candidate list internally is a who’s who. And again, that’s something I’m going to take advantage of, meaning there’s no rush. 

DR: I hadn’t thought about the idea of “inside the building” and “inside the company” being the same in your eyes. That makes a lot of sense for the approach.

CO: It’s got to be, because if you think of my history and my previous life at CBS Radio I was so intrinsically involved with every sports station around the country, those that we’ve launched from scratch that didn’t exist before we put them on the air or those heritage brands that we continue to evolve. So, again selfishly, that’s an advantage I think that I can rely on from my previous life. 

DR: Is familiarity with the legacy of WFAN going to be as important as a vision for its future? 

CO: Yes, because here’s why. When you have a brand that is this successful and has truly stood the test of time, you’ve probably heard this a thousand times, but you want evolution. You don’t want revolution. That brand equity is extremely valuable. You don’t want to move too quickly in a disrespectful way to the past. You want to recognize the past. You want to honor the past, use that as the foundation for the future, but this is not a revolution. There’s just no need for it. I mean, it is an extremely healthy business today. It’s just about beginning the transition to a future state. 

DR: As you look at the new afternoon show, I think it is clear most listeners are happy to hear Craig on the air again. I think fans of those guys are liking what they hear. But the media in New York is so focused on how it’s going to go, how does it sound compared to Joe and Evan or Mike Francesa, how does it stack up with Michael Kay. I wonder how hard is it to grow a new show and a new partnership under the kind of microscope that comes with WFAN and on top of that, the kind of microscope that comes with Craig Carton? 

CO: Not hard at all, actually. We welcome it. Think about it. FAN has been around the block. We have thick skin at FAN. We don’t crumble under scrutiny. And then when you talk about the talent, Craig and Evan, both total pros. They’ve been doing this a long time. They don’t shy away from the pressure, so we actually enjoy it. We enjoy the attention.      

We talked about it earlier. How many, “local radio stations” get the exorbitant amount of attention of every minutia move that they make like FAN does? It doesn’t exist anywhere else.     

I say to people all the time, it’s like the media covers sports in New York where they cover the teams and then FAN. FAN has become almost like a pro sports team. And the line up at FAN is almost judged and scrutinized like the Yankees batting line up. And we love that. We welcome it, because that is a recognition of the station’s stature. When people stop paying attention or people stop covering us, that’s when I’d get really nervous. And also to remember too, any programmer would tell you this, you don’t program to the media reaction. You program to the listener and to the fans. That’s what we do. That’s what Craig and Evan do. 

Their show is basically four months old, but even less than that if you consider the holidays and vacation times. After only three months, I couldn’t be happier with where the show is. It’s getting an enormous amount of attention. The symbiotic relationship between all the shows has never been stronger. If you think about how Boomer & Gio interact with the afternoon show now, how the afternoon show interacts with Moose and Maggie in mid days. That has not always been the case in the history of FAN. That’s good for business, where all three of the shows during the day are kind of swimming together. 

DR: You mentioned that the time is going to come where the spotlight shifts to, whether it’s CBS or 1010 WINS. I do wonder with those two stations, in addition to FAN, if there have been conversations about people’s listening habits changing in New York due to Rush passing away. Has there been sort of a “time to step up what we’re doing” discussion given the reality that new listeners will likely be available due to their favorite show no longer being available?

CO: Yeah, I think definitely from a company perspective. But the key for us in New York is we’re in the all news business in New York. We’re not in the news talk business. So if you look at 1010 WINS and CBS 880, they’re all news all the time. They’re not news talk stations per se. That lane in New York is more the OR, WABC lane, but to your point, Rush was such a dominant personality, not just nationwide, but he did tremendously well in New York City. I know that shocks people because you think of New York City, you think of a liberal Democratic stronghold. But Rush performed extremely well for decades on WABC and even recently on WOR.

So now will there be an opportunity where a portion of the population between noon and 3 Monday through Friday in New York City are sniffing around for other audio options? I’m sure there will be. But are we going to change what 1010 and 880 do? No. Our position is going to be ‘if you stumble upon us, and you’re a post-Rush listener, you’re going to like what you hear’. But it’s an all news presentation. So if you’re still looking for news talk, well, you’ll probably go somewhere else and that’s ok.

BSM Writers

Covid Is A Convenient Excuse For Lowering Our Standards

“I am sick of hearing lag and noticeably different levels of soundproofing between two hosts on the same show.”

Published

on

I was probably four hours deep into my all-day football binge on Saturday when I started to think about the overall quality of what I was seeing. This isn’t a column about whether college football is secretly better than the NFL. This is about our industry.

While you may not notice a difference in the presentation on CBS’s top line SEC broadcast or on FOX’s Big Noon Saturday game, it is clear how few resources are being allocated to some of the games further down the networks’ priority list. ESPN doesn’t even send live broadcasters to its Thursday night college football game for instance.

Ohio State football broadcasts go remote amid COVID-19 restrictions
Courtesy: WBNS Radio

Covid-19 was the beginning of this. It forced every business in the broadcast industry to re-evaluate budgets and figure out how to do games when travel and the traditional set up of broadcast booths simply were not on the table.

This isn’t a problem limited to game coverage either. Plenty of hosts still are not back in their radio studio. Plenty of guests on ESPN’s and FS1’s mid day debate shows are still appearing via Skype and Zoom connections. It is as if we have started counting on our audience not expecting quality any more.

I want to be perfectly clear. I get that this pandemic isn’t over. I get that in many cases, networks and stations are trying to avoid overcrowding studios and in some cases, make accommodations for top-level talent that refuse to get vaccinated. “It’s survival mode,” is the answer from corporate.

Do we still need to be in survival mode though? We are 18 months into this pandemic. The majority of Americans are vaccinated. The ones who aren’t are actively making a choice not to do what they need to in order to put on the best possible show they can.

I am sick of hearing lag and noticeably different levels of soundproofing between two hosts on the same show. I am sick of seeing hosts on crystal clear HD cameras in a high tech studio talk to someone on a dirty webcam that can’t be bothered to even put in headphones so they don’t sound like they are shouting down a hallway.

A good example is the late Highly Questionable. I really liked that show when it was done in studio. I liked a lot of the ESPN talent that popped up on the show even after Dan Le Batard left. I couldn’t watch any more of the show than the two minute clips that would show up on Twitter. I didn’t want to see Bomani Jones behind a giant podcast mic. The low res camera that turned Mina Kimes’s house plant into a green blob gave me a headache. The complete disregard for quality made a decent show hard to watch.

Highly Questionable 4/12/21 - Changing History? - YouTube
Courtesy: ESPN

There was a time when the accommodations we made for Covid-19 were totally necessary. Bosses and broadcasters did whatever they had to to get a show or a game on the air. At this point, I am starting to wonder how much of the concessions are necessary and how much are the result of executives that “good enough” is the new standard.

It is totally reasonable to argue that in an age where microphones and editing software are cheap, slick production doesn’t carry the weight it once did. That is true for the podcasters and TikTokers that are creating content in spare bedrooms and home offices. If you’re ESPN or FOX or SirusXM, that slick production is what sells the idea that your content is better than what people can make at home on their own.

It’s soundproof studios, 4K cameras and futuristic graphics packages that make the standard setters in the industry special. Maybe your average Joe Six-Pack can’t put it into words. He just knows that a lot of home-produced content sounds and looks like play time compared to what he sees or hears on a network.

Sure, the anchors are the signature of SportsCenter’s heyday, but it was the stage managers, producers, and other behind-the-scenes staff doing their jobs that really made the show thrive. Those people cost money. The details they took care of may be something 90% of viewers will never notice. They will just know that they are watching a really good show. Those difference makers cannot do their jobs to the best of their abilities if everyone is being piped in from a different FaceTime feed.

In the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic we did whatever we had to. As broadcasters, we made compromises. As an audience, we accepted compromises. We were desperate for familiar entertainment and if Zoom is what it took to get it, that was just fine. There was no cure, no vaccine, things were scary and we were all anxious not knowing how long it would all last.

Anxiety and Depression From COVID-19 – San Diego – Sharp Health News
Courtesy: Nuthawut Somsuk

More than 18 months later, things may not be back to normal, but we are considerably less desperate. There are signs of normalcy in the world. Make the commitment to bring back the standard that won you so many fans in the first place.

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

If Netflix Wants Live Sports, F1 May Be Just The Beginning

“Netflix will shrewdly need to continue to rethink its strategy because its first-mover advantage and long-time industry leading dominance is no longer guaranteed.”

Published

on

In the past, Hollywood dealmakers and stockbrokers wondered whether another studio or streamer would catch Netflix.  Its dominance stemmed from being a first-mover and not having a serious competitor until Amazon and Disney ten or more years after their launch.  However, Netflix would eventually have to compete for content, original and licensed, other platforms that offered less expansive ad-based options, and additional content like live sports or a very popular series or movie premiere.  

Arguably, the pandemic accelerated the move to digital and it allowed competitors to gain subscribers because people were spending more time at home.  More subscribers and additional streaming options for consumers has not caused Netflix to faulter, but it has caused Netflix to rethink its sports strategy.  For years, Netflix was dead set again streaming live sports because of their cost and commercials—Netflix does not have advertisements on its platform currently.  

A sports fan's guide to Netflix, Hulu, YouTube & more after coronavirus  cancels live games | Sporting News
Courtesy: Sporting News/Getty

Netflix’s popular Drive to Survive docuseries about the Formula 1 (or “F1”) racing circuit, which was renewed for a fourth season, and the Michael Jordan/Chicago Bulls The Last Dance represents a golden era and renaissance of sports documentaries.  As much as fans of feature films and television series enjoy learning about actors during and off camera they similarly want to know about sports stars, their coaches, and franchises.  In other words, the business of sports is booming in valuation and behind-the-scenes content.  

Recently, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings stated that the popularity of Drive to Survive has caused the company to rethink its stance on purchasing live sports content.  The broadcast and streaming rights to Formula 1 will become available via ESPN and Sky Sports in 2022 and 2024.  Netflix, will have some competition to secure F1 rights, which will drive up the cost.  It was also reported by Front Office Sports that the Netflix CEO would require a level of exclusivity for sports rights that other platforms do not normally require.  The exclusivity is likely required because Netflix will want to justify the purchase price and to keep-in-line with what Netflix customers expect—exclusive content on the platform.  

With Premier League club Manchester United looking to secure a broadcast deal for selling its rights outside of the traditional league format, it might be the perfect acquisition for Netflix.  An exclusive team vs. an entire league would also be less expensive and more targeted.  One aspect of uncertainty for all streamers is their subscribers overseas, particularly in untapped China.  The international market is far from settled or established.  Netflix also has a large operation in India so possibly cricket via the Indian Premier League (“IPL”) could be a rights purchase to consider.

In 2018, the original content on Netflix only accounted for 8%.  This means that 92% of the content on the platform just a few years ago was all owned (at least partially) by someone else.  That statistic has changed because Disney+, Paramount+, Peacock, HBO Max, Apple+, and many others have since been created and stocked or restocked with content.  Controlling interest in Hulu was even purchased from FOX by Disney.  Disney and Amazon now both rival Netflix in terms of subscribers.  Netflix will shrewdly need to continue to rethink its strategy because its first-mover advantage and long-time industry leading dominance is no longer guaranteed.  

As Comcast-owned NBCUniversal CEO Brian Roberts recently said, purchasing sports rights can be difficult.  Sports rights are expensive.  Exclusive sports rights are even more expensive.  Sports rights only become available every five to ten years.  Networks and streamers are highly competitive to secure those rights with the hope of landing viewers, subscribers, and advertising dollars.  

Will Netflix get into sports rights bidding?  In the past, the digital entertainment giant has been steadfast is its non-sports approach.  However, the market has changed and is flooded with more competitors now.  Netflix has to change to meet its customer and the market needs.  

Formula 1 presents an interesting scenario for Netflix as a buyer and partner.  F1 is a popular league internationally and growing in the United States.  Two new F1 races in Miami, Florida, and Austin, Texas, in addition to season four of the Drive to Survive Netflix series are sure to drive traffic, pun intended, and interest in the racing sport.  

Formula 1: Drive to Survive Season 3 Netflix Docuseries
Courtesy: Netflix

Formula 1 is a sports league that will cost less to purchase streaming rights than a traditional American “Big 4” like the NBA, NFL, or MLB.  Formula 1’s structure is also centered at the top so it would be easier to make an exclusive deal that Netflix seeks.  The remaining questions being, will Netflix pursue Formula 1 sports rights to increase its streaming platform subscribers and compete with others?  Second, will Netflix be the first to offer commercial free live sports programming—for a premium price—or offer in-screen ads and additional during-break inside looks, content, and analysis?  Or will Netflix act more like a traditional broadcaster and offer advertisements to pay down its purchase price?  One will know more after a few laps around the sun.

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

Manningcast Is Best Experienced As A Fan, Not As A Broadcaster

“I still would’ve watched the game had the alternate not been available, but with the Manning breakdown of each play, I was watching an otherwise meaningless game on the edge of my seat.”

Published

on

ESPN

Much has been written on this site already about the ESPN alternative to a traditional Monday Night Football broadcast, the Manningcast. Andy Masur asked if it worked and questioned the network pulling its audience in two different directions. Mark Madden said the concept undoubtedly works, but the content is poor.

Both articles are good reads. Both provide another level of insight from those in the industry and how they view this unique/high-profile concept. Industry views provide solid insight to the success and quality of the show itself, what works – what doesn’t. But if we can’t sit back and take our industry glasses off, and just look at this broadcast as sports fans, I feel we’ll never see it in clear view. 

NFL Week 1 Monday Night Football, Peyton Manning ratings - Sports  Illustrated
Courtesy: ESPN

I’ll admit, for me, it took me no more than 5 minutes of watching week 1’s Ravens vs Raiders game to say “yeah, this isn’t meant for me”. I didn’t like the non-traditional approach of the broadcast, it felt like it lacked the energy of a traditional sportscast. The stadium volume was turned way down, the excitement was more in the conversation they were having with each other, rather than the game itself. It took me out of the moment of the game, rather than allowing me to get sucked in.

Now, in fairness, I kind of went into it with a narrow mind, thinking that would be the case. I am not someone who has the desire to flip around during the College Football Playoff broadcasts and catch the coaches corner or studio chatter, I want the game. 

Bottom line is, I hated the Manningcast when I watched it in Week 1. I even went on the air the next day and trolled members of my audience that were effusive in their praise of it. In the limited sample I provided for myself, I had come to the conclusion that this broadcast wasn’t made for REAL football fans (insert caveman sound effect here) and that only the most casual viewer would want to watch this SNL wanna be of a football broadcast. 

However, week 2, I decided I was going to be more open minded to it. I made it a point to break away from the traditional Packers vs Lions broadcast and watch the Manningcast, no matter how painful. I was completely wrong in my initial opinion.

Was Peyton Manning wearing a helmet and acting a little too zany for my taste in week 1? Yes. Is the guest connection quality well below what we should find acceptable in broadcasting? Yes. But that’s where I made the mistake. I was looking at this broadcast through the eyes of a broadcaster and not as a sports fan. 

Peyton Manning’s charisma jumps off the screen, he is elite at describing what he sees on the field in a way that no one else can. Eli can be a little dry, but he’s low key funny. And they have real chemistry together, as they should. They are family after all.

The thing that hooked me the most was just how invested Peyton was in the plays on the field, he really gets into the game, truly invested in the success and failure of the quarterbacks. There was a moment in week 2 when Jared Goff threw the ball to an empty patch of grass 15 yards down the field and was subsequently called for intentional grounding. You could see Goff yelling at the referee, pleading his case. Peyton surmised, probably accurately, that Goff was telling the ref that the ball was thrown to the right place and that its not his fault the receiver didn’t run the correct route. Peyton then carried on and told stories of when this type of thing would happen to him when he played for Indianapolis and Denver. I was hooked. 

I realized that I was far more invested in week 1 as a stand alone football game, I’m from Baltimore, I have a lot of love for the Ravens. Being invested in the game itself doesn’t lend as much flexibility. As a fan, you to want to hear about anything else but the action on the field. However, when watching two teams that I have no personal interest in, the Manning broadcast took on this new life. It created a level of interest for me as a REAL football fan that I otherwise would not have had. I still would’ve watched the game had the alternate not been available, but with the Manning breakdown of each play, I was watching an otherwise meaningless game on the edge of my seat. I felt like I had a front row view to a football clinic, held by two of the most accomplished players in league history. 

Best of former NFL punter Pat McAfee with Manning bros on 'MNF' | Week 2
Courtesy: ESPN

Personally, I could live without the guests. I am not as entertained by the back and forth with Rob Gronksowski or Pat McAfee as it seems the majority of social media is, but the Manningcast does a brilliant job of bridging the gap between the hardcore football fan and the casual observer. It’s an absolute hit and I’ll be locked in for the next one.   

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 Barrett Media.