Connect with us

BSM Writers

Analogies Aren’t Colin Cowherd’s Exclusive Property

“Your listeners want to be entertained. Relating sports to something that isn’t sports is entertaining. Call me crazy, but I bet Colin Cowherd knows that and that is the reason he works analogies into his segments. There is no reason you aren’t allowed to follow that lead.”

Demetri Ravanos



I had a conversation over the weekend with a host in a mid-size market. He was looking for some guidance on how to break out of ex-jock mode and how to be a little more human and relatable to the average bear. The guy doesn’t necessarily have his eye on hosting solo, but he wants to be able to do that if the opportunity were to present itself.

This is a guy that played big time college basketball and then had a cup of coffee, a shot of espresso really, in the NBA. We talked about his playing days and how he talks about them on air. We talked about how he sees a game and how he relates to his listeners what did or didn’t work when he is talking about his local team.

Ball And Basketball Court by Matt brown

In short, he said that he knows he needs to talk less about Xs and Os and think more about the way a guy who has never watched basketball from a bench can understand the game. He told me that in the team shows he has done, he has tried working in some analogies, but his partner is always critical.

“Every time I try to do that I hear that I am ripping off Colin Cowherd,” he told. “Apparently doing that is Colin’s thing. I don’t f***ing know. When I leave here, the last thing I want to do is listen to someone else’s show.”

Colin Cowherd is very good at analogies. I have heard him tell GMs that their team’s ceiling is being the league’s Burger King. I have heard him tell fans that couples’ counseling offers all the explanation you need about the Packers and Aaron Rodgers. I have heard him say the Raiders are going to look at Khalil Mack the way he looks at the Apple stock he sold in 1990.

His creativity and his ability to connect dots is unmatched. That cannot be denied. But it doesn’t mean that Colin Cowherd is the only one that gets to use analogies in his shows.

This industry has bits and sayings and styles that are clearly associated with a single show or host. The Looks Like Game is property of Dan Le Batard. No other show can do it without being accused of thievery. Phrases like “rack him” and “grab a vine” came from the Jungle. Anyone not named Jim Rome that started using that language would be called a copycat on the spot.

Just finding a good way to relate to your listeners? Figuring out an easy way to get them on board your ship for the journey ahead? How can that belong to any one person?

If another host accuses you of ripping off Cowherd because you also said that you sold Apple stock in 1990 and you felt then the way the Raiders feel about Kahlil Mack now, then okay. That’s a fair criticism. If they accuse you of ripping off Colin because you made any analogy at all, that person is a dope.

I happened to be filling in on a station in the Southeast the day after Scott Woodward announced he was leaving Texas A&M to become the athletic director at LSU. At that point, Ed Orgeron had been the head football coach at LSU for one and a half unremarkable years. His being hired in the first place was seen as a disappointment by the fan base, so naturally the question was asked.

With a new AD in place, even with relative success thus far, is Ed Orgeron on the hot seat?

The internet was abuzz with opinions. Most of the nos came from the idea that you aren’t going to pay a nearly $9 million buyout for a coach who was 15-6 overall at that point. Most of the yeses mentioned this same fact and came with the caveat of “it is crazy but”. To me it seemed simple. Ed Orgeron wasn’t Scott Woodward’s guy. You don’t leave one good job for another without the ability to get your guys where you want them.

On air, I relied on my love of Star Wars and the general public’s familiarity with the most basic storyline elements. I said “you don’t agree to be the captain of the Death Star if they aren’t going to let you fire the big laser“.

The PD heard it and texted me when the show was over. He didn’t say “I am so embarrassed that I put you on my station and you so blatantly ripped off Colin Cowherd.” He said “I totally disagreed with you until you put it that way. Why would you want to be in charge of the Death Star if you didn’t get to blow up a planet?”.

Your listeners want to be entertained. Relating sports to something that isn’t sports is entertaining. Call me crazy, but I bet Colin Cowherd knows that and that is the reason he works analogies into his segments. There is no reason you aren’t allowed to follow that lead.

The former basketball player I spoke with over the weekend loves Dr. Dre. I told him that if you went to a break saying that The Lakers were supposed to be The Chronic, but they are turning into The Aftermath, don’t you think men in the target demo would want to hear what you have to say? Do you think that is a comparison that would even be in Colin Cowherd’s wheelhouse?

Dr. Dre - Dr. Dre Presents... The Aftermath Lyrics and Tracklist | Genius

If the answer to the first question is yes, it doesn’t matter what the answer to the second question is. However, if the answer to the first question is yes and the answer to the second question is no, why would you think twice about using it?

Colin Cowherd is very good at his job. His ability to work analogies into his takes is a big part of the reason why, but they aren’t his exclusive property. I don’t think he would even try to claim they are. Just because someone is the best at a particular skill or strategy does not mean you cannot use it. You just have to add your authentic spin on that strategy. Analogies already involve thought and imagination. Just work a little bit harder to make sure your listeners hear something only you can come up with and the name Colin Cowherd won’t even cross their minds.

BSM Writers

Your Football Conversation Has To Be Different

I don’t know why any host would go with B- or C-material just for the sake of providing variety. That’s silly to me.

Brian Noe




Rejoice! Ball is back, baby. Life is just better when football season is included; am I right? (That was a rhetorical question because I know I’m right in this case.) Like many people in this country, I’m all about the pigskin. Outside of my family and friends, there aren’t many things in life that I love more than BALL.

With all of that being established, a simple question still exists: is there such a thing as talking too much football on a sports radio show?

I think it isn’t as much what you’re talking about; it’s how you’re talking about it. For instance, it isn’t good enough to lazily say, “Ehh, we’ll start off by talking about the game last night.” Well, how are you going to talk about it? Do you have anything original, interesting or entertaining to say? Or are you just gonna start riffing like you’re in a jam band hoping to accidentally stumble onto something cool after six minutes of nothing?

Talking about football is like opening a new burger joint. Hang with me on this one. There are so many options — Burger King, McDonald’s, Five Guys, Wendy’s, In-N-Out, etc. — that you can’t expect to have great success if you open a run-of-the-mill burger joint of your own. Having an inferior product is going to produce an inferior result.

It comes down to whether a topic or angle will cause the show to stand out or blend in. Going knee-deep on a national show about the competition at left guard between two Buffalo Bills offensive lineman doesn’t stand out. You’ll get lost in the shuffle that way.

A show needs to constantly be entertaining and engaging. One way to check that box is with unique viewpoints. Don’t say what other shows are saying. Your burger joint (aka football conversation) needs to be different than the competition. Otherwise, why are you special?

Another way to stand out is with personality. It’s impossible to have unique angles with every single topic that’s presented. A lot of hosts recently pointed out that the Dallas Cowboys committed 17 penalties in their first preseason game against the Denver Broncos. But Stephen A. Smith said it differently than everybody else. That’s what it comes down to; either say things that other shows aren’t saying, or say them differently.

New York Jets head coach Robert Saleh made a comment recently that too much of anything is a bad thing. So back to the original question, is there such a thing as too much football talk on a sports radio show?

Variety is the spice of life, but quality is the spice of sports radio. If a show provides quality, listeners will keep coming back. It’s really that simple. Sure, hosts will hear “talk more this, talk more that” from time to time, but you know what’s funny about that? It means the listeners haven’t left. The show is providing enough quality for them to stick around. If the quality goes away, so will the audience.

It’s smart for hosts and programmers to think, “What’s our strongest stuff?” If that happens to be a bunch of football topics, great, roll with it. I don’t know why any host would go with B- or C-material just for the sake of providing variety. That’s silly to me.

Former NFL quarterback Michael Vick said something interesting last week while visiting Atlanta’s training camp. Vick was asked which team’s offense he’d like to run if he was still playing today. “The offense Tom Brady is running in Tampa,” Vick said. “Pass first.”

The answer stood out to me because throwing the ball isn’t what made Vick special with the Falcons. He was a decent passer and a dynamic runner. The run/pass blend made Vick a problem. I totally understand wanting to prove doubters wrong, but there are a lot of athletes that get away from what they do best while relying on something else that isn’t their specialty.

Los Angeles Lakers guard Russell Westbrook is not an outside shooter. He’s brutal in that area. Yet Russ will keep firing threes at a 30% clip. Why? Attacking the rim and working the midrange is his game. You don’t see Phoenix Suns guard Chris Paul bombing threes if they aren’t going in. He kills opponents with his midrange skills all day.

It’ll be interesting to see how Miami Dolphins quarterback Tua Tagovailoa approaches this season. He’s received a steady diet of “can’t throw the deep ball.” Will he try to a fault to prove doubters wrong, or will he rely on what he does best? Beating defenders with timing and accuracy on shorter throws is where he finds the most success.

Working to improve your weaknesses makes sense, but it shouldn’t come at the expense of going away from your strengths. How is it any different in sports radio? If a host isn’t strong when it comes to talking basketball or baseball, it definitely makes sense to improve in those areas. But if that same host stands out by talking football, at some point it becomes like Westbrook jacking up threes if the host gets too far away from a bread-and-butter strength.

Former New York Yankees closer Mariano Rivera is the only player in the Baseball Hall of Fame that was unanimously elected. He relied on his cutter — a fastball that moved, a lot — about 85% of the time. Mo didn’t say, “Man, my four-seam fastball and changeup aren’t getting enough respect.” He rode that cutter all the way to Cooperstown and legendary status.

Rivera is a great example of how playing to your strengths is the best approach. He also shows that quality trumps variety every time. Let’s put it this way: if 85% of a sports radio show is football content, and the quality of that show is anywhere near Mo caliber, it’s destined to be a hit.

One of my buddies, Mike Zanchelli, has always been a hit with the ladies. I think he came out of the womb with at least 10 girls in the nursery showing interest in him. He had a simple dating philosophy: “Always. Leave them. Wanting. More.” That might work in dating, but I think it’s the opposite in sports radio. Most listeners don’t hear the entire show. If they’re in and out, wouldn’t you want them to hear your best stuff when they are tuned in?

That’s why I say screw variety. That’s why I wouldn’t worry about overserving your audience an all-you-can-eat BALL buffet. I think it’s much wiser to focus on producing a quality product regardless if it’s well rounded or not.

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

ESPN Has Gone From Playing Checkers to Chess In Two Years

Those decisions make the future ones with the Pac-12, the Big 12, NBA and UFC fascinating to watch but what’s clear is that this ESPN strategy is different.



In the days after the Big Ten news leaked regarding some of the details of their upcoming media deals, I was hankering for more information. I wanted more insight as to the “why”. Why did the Big Ten leave such a long-lasting and prosperous relationship with ESPN. I just couldn’t imagine it and it’s why I wrote about it last week.

It was in that pursuit of knowledge that I tuned into a podcast favorite of mine, The Marchand and Ourand Sports Media Podcast. The show’s hosts are deep into the weeds of sports media with John Ourand at the Sports Business Journal and Andrew Marchand at the New York Post. It was Ourand who was dropping dimes of news on the Big Ten deal last week. I wanted to hear him dive deeper, and he did on the podcast. But it was a throwaway line that got my wheels churning.

“This is about the third or fourth deal in a row that ESPN, the free-spending ESPN, to me has shown some financial discipline” Ourand said. “They are showing a bit of financial discipline that I hadn’t seen certainly when John Skipper was there and pre-dating John Skipper.”

I had to keep digging and folks, it’s true. ESPN is essentially Jimmy Pitaro in the above quote, the Chairman of ESPN. Since taking the role in 2018, he was put into an interesting position of being in the middle of a lot of big money media rights deals that would be coming due for renegotiation soon. The rights fees for EVERYTHING were going to balloon wildly. But in the last two years, he has comfortably kept the astronomical rates somewhat within shouting distance.

The big one, the NFL media rights deal agreed to last March, saw ESPN pay a very strong 30% increase for the rights. However, other networks involved had to pay “double” as Ourand so succinctly put it. He also personally negotiated with FOX to bring in Troy Aikman and Joe Buck to make their Monday Night Football booth easily more recognizable and the best in the sport. ESPN in that deal, that did NOT include doubled rates, got more games, better games, and more schedule flexibility. ABC gets two Super Bowls in the deal too. Simply put, Jimmy Pitaro set up ESPN to get a Super Bowl itself, but for now his network will take full advantage of the ABC network broadcast when the time comes (2026, 2030).

The recent Big Ten deal was massive because the conference spent forty years with ESPN and decided to reward that loyalty with a massively overpriced mid-tier package. ESPN balked at the idea. In their back pocket lies a lot of college football media rights deals with a lot of conferences including one that will be a massively profitable venture, the SEC package. ESPN takes over the CBS package of the “top” conference game. Yes, it paid $3 billion for it, but it’s a scant $300 million annually. Sure, that’s over 5X what CBS was paying annually but CBS signed that deal in 1996! I need not tell you all of the advancements in our world since Bob Dole was a presidential nominee. ESPN now gets to cherry-pick the best game from the best conference and put the game anywhere they damn well please to maximize exposure.

The F1 media rights extension is massive because of two things: one, they got it cheap before the sport littered your timeline on weekend mornings and two, when they re-signed with F1 this summer they paid way less than other streaming networks were reportedly willing to pay. The brand, the savvy worked again. ESPN takes a small risk for a potentially exploding sport and much like CBS did with the SEC for 25 years, can make massive margins.

I can keep going, and I will with one more. Sports betting. The niche is growing like my lawn minutes after the summer rainstorm. Pitaro has said publicly that sports betting “has become a must-have” and he’s full-frontal correct. ESPN is in an odd spot with their clear lineage to Disney, but it’s obvious something massive is going to come soon with ESPN reportedly looking for a deal in the $3 billion neighborhood.

Pitaro has been positioning this company from a position of strength. He pays big money for big properties, but knows when he’s getting taken advantage of and most importantly, isn’t afraid to pull his brand’s name out of the deep end.

ESPN may have an issue with dwindling subscribers, but that’s an everyone problem. The difference is ESPN is constantly trying to get you from one network ship you think is sinking into another network life raft. If you want to leave cable or satellite and go streaming, you can. ESPN+ is there to pick up the pieces. Or Sling (with an ESPN bundle). Or YouTube TV (ESPN is there too). Or a myriad of other ways. They are positioned so well right now to be where you think you want to go. Jimmy Pitaro and ESPN have been amazing at doing whatever they can to keep you paying them monthly.

The network has been aggressive with media rights deals but these newer ones have been diligently maneuvered by Pitaro. It was a choice to essentially back the SEC for the next decade, and to put more money into the potential of F1. The effort was a conscious one to keep a tight-lipped mission to bolster Monday Night Football’s booth. It was an understated strategy to reinvest in the NHL. Those decisions make the future ones with the Pac-12, the Big 12, NBA and UFC fascinating to watch but what’s clear is that this ESPN strategy is different. The old adage of “pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered” may have applied to the network under different leadership, but these aren’t eating pigs. These are boars.

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

The Producers Podcast – Big Baby Dave, Jomboy Media

Brady Farkas



Big Baby Dave has his hands in everything for Jomboy Media. He joins Brady Farkas to talk about how he brings a unique sound to each show he works with.






Continue Reading

Barrett Media Writers

Copyright © 2021 Barrett Media.