Richard Deitsch and Andrew Marchand are sports media writers for The Athletic. They converse every couple of weeks on sports media topics. This week, they discuss the Super Bowl from a media perspective, including:
- Tom Brady’s Super Bowl broadcaster debut
- Viewership potential for the game
- The future of Super Bowl pregame shows
- Netflix becoming an NFL player
Richard Deitsch: I’m seeing Tom Brady in my sleep given how much this site has written about him over the past five months. But here’s the reality: We both agreed prior to the start of the NFL season that Brady’s debut as a Fox NFL analyst was the biggest sports media story of the NFL season.
My thesis has always been that Brady’s broadcasting year would ultimately be judged by the viewing public on how he performs in the Super Bowl. That’s the final test, but it’s more than a test: It is the football public’s ultimate engagement with Brady in his first year on TV.
We both know that his Fox Sports bosses and sports television executives look at it differently. They will judge him on progress from Week 1 to Week 21. Fox believes he has improved significantly throughout the season.
However, there will be 115 million-plus people watching Brady on Sunday. That is an enormous jury. How do you see this?
Andrew Marchand: I agree, but there are several different audiences for the Super Bowl:
There are the hardcore fans there every week that produce the 15 (million) to 35 million or so viewers for games each week. The more casual fans that begin watching in the playoffs push the numbers into the 40 (million) and 50 million range. Then comes Super Bowl viewers.
The deciders are that first group, as they care much more about the broadcast. The other two groups may have some opinions, but ultimately will likely just be impressed that Brady is on the call.
If he does amazing or has an awful performance, then all three sets will chime in. He is way better than Week 1, but he’s not John Madden just yet.
If he has a “16-for-24, two touchdowns and one interception” performance, I think Fox would take it. They would love “400 yards and five touchdowns,” but I don’t think they will be greedy.
AM: How many eyes do you think will be watching this game?
RD: The current viewership record came last year when an audience of 123.4 million viewers watched the Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers in overtime. That topped the previous record of 115.1 million viewers for the Kansas City-Philadelphia Eagles matchup two years ago.
Look, there is no Chiefs fatigue; the data does not lie. The AFC Championship Game averaged 57.7 million viewers, the most-watched AFC title game in history. If this game is tight late — and I think it will be — I think we see a new record. Put me down for 124 million. You?
AM: This is a bad omen for Fox — we agree! I’m going 124.5 million viewers and a record.
You are on point on the fact that Chiefs fatigue is overrated. Viewers like the big-name teams, and Kansas City is going for history (three Super Bowl championships in a row) with maybe the greatest quarterback ever.
There may be some hate watching, but the people who have such strong feelings are watching no matter what. The records come at the edges, and I think Fox and the NFL pick that up.
AM: How about the pregame show? You into it? Or a big waste of time?
It could be the last Super Bowl pregame show for Jimmy Johnson and Terry Bradshaw. After two of the last three Super Bowls because of the new TV contracts with the NFL, Fox won’t have the big game for four years as it is NBC (2026), ABC/ESPN (2027), CBS (2028) and then Fox in 2029.
RD: So here is the interesting thing with NFL pregame shows: They continue to draw more viewers than you might think.
For instance, “Fox NFL Sunday” averaged 4.42 million viewers this season. You can make a lot of advertising money off those numbers. I mean, if “First Take” averaged 600,000 viewers over a year they would hold a Rose Bowl parade in Bristol, Conn.
I find the pregame shows increasingly less relevant these days with younger viewers. We also don’t often see them pop on social media, the coin of the realm for young people.
Fox Sports clearly will be bringing in younger staffers soon, but the NFL pregame show often feels like a relic of a different time. I’ll watch because we get paid to watch, but I find it less interesting every year.
RD: One of the things I get asked about from a lot of readers is whether a Super Bowl will ever go behind a paywall where a Netflix buys it.
I don’t think this happens in our lifetime. Now, if you asked me whether I can see a Netflix or Amazon have the divisional playoffs in the next 20 years, I absolutely see it. What about you?
AM: I’m more bullish on this lifetime, but I’d like to know how long that means. Amazon and Netflix are thinking big, global.
The NFL can have Roger Goodell do songs and dances about the fans this and the fans that, but if the digital players offer way more money, I could see Amazon or Netflix having a Super Bowl maybe when the NFL opts out of its current TV deals. I don’t think that is a wild thought in four or five years when those opt-outs happen.
If broadcast TV gets significantly weakened over time, I think the idea of a subscription-based Super Bowl becomes more likely. It really depends on where The Great Rebundling takes place and how strong the networks can continue to be. But in a TV-by-subscription world, it’s hard not to bet on Netflix’s and Amazon’s long-term models for big events if they want more.
(Illustration: Demetrius Robinson / The Athletic; Sam Hodde/Getty Images, Mikayla Schlosser/Kansas City Chiefs via AP, Kara Durrette via AP)
