Insider trading is nothing new. The impact is permanent, and the practice is illegal. It involves nonpublic information being shared to provide an edge and an unfair advantage to another party. When Tom Brady wanted to purchase a small stake in the Las Vegas Raiders while working for FOX Sports, the NFL reacted. The league placed immediate restrictions on his access to team facilities, players, and coaches.
Troy Aikman’s current situation drew a “no comment” from the NFL, even though the Hall of Fame quarterback and ESPN Monday Night Football analyst is saying the quiet part out loud. Brady never did what Aikman has done, yet handcuffs were immediately placed on Brady. Aikman, meanwhile, walks through the front door unscathed.
What Troy Aikman is potentially engaging in is insider trading, not unlike someone with nonpublic information about a company that others can use to reap rewards with an unfair advantage. What boggles the mind is: where are the networks in all of this? Why hasn’t ESPN (and FOX Sports before them) made a better effort to ensure network access isn’t compromised by the actions of their own hired talent?
Access is everything to networks, radio stations, and media in general. Without access, there’s no ability to gain insight, report a story, or enhance content without engaging the proper figures involved. When Troy Aikman calls a Monday Night Football game for ESPN, that role grants him something other teams do not get.
Access.
There is massive value in access. With it, content receives a significant upgrade because of the information gained to provide the insight employers expect. Without it, you’re just another voice in the crowd. Buddy Ryan once said if you listen to the fans, you’ll be sitting up there with them.
That’s why access matters. Did it affect the end product that Tom Brady put out on FOX Sports when he didn’t have access to coaches, players, and facilities? Possibly. Would the average fan know? Likely not. However, principle is everything. Once you open Pandora’s box, there’s no going back.
In the end, the restrictions on Brady were lifted, even after visuals of Brady in the Las Vegas Raiders’ coaches box wearing a headset generated national headlines.
What Troy Aikman is doing is different. He didn’t buy his way into influence with the Miami Dolphins. The team brought him in and paid him for the information and insight he can provide.
Aikman helped the team secure its new head coach and general manager by the middle of January. That could have been the end of his responsibilities. However, he continues to serve as an advisor for the organization. He told Clarence E. Hill Jr. of DLLS Sports that he plans to be in the war room with the Dolphins for the NFL Draft. Aikman will also be around the team facility, continuing to provide services for the franchise that is paying him.
Then Aikman dropped this nugget in his conversation with DLLS Sports.
“I think the Dolphins were wise in understanding my relationships around the league and knowing that I have information that they don’t have or can’t get,” Aikman said. “And I think they were smart in taking advantage of that, whether it was through me or through somebody else.”
Aikman is plainly stating that the information he has—information the Dolphins can’t or don’t have—is being paid for. If any of that information comes from the access his ESPN job provides, it creates a potential unfair advantage for the Miami Dolphins. If the Dolphins use that information in any way, shape, or form, that is insider trading.
So why is ESPN not raising an issue with this? Don’t they have the Super Bowl this year?
If access is everything, and your own talent is cashing in on the access your employment provides. How can you not address it? For the NFL, this is clearly an issue because the league has allowed it to become one.
Let’s play this out. Suppose Troy Aikman continues to work for the Miami Dolphins in his current role while utilizing information gained through his ESPN position. Can Troy Aikman call a Monday Night Football game involving the Dolphins?
The excuse often cited in this discussion is that fans don’t care—it’s just a sports media gripe. But what if the Dolphins beat the Patriots and head coach Mike Vrabel raises concerns that information shared in a conference call contributed to that victory?
Would insider trading matter to networks and the NFL then—when it affects outcomes? If the NFL isn’t careful, that’s the outcome on the horizon.
If NFL broadcasters are profiting from information shared in confidential, closed-door meetings with competing teams, how is that not insider trading?
The NFL already faces significant questions, especially as the league prepares for media rights deals that could reshape the industry. However, if this ethical gray area continues, teams should push to restrict access to broadcast partners across every network.
Where the NFL has been passive in enforcing ethics and protecting access, Troy Aikman’s actions—and his own words—challenge the league directly.
If the league won’t act, then networks should. Stop paying top voices if they are going to leverage the access you provide for personal gain and influence within the league. That’s not fair to teams. Especially in an era where the integrity of sports is constantly questioned, it’s certainly not fair to fans.
At some point, this stops being a gray area and becomes a credibility crisis. You can’t sell fans on the integrity of the game while allowing those closest to it to blur the lines between access and advantage. Whether it’s called consulting, advising, or simply “relationships.” The result is the same. Information that isn’t supposed to be shared suddenly has value where it shouldn’t.
If that line isn’t clearly defined and enforced now, it won’t just be broadcasters or executives who pay the price. It will be the league’s credibility, the networks’ trust, and ultimately the fans’ belief that what they’re watching is fair.
Because once access becomes currency, the game stops being played only on the field.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.
Keywords:
“If NFL broadcasters are profiting from information shared in confidential, closed-door meetings with competing teams…that contributed to a victory” over another.
Those are big, speculative “ifs”, John. And demonstrating to a neutral judge that “information” definitively resulted in a clear, unmistakable advantage of one team over another will be rather challenging to say the least. Details specific to gameday are not shared with media of any sort.