The news is official. Former college and NFL wide receiver Mike Pritchard has left ESPN 1100/100.9FM in Las Vegas.
One of the stars of Colorado’s 1990 national championship football team, has given up his midday hosting role and analyst position on UNLV football broadcasts to move to Denver and pursue opportunities as an NFL and Power 5 conference analyst.
“One thing I’ve always been interested in over the years is challenging myself, and just seeing how far I can go,” Pritchard told his audience on Friday. “Vegas is home and it always will be home. But for me, it’s just how far can I go with this.”
Pritchard spent the past few years in Las Vegas sports radio working in middays withe Mitch Moss on the “Mitch and Pritch” show. Moss though left the station in April to join Brent Musburger’s VSIN network, leaving Pritchard to team with Las Vegas Review-Journal sports writer Ed Graney.
No word yet on what ESPN Las Vegas has planned for middays. To hear Pritchard’s final hour on the station click here.
After the opening pleasantries on episode 2 of Season 2, Jason dives into The 5 in 5. This week’s stories focus on Vice Sports dropping written content in favor of video, The Athletic and Boston Sports Journal doubling down on print while others run away from it, the lack of interest in the O.J. Simpson parole hearing on sports television, ESPN’s interest in Charissa Thompson to work alongside Mike Greenberg on his new TV show, and Jeremiah Crowe’s promotion to Program Director of KNBR in San Francisco.
This week’s guest is Joe Fortenbaugh of 95.7 The Game in San Francisco. During the course of 43 minutes, Joe takes listeners through his unique journey into sports radio and shares tips on how to succeed as a personality and capitalize against a strong local competitor.
SUBJECTS COVERED WITH JOE FORTENBAUGH
Chasing a law degree and an opportunity in sports as an agent
Getting his start with the National Football Post and what the job entailed
Calling into other market programs and what his strategy is when doing it
How doing a good deed led to a change of luck and life changing message
Going thru a challenging audition process and how he prepared for it
Settling into the #2 role on a morning show and finding his groove
Undergoing adversity and how to approach it during challenging times
Adjusting to the lead host position and what he did to get ready for it
Trying to grow a show while competing against a dominant competitor
The mindset of Bay Area listeners and why he reduces his aggression
Measuring self-improvement and seeking honest outside feedback
The challenge of pleasing the audience while satisfying your own interests
Why sports handicapping will become a bigger conversation in sports media
Growing up a Philly sports fan and if he desires talking sports in Philadelphia
Quick Hits – Raiders in Vegas, Best host, Donald Trump, Best sports media bet
What if I told you, that another sports media show or personality would be given a future 30 for 30 documentary. Who would you nominate to earn that honor?
On Thursday evening July 13th, ESPN premiered the 30 for 30 film on WFAN’s longtime afternoon show, Mike and the Mad Dog. The story revolved around Mike Francesa and Chris “Mad Dog” Russo, and the New York sports radio duo’s rise to prominence in the big apple. Mike and Chris enjoyed nineteen successful years on the air together, and in the process, influenced the growth of the entire sports radio format, and many of the broadcasters who operate in it today.
By the end of the episode, Twitter was exploding with conversation about the film, making it one of the evening’s top trending topics. The film ran sixty minutes in length, which I felt was short, but the episode brought back many great memories for those who were familiar with Mike and Chris and their importance to the sports radio format.
After learning about the ratings, I began thinking to myself, which other sports media shows, hosts, stations or stories would be worthy of a similar honor? 30 for 30 films aren’t handed out to just anyone. To earn that type of respect and recognition as a media personality or show, a significant contribution to the industry must be made for a lengthy period of time.
I began jotting down ideas and contemplating who had blazed a large enough trail in the sports media business to warrant consideration. I don’t claim for this list to be bulletproof. But maybe it spurs additional ideas, and reminds us to appreciate the style, skill and special qualities that many great broadcasters have brought to the airwaves, and the life lasting connections they’ve formed with the audience.
There are many giants in our industry. Some have retired after decades of excellence. Some continue to steal the spotlight on television and radio, adding to the legacies they’ve already established. And others have joined the guy in the sky after owning space in the hearts and minds of sports fans during the length of their broadcasting careers.
It’s easy to make a case for Chris Berman, Mike and Mike, Jim Rome, Stephen A. Smith, Pardon The Interruption, Bob Costas and Al Michaels. The same can be said for Stuart Scott, John Saunders, Harry Caray and Craig Sager. And there are many others that belong in the conversation as well.
I don’t expect ESPN to create future 30 for 30 documentaries on these individuals, let alone the ones that I’m making a case for in this article, but since this is the land of make believe, and we’re all allowed to dream, I’ve laid out a few thoughts on who I think is worthy of having their story told. Each of these candidates have left an indelible mark on the sports broadcasting profession, and their ability to resonate with fans on a national level would create greater public interest in their documentaries.
If 30 for 30’s writers, filmmakers, and producers choose down the line to develop a film from one of these ideas, a simple thank you to Barrett Sports Media in the final credits will suffice. Unless of course you’re paying seven figures. In that case, call me!
But while I spend my time sitting around waiting for their call, use your next few minutes to review the three candidates that I’ve chosen, and the reasons why they deserve consideration to be featured in a future 30 for 30 documentary.
Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann – Before the landscape of sports television exploded with tons of options and channels, Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann owned the attention of every sports fan across America for a five year period. The times may have been simpler, the competition less formidable, and the production quality and studio display less appealing, but when Dan and Keith took the air to host The Big Show, viewers adjusted their schedules to make sure they were in front of a television to watch them perform.
From their signature catchphrases to their on-camera chemistry and the sheer joy in which they informed you about the best moments each night from the world of sports, Dan and Keith became television rock stars. They were your friends on SportsCenter and the guys who both fans and athletes each wanted to spend time hanging out and having a beer with. Their style was contagious, their laughs were natural and they inspired many to want to stand in front of camera and develop a career calling sports highlights.
The only downside to Dan and Keith’s tenure is that it didn’t last long enough. Patrick stayed at ESPN until 2006, but Olbermann was long gone, departing in 1997. Upon his exit from Bristol, a town in which Keith was not fond of and had publicly been critical of, sources said there was a better chance of hell freezing over before Olbermann would be welcomed back.
When the network celebrated 25 years of its history, Keith was the one marquee name who wasn’t present. The two sides did though finally turn the page and work together in 2013 when KO signed on to host his own self-titled nightly program. He also returned for ESPN Radio’s 25th anniversary. Patrick cut ties with the network too for a few years, but finally returned in 2015 as Scott Van Pelt’s first guest on SportsCenter.
The emergence of The Big Show gave SportsCenter the jolt of energy it needed during an important time in the show’s history. Although the program had gained ground prior to Dan and Keith’s arrival, once the two teamed up to own the 11pm ET time slot, patterns changed, allegiances were formed, and late night sports television became must-watch and must-discuss.
Since departing from the four letter network, the two broadcasters have taken different roads, enjoying varying levels of success. Olbermann expanded his profile by tossing his hat into the political arena. Patrick stayed true to his sports roots, developing a nationally syndicated radio/television show, and becoming the studio host of NBC’s Sunday Night Football. He’s also continued to make appearances in Adam Sandler films.
They say the true measure of impact is what you accomplish during the time that you’re doing it. Well, for five years Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann owned the attention of every American sports fan, athlete, coach and executive. If 30 for 30 shined the spotlight on their influence on SportsCenter and sports television, they’d earn the nation’s attention again, even if only for an hour or two.
Vin Scully – Like a cup of hot chocolate on a cold winter’s day, Vin Scully warmed the sports fan’s soul for over six decades. The graceful voice of the Los Angeles Dodgers was the epitome of class. He made sports fans feel like they were at the ballpark enjoying the sound of the crowd, the taste of the hot dogs and beer, and the smell of the grass, even as they relied on his magical voice to convey the excitement over their radio airwaves. You couldn’t think of the L.A. Dodgers without thinking of Vin Scully.
One of the more interesting sagas of his career occurred at CBS where the network chose Pat Summerall over him to work opposite John Madden. The network felt Summerall blended better with Madden, which ultimately proved to be a good decision. The sting from that situation led Scully to NBC.
The list of awards and accomplishments that Scully racked up over his broadcast career is impressive as well. He was given the Ford Frick Award from the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1982, honored with a Lifetime Achievement Emmy Award for sportscasting along with induction into the National Radio Hall of Fame in 1995, and was named the California sportscaster of the year 32 times. He has his own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, and was honored with the Icon Award at the 2017 ESPYS awards show.
Scully was America’s friend on the radio, a master at painting pictures with words, and his excellence continued until his final sentence was uttered in 2016.
The only challenge with producing a Vin Scully documentary is that it’s missing a lot of negativity and friction. Maybe I’m naive to think that respect, decency, and greatness would be enough to make people care, but I’d roll the dice on telling the story of one of America’s finest broadcasters. A story about Vin would not only capture a few eyeballs, but it’d also leave them wet.
Howard Cosell – Few sportscasters were as successful, influential, controversial and colorful as Howard Cosell. Many loved him. Others hated him. But all paid attention to him.
What made Cosell a trailblazer was his uncomfortable and unapologetic approach which often ruffled the feathers of many he spoke with. He was a bombastic personality with a huge ego who referred to himself as arrogant, obnoxious, vain, verbose and a little bit of a showoff. He stood firmly behind his convictions, often using the line “I’m just telling it like it is”.
Perhaps the New York Times described him best when they wrote his obituary in 19995. The newspaper said that Cosell entered sports broadcasting in the mid-1950s, when the predominant style was unabashed adulation. Cosell provided a brassy counterpoint which was first ridiculed, and then copied until it became the dominant note of sports broadcasting.
All of those character traits became part of Cosell’s magic. After carving out a solid niche on New York radio and television, he became a national figure thanks to his interactions with Muhammad Ali. Despite their differences as people, the two discovered an instant chemistry. They were able to cover territory in their conversations that others simply didn’t. The various twists and turns and occasional sparks, made their interviews worth the price of admission.
Cosell was one of the first sportscasters to support Ali when he refused to be inducted into the military. He also publicly supported John Carlos and Tommie Smyth after they raised their fists in a “black power” salute during the 1968 medal ceremony. Most broadcasters sought to steer clear of social and racial issues, but Cosell embraced them, enhancing his public profile, but creating mixed reactions along the way.
It was Cosell who was behind the microphone for one of the most memorable moments in professional boxing history. The brash broadcaster screamed “Down Goes Frazier. Down Goes Frazier. Down Goes Frazier” after George Foreman rattled Smokin’ Joe Frazier in round 1 of their 1973 heavyweight title fight. Foreman would go on to knock out the champion in round 2. The call remains one of the most popular in sports broadcasting history.
To have one of those moments is special enough, but another on-air moment is equally as important to Cosell’s legacy as any other. During a Monday Night Football game between the Miami Dolphins and New England Patriots on December 8, 1980, Cosell stunned the audience by revealing that John Lennon of The Beatles had been shot and killed outside of his apartment in New York City. At first, Cosell was hesitant to announce the news of Lennon’s death, but after being pressed by Frank Gifford, he eventually relayed the information, making it one of the most defining on-air moments in sports television history.
There are many other acts, moments, controversies and contributions that make up the Howard Cosell story. From his introduction of the line “The Bronx Is Burning”, to his controversial remarks about Redskins wide receiver Alvin Garrett, to his best selling memoir “I Never Played The Game” which created tension at ABC and led to his dismissal, Cosell was a colorful and complicated individual. That’s usually what makes for compelling and entertaining programming. If 30 for 30 chose to tell his story, I don’t think they’d struggle to find an audience for it.The beauty of sports media is that it never stops producing interesting personalities and stories. The growing amount of networks and platforms, and interest among viewers, readers and listeners, means we’ll have plenty to choose from when determining which trendsetters and game changers warrant a documentary worthy of the world’s attention, and which ones have built a nice niche but are best remembered in their local backyards.
Maybe one day we’ll profile the digital empire Bill Simmons built. Or Barstool Sports’ influence on sports fans. Or the impact of the Woj bomb after a decade of NBA news breaking dominance. Heck, maybe another sports radio program will have a larger impact on an audience than Mike and the Mad Dog, although I have a difficult time picturing it.
Imagine the uproar if ESPN announced a 30 for 30 was in development to profile the Embrace Debate model and how it changed sports television? The social media insanity would be worth the price of admission alone. As much as people knock it and complain about it, a case could be made that it’s not only produced ratings and big media stars for ESPN, but it’s influenced the way other television networks present their own programming. And I’m not just talking about FS1.
For many in the sports media industry this is a fun topic to debate and discuss. Selfishly we love to hear about members of our business and the stories behind their careers, even if the overall interest in the subject is less when compared to the world of sports and all that it creates. That isn’t to suggest that what we do doesn’t matter or that it’s not worthy of recognition, but choosing the right story is critically important to generating success for a film.
Let me end this column by leaving you with the question that I presented in the opening paragraph. If you were in charge of developing a 30 for 30 documentary, and tasked with creating the next big hit around a sports media personality, show or story, which one would you choose?
But let’s raise the stakes. If you choose right, you earn a lifetime contract to produce films for ESPN. If you make the wrong call, you can never film anyone or anything again.
That shouldn’t be too difficult right? After all, it’s only your career that’s on the line. Choose wisely my friends.
Jeremiah Crowe has been given the reigns to set the tone and vision for one of the most successful sports radio stations in the country. After serving as Program Director of KNBR 1050 (KTCT-AM) and as Assistant Program Director of KNBR 680, Cumulus Media have elevated Crowe to program KNBR 680, one of the company’s most powerful and successful sports radio properties.
KNBR has been built on a combination of strong local programming and play by play, and fortunately for Crowe he’ll have an experienced hand available to guide him along. Longtime PD Lee Hammer will remain involved and shift to a new position of Vice President of Sports Play by Play Programming. Hammer will become more involved in navigating the relationships and on-air opportunities with the San Francisco Giants, San Francisco 49ers, and other Bay Area sports partnerships.
VP/Market Manager Justin Wittmayer said, “Jeremiah Crowe and Lee Hammer are the ‘Dream Team’ for outstanding sports radio programming and together, will continue to drive the growth of these powerhouse sports stations. Jeremiah has done a remarkable job leading the re-launch of KNBR 1050 over the past year, while expanding our high-engagement social media platforms for Bay Area sports fans. In this new role as Program Director of both KNBR 680 and KNBR 1050, he will focus his considerable expertise and efforts into growing these stations and the KNBR brand as the Bay Area’s most powerful name in sports programming.”
Wittmayer continued, “As VP/Sports Play-by-Play Programming for Cumulus Media-San Francisco, Lee Hammer is a major asset to our senior leadership team. This appointment reflects our continued investment in KNBR, with an enhanced focus on our play-by-play partners, the Giants and the 49ers, and our commitment to bringing the very best play-by-play programming to Bay Area sports fans.”
Crowe joined KNBR after spending four years at crosstown rival 95.7 The Game. He added, “This is an opportunity to bring a fresh perspective to a strong KNBR brand that means so much to Bay Area sports fans. Our format is at a pivotal point in its evolution, and the KNBR staff is primed to pioneer a landscape where terrestrial radio and digital assets are converging. I want to thank Lee Hammer and Cumulus’ leadership for their support. I couldn’t be more excited to get started in my new role as Program Director.”
Hammer also chimed in by adding, “The relationships we have with our play-by-play partners, the Giants and the 49ers, are key components to the overall success of KNBR. This new role will allow me to devote more time to enhance and expand these key partnerships, resulting in increased value for our listeners and our clients.”
Season 2 begins with an explanation of why the podcast went on hiatus for two months. Jason then introduces a new feature called The 5 in 5 which covers 5 topics in 5 minutes. Stories discussed include Mike and the Mad Dog’s 30 for 30, Mike Francesa’s claim that Michael Kay’s ratings win was a fabrication, the slow death of written content, Clay Travis’ choice to reject FS1 and stay true to his principles, and ESPN’s decision to air the O.J. Simpson parole hearing.
The first guest for Season 2 is Josh Innes. He can be heard weekday mornings on SportsTalk 790 in Houston and middays on Sports 1280 in New Orleans. This conversation runs 56 minutes and tackles the trials and tribulations of Josh’s career and covers a number of different subjects related to the sports media industry.
TOPICS DISCUSSED WITH JOSH INNES
How growing up with a father in radio influenced his desire to pursue the business
When he started collecting a check and what his initial responsibilities were
Gaining national attention as a fill-in for Jim Rome and how it developed
Moving into afternoons at 610 with Rich Lord and the challenges it produced
The first 90-days in Philadelphia at WIP and having a target on his back
Dealing with Tony Bruno’s exit and the rumors that circulated from it
Why he believes he was a magnet for media attention in Philadelphia
What he learned from the situation when Andy Bloom was let go as PD
Becoming clickbait for Houston newspapers and handling negative press
Studying successful radio personalities and why he believes in doing it
Battling social justice warriors and how he sees sports radio evolving
The way social media can damage your show and your career
Quick Hits – Best host, PD advice, Dream market, Wisdom for young people
ESPN Radio has set a date to move on from Mike and Mike in the morning. The network has confirmed that it’s new morning program, Golic & Wingo, featuring Mike Golic and Trey Wingo, will debut on Monday, November 27th. Mike Greenberg will move to TV, hosting a brand new morning show on ESPN starting January 1, 2018.
The new Golic & Wingo program will be heard weekdays 6a-10a ET on ESPN Radio. It’ll also include a simulcast on ESPN2 before moving to its new simulcast home on ESPNU in January.
In addition, Mike Golic, Jr. will join the show daily between 6a-7a ET. Golic Jr. will continue as host of ESPN Radio’s First & Last, weekdays from 4a-6a ET before contributing to the new morning show.
Curious sports radio listeners will have a chance to hear ESPN Radio’s new morning team July 18-20. Golic and Wingo are scheduled to host Mike and Mike all three days while Mike Greenberg fills in alongside Don LaGreca on The Michael Kay Show on ESPN New York 98.7FM.
The spring book is officially over and for some sports radio stations, it’s time to celebrate. For others, it’s an opportunity to analyze, adjust, and turn the attention to improving during the summer ratings period.
Although most brands examine a number of different demographics and base their success and revenue potential off of a variety of factors, the focus of this column revolves around Men 25-54. That’s the demographic that most sports stations analyze most.
One last note to pass along, not every major market has forwarded their latest quarterly performance. I anticipate a few others becoming available in the next day or two so keep an eye out for additional stories.
In the meantime, here are how a couple of top cities performed during the months of April, May and June.
Boston:
No market has fueled sports radio’s success better in recent years than Boston. WEEI and 98.5 The Sports Hub have consistently generated double digit performances, but it’s been The Hub who have been in the driver’s seat during recent years. However, the tide appears to be turning in WEEI’s direction.
In the competitive daypart of morning drive, WEEI’s Kirk and Callahan won the spring book, beating The Hub’s Toucher and Rich. K&C finished a point and a half in front of their counterparts and were the top rated morning show in the market in multiple categories including Men 18+, Men 25-54, Men 35-64 and Adults 25-54. An even more impressive statistic was the head to head performance during the month of June. K&C’s share was slightly above a fifteen share, nearly six points higher than T&R who were in the low nine’s. You can read more on the morning show’s success by clicking here.
The news was also positive for WEEI’s midday show featuring Glenn Ordway, Lou Merloni and Christian Fauria. OMF finished in 2nd, beating Zolak and Bertrand of The Hub who came in 4th. The month of June specifically saw WEEI hold a 3 point advantage in middays.
The Hub did claim victory in afternoons, thanks to a solid performance from Felger and Massarotti. The show finished in 1st, 2 full points ahead of Dale and Holley with Keefe who were 2nd. However, keep your eye on this race moving forward. During the month of June, DHK were within one tenth of point of F&M. Will that continue or is it a one month aberration? Only time will tell but each side had reason to feel optimistic.
Overall, The Hub won the spring book among Men 25-54 by one tenth of a point during the weekday prime hours of M-F 6a-7p. They were also five tenths of a point in front M-SU 6a-Mid. But June saw WEEI begin to separate itself from the Hub, winning M-F 6a-7p by three and a half points and M-SU 6a-Mid by two and a half points.
Will that continue going forward? It’ll be an interesting story worth following.
Philadelphia:
In the city of brotherly love, WIP is back on track. The radio station finished the quarter in 3rd place among Men 25-54. The Fanatic experienced a minor setback, dropping to 11th.
As usual, Angelo Cataldli dominated in morning drive. The 66-year old WIP morning man has been a steady force for the radio station over two decades. The only question is whether or not he’ll continue to lead the way beyond 2017. Cataldi’s contract is set to expire at the end of this year.
Aside from Cataldi’s win, WIP also received some positive news in middays. Despite being together for less than a year, Joe DeCamara and Jon Ritchie passed 97.5 The Fanatic’s Harry Mayes and Rob Ellis. DeCamara and Ritchie finished 4th, which was up from 9th last year when Michael Barkann and Ike Reese were WIP’s midday program. Mayes and Ellis on The Fanatic came in 11th. They were in 8th during the same period twelve months ago. Ellis has since announced he’s leaving The Fanatic which will make the midday battle even more intriguing going forward.
Not all of the news was bad though for The Fanatic. The radio station recorded another win in afternoons thanks to Mike Missanelli. However, WIP’s Chris Carlin and Ike Reese have been making strides and are within striking distance of The Fanatic’s ratings king. For the spring book, Missanelli placed 3rd. Carlin and Reese came in 4th.
Washington DC:
Political chaos wasn’t enough to slow down 106.7 The Fan’s momentum. The CBS sports radio station finished 3rd with Men 25-54 M-SU 6a-Mid and M-F 6a-7p.
Driving The Fan’s success for the spring were the Sports Junkies. The station’s popular morning show was above an eight share to command 3rd place with Men 25-54. Grant and Danny in middays and Chad Dukes in afternoons also turned in impressive quarters finishing 4th during their time slots.
Elsewhere in the market, ESPN 980 finished 14th with Men 25-54 M-F 6a-7p and M-SU 6a-Mid. Steve Czaban and Cooley and Kevin tied for the best rated show on the station. Both were slightly above a three share during their hours of operation.
Chicago:
The spring produced another quarter of smiles and success for both area sports radio brands. The return of the world champion Chicago Cubs and playoff appearances by the Chicago Bulls and Chicago Blackhawks were helpful factors in fueling the interest of Chicago sports fans.
670 The Score rode the wave to victories among Men 25-54 M-F 6a-7p and M-SU 6a-Mid. The station was 1st for the full week and 2nd during weekday prime hours.
In mornings, The Score enjoyed a three point advantage over ESPN 1000 thanks to a great performance from Mully and Hanley. The Chicago sports radio duo has consistently outperformed Mike and Mike, which airs on ESPN 1000 but originates out of Bristol, CT.
The competition was tighter in middays. As you process these numbers, keep in mind that the two stations configure their lineups differently so there are some overlaps between shows.
Starting with The Score, during the hours of 9a-1p, Spiegel and Parkins nipped ESPN 1000 by one tenth of a point. However, from 1000’s vantage point, David Kaplan’s show airs 9a-12p, and during those 3 hours he was tied with The Score’s program with just under a four share.
1000’s second midday program, Carmen and Jurko, occupy the airwaves between 12p-2p. That means they go head to head against Spiegel and Parkins for 1 hour and opposite The Score’s afternoon show Bernstein and Goff for an hour. During the 12p-2p hours, The Score was ahead by a little more than a point.
Where the news was strong for ESPN 1000 was in afternoon drive where Waddle and Silvy continue to dominate. The popular drive time show finished #1 between 2p-6p with just under a five and a half share. Given that W&S has to overcome a top notch show on The Score and the addition of Chicago Cubs day games during baseball season, that’s nice coo for the folks inside 1000’s offices.
However, for the folks at The Score, Bernstein and Goff’s afternoon program air between the hours of 1p-6p. During those hours, the show placed 1st with a little more than a five share. 1000 trailed by only two tenths of a point during that time frame.
St. Louis:
A few hours south in St. Louis, 101 ESPN turned in another impressive quarter. The market’s dominant sports radio station finished 3rd overall with Men 25-54 M-SU 6a-Mid. They also placed 3rd in weekday prime, M-F 6a-7p. Their prime number was slightly below a nine share.
Leading the way for 101 was The Fast Lane which finished 1st overall in afternoons with better than a ten share. The show was also 1st during the Winter ratings book, making it the top show in the market among Men 25-54 for the first six months. It’s also averaging double digits for the first six months. Very impressive.
The remainder of the station’s weekday programs also enjoyed strong quarterly performances. Bernie Miklasz in mornings, and Kevin Wheeler and The Turn with Anthony Stalter and Chris Duncan in middays all placed 3rd in their respective timeslots.
Local market competitor 590 The Fan KFNS came in 21st during M-F 6a-7p and M-SU 6a-Mid.
Los Angeles:
Shares for sports radio may not be as high in Los Angeles as they are in other cities but the market is well represented by 710 ESPN Los Angeles and AM570 LA Sports. In the latest spring book, 710 held the advantage, gaining wins M-F 6a-7p and M-SU 6a-Mid with Men 25-54.
In the individual show breakdowns, L.A. mornings with Jorge, Lz and Keyshawn finished six tenths of a point ahead of the Dan Patrick Show. Although the news was positive from a competitive standpoint, the year to year growth is a challenge for both brands. 710 was down close to a point, but 570 has really suffered, losing more than two and a half points over the past twelve months.
Switching to middays, the first hour of Colin Cowherd on 570 bested Thompson and Trudell by two tenths of a point. However, Stephen A. Smith helped the station rebound by holding an eight tenths of a point lead over Cowherd’s final two hours.
710 enjoyed their biggest win between 12-3, when Mason and Ireland nearly doubled Lunchtime with Roggin and Rodney and the first hour of Petros and Money. Mason and Ireland continue to deliver the best ratings of all weekday sports radio programs.
Closing things out, 710 held the advantage in afternoon drive during the hours of 3p-7p PT. Marcellus and Kelvin were nine tenths of a point ahead of 570 to gain bragging rights for the quarter. However, similar to the issue in mornings, afternoons is dealing with some difficulty too. During the past year both stations/shows have lost a full ratings point or more.
Additional Notes:
KNBR in San Francisco finished the spring book in 2nd with Men 25-54. 95.7 The Game was also very healthy earning a top 5 finish.
Arizona Sports 98.7FM in Phoenix enjoyed a top 3 finish among Men 25-54 in weekday prime.
710 ESPN remained ahead of Sports Radio 950 KJR in the Seattle spring book.
JT The Brick has hosted his final show on 95.7 The Game. The FOX Sports radio host had hosted weekdays 10a-12p PT on the San Francisco sports station since September 2016. He replaced Guy Haberman and John Middlekauff. The news was confirmed earlier today by JT on Twitter.
Sources indicate that a permanent replacement for JT hasn’t yet been made. Brick’s exit from the radio station won’t have any impact on his current role as weeknight host on FOX Sports Radio.
Aaron Judge’s home run display on Monday night during the HR Derby was impressive but despite the slugger treating sports fans to his power display, the week of the MLB All Star game is often very uneventful. It’s a week where MLB action is less significant, NBA news is lighter, NFL training camps are two to three weeks away from opening, and the enthusiasm of sports fans is reduced. People use the time to mentally disconnect from sports, and in the process spend less time listening and interacting with sports radio.
If the audience’s appetite for your brand’s content isn’t strong this week, that poses a short-term problem. Hosts still have the same amount of hours to fill, programmers have the same responsibilities to execute, and advertisers are still purchasing ads and sponsorships and expecting a return on their investments. Your bosses are also expecting the ratings to remain high, regardless of the challenges that exist in the sports calendar.
So what do you do?
From the vantage point of a former program director, this is the perfect time to create something fun or do something different on your airwaves. It’s why ESPN Radio holds the V-Foundation auction this time of the year, and why ESPN television presents the ESPYS and a new episode of 30for30.
Audience interest naturally declines during this week. There’s no getting around that. We can’t expect people who love to watch athletic competition, and debate and discuss news from the world of sports to be as fired up during a time when activity is minimal. It’s the same reason why most sports stations see their audience numbers dip in February and March. You can try to manufacture content but if the audience doesn’t care, you’re in a tough spot.
If you entered this week expecting to rely on the topics of the day to fuel your on-air conversations, you didn’t help yourself. Many hosts and programmers feel stuck this week because they’re at the mercy of the sports calendar. This time of year doesn’t give you much to work with. We can make excuses but that doesn’t solve our problem, nor does it convince the audience to turn on our radio stations during a time when they’re less interested.
In order to be successful during slow periods, you need to prepare in advance. It starts with tapping into your creativity, brainstorming ideas, setting a vision that you feel confident in, selling it to the audience, and then executing it in grand fashion. Some things you try will be home runs. Others will fall flat. But if you don’t try something, you’ve done yourself and your brand a disservice.
It’s not a question of whether or not you’ll generate decent on-air conversation during All-Star week. If your hosts are good, they’re not going to fill the air with bad content. The reality though is that it’s not about your personalities being gifted content generators as much as it is about creating interest in programming during a time when the audience cares less about it.
A radio station is tasked with creating excitement for its fans. The daily challenge is to make them want to listen and feel like they’ll miss something if they don’t. But we both know, there’s not a lot to miss during All-Star week. Think about your own level of interest and enthusiasm in the stories you’re given to work with this week. If you’re less excited, what do you think the audience is feeling?
Do you think ESPN just decided at the last minute to feature the ESPYS, V-Foundation Auction and Mike and the Mad Dog 30 for 30 this week? Of course not. They strategically prepared for it. It’s the exact reason why Dana White scheduled the Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor press conference this week. He knew the fight would gain a ton of air time because the media were starving for content, and fans had little to hold their interest.
From the creative side, personalities should welcome risk taking, especially during this week. It’s an opportunity to stretch your legs and do something different. It allows you to explore areas that you might not otherwise get to. Hosts should embrace developing a content plan their excited about instead of trying to create 4-5 angles on the All-Star game, a HR Derby and an ESPYS awards show.
Sure, those conversations will become part of your show too, but are they strong enough to warrant 3-4 hours of conversation? Better yet, does your audience want to hear about them for more than 15 minutes? I think you already know the answer.
When I programmed in St. Louis, I used the All-Star week to create Flashback Week. On Monday’s we presented an all 70’s theme, Tuesday featured the 80’s, Wednesday the 90’s, Thursday the 00’s and Friday the 10’s. All of the music beds leading into our shows were from those various eras, popular actualities and historical sports moments from each decade were inserted into the imaging, the guests booked on every show reflected those various times, and the talent were given free reign to discuss their favorite television shows, movies, sporting events, fashion styles, etc. It was fun, and it’s a tradition that continues today. It was also successfully executed in San Francisco.
If you’re in a host’s position, this makes the job easier and more enjoyable. When you can enter a week knowing that you have the freedom to tap into things that were part of your childhood, and have on-air conversations with people you’d likely never have a chance to talk to, it becomes exciting. That carries over to the audience. I remember numerous personalities having a blast on the air talking to Lou Brock and Ted Nugent, Whitey Herzog and Nina Blackwood, Brett Hull and Biz Markie, and so on and so forth.
The goal with creating weeks like this during dead periods isn’t to spike the ratings. If that happens, even better. The point was to simply not lose ground. You can lose momentum during slow periods not because you weren’t doing quality work on the air, but because it was falling on deaf ears. If you can stay on course when people feel it’s less important to pay attention, you’ve already helped yourself in your next ratings book.
Allow me to make one final point. This isn’t a plea to tell you to roll out a Flashback Week. It’s simply to challenge you to think ahead of how to be creative to better help yourself, your station and your audience during a period of disconnect. The issues of the day may appeal to the audience most of the time, but if sports drama doesn’t exist or is of far lesser value than normal due to a hole in the sports schedule, then you’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Mike and Mike once created 80’s day. 790 The Zone in Atlanta presented Sitcom week. They weren’t done in July but easily could have been.
Maybe you build the week around a popular local team, former player, historical event, or something important in your community. Maybe you partner with one of your local franchises and have a few of their players host shows on your station all week. There are so many possibilities to explore, and it starts inside your building, months in advance, and all that it requires is a little bit of brainstorming and creativity.
Without trying something, the fate of your monthly ratings are reliant on less important stories generating emotional interest from an audience which has already mentally checked out. That’s not exactly a formula you want to depend on when trying to retain a solid ratings position in the local marketplace.
Sports is a subjective business. On the field or court, players are paid a lot of money to perform and make sound decisions. We determine their success or failure based on batting averages, shooting percentages, yards gained, touchdowns, home runs and of course, wins, losses and championships. It matters less to fans if a player is a good locker room leader or valuable to the organization in other ways. If it can’t be measured in a positive way statistically, we deem them ineffective and replaceable.
But in the sports media business, we’re not paid to play. We’re paid to talk. And as groundbreaking as this news might be, it doesn’t take much to deliver a passionate opinion and generate a response. You simply read or watch a story, form a thought in your mind about how it makes you feel, articulate it to the audience in a passionate manner and support it with a few facts you uncovered while researching the subject.
But not every individual has the ability to provide thought provoking opinions in a unique, colorful and memorable way. It’s what separates a good host from a great host. Colin Cowherd has often said the sports media business is less about about being right and more about being interesting, and in the climate that we operate in where attention spans are shrinking by the second, it’s hard to disagree with him.
Whether you like it or not, sports audio and video is all about entertainment. There are no passing grades handed out for accuracy. And it’s always been that way. This is not a new trend.
When an audience consumes sports content they’re often looking for a mental escape, a breather from life’s challenges. They’re not interested in the additional responsibility of tracking a host’s win-loss record when offering predictions and opinions. They simply tune in and expect to hear an interesting conversation, learn a few things relevant to the story being discussed, and then take that information with them to use with their friends or family members in their daily conversations. If the host turns out to be right, great. If not, life goes on.
But if you survey the media landscape today, there’s a growing belief that we should expect more from public figures who are paid to offer sports opinions. If an individual is given a platform to speak to an audience and inform them on what’s taking place in the world of sports, there’s a contingent of folks who feel it should be expected that the hosts are not only accurate with their facts and information, but also more successful with their opinions.
A big factor in the changing perception among fans is social media. The rising influence of Twitter and Facebook has given people an ability to permanently store, dissect, and use a personality’s commentary against them. That’s certainly different from TV or radio where a listener or viewer’s ability to recall specific points, opinions, and predictions vanishes quickly.
The positive side of this development is that it puts added pressure on personalities to be more thorough and accurate with their opinions and predictions. The negative is that it feeds this growing trend of judging people on fifteen seconds of commentary, while disregarding the countless hours of additional accuracy and entertainment they may have provided.
Maybe in the past it was worse than I’m giving it credit for, but it certainly seems like we’ve seen a lot more misses from talk show hosts over the past few years. That perception has been shaped by the increased visibility on social media. Years ago when Mike and the Mad Dog were the dominant duo in sports radio, they were praised for how much they knew about sports and how often they were right. Today, you’d swear neither knows much if you didn’t listen to their show and relied solely on social media to form your opinion.
One Twitter account which does a fantastic job of keeping personalities in check and showcasing their missed predictions is Fred Segal’s Freezing Cold Takes. It may ruffle the feathers of some personalities who reject the idea of being called out for being inaccurate, but it’s become a badge of honor for others to have their misfires recognized by the account. And it’s clearly attractive to listeners and viewers, because over seventy two thousand are following the account on Twitter.
As much as the audience, media critics and an occasional colleague or two may take exception with a host’s ability to be accurate with their predictions and positions, we’ve also got to remember that opinions are personal beliefs. Many factors can influence how a situation turns out, and each person reserves the right to change their mind.
For instance, you may pick the Golden State Warriors to sweep the Cleveland Cavaliers in the 2018 NBA Finals before the upcoming season begins. However, if Kevin Durant and Steph Curry went down with season ending injuries in November, that’d certainly change the likelihood of your prediction being accurate. That doesn’t mean though that you didn’t provide an informed and rational prediction when initially making it.
If there’s an area that frustrates many critics, fans, and listeners, it’s when a host is unwilling to adjust their stance and own a blemish on their record after misfiring on an opinion or prediction. A personality only helps themselves by doing so. It’s fine if you take your sports seriously and strive to be accurate when delivering opinions, but it’s also OK to be wrong.
I’m a firm believer that one of the best traits a host can possess is self-deprecation. If you can own a mistake, laugh at yourself, and show the audience you’re a human being who’s as flawed as they are, it shows you’re relatable. People tune into a show because they want to laugh and learn. If they like you, that’s even better. When you’re accountable and able to acknowledge your personal blunders, it increases your approval rating. If you’re arrogant and unwilling to fall on the sword when you screw up, it’ll cost you fans.
The idea of being more accountable and accurate is welcomed by most people in the sports media business. It’s also beneficial to every on-air talent to be challenged to do their homework and find unique angles to deliver to the audience. But while those areas can certainly be examined and improved, it’s important to remember and never forget that being right matters far less than being entertaining.
As consumers we sometimes scrutinize every detail of a show and every character trait of a host that we become incapable of allowing ourselves to be entertained. We forget that the biggest reason we watch or listen to a show about sports is because it’s fun. It brings people from different backgrounds and communities together to debate, discuss, and publicly express love and support for a common cause and in doing so, the presentation entertains us.
That connection is what makes a program necessary. It’s far greater in value than any host’s ability to provide a stronger winning percentage when spitting out sports opinions and predictions.
This isn’t to suggest that there aren’t some holes that need patching. For one, I’d like to see hosts and networks spend less time rushing to judgment and invest more time putting things into proper context. That happens a lot, especially after a big sporting event when shows/hosts immediately declare a team, player or play as the best of all-time. They disregard the past and live in the moment because it’s easier to ride an emotional high instead of pushing the pause button to process what’s transpired, research and analyze it, and come to a conclusion about where it belongs in a historical sense.
I was curious how programmers and personalities felt about this topic given that it has a direct result on everything they do on a daily basis. Here’s what I uncovered from talking to a number of industry professionals.
Joe Zarbano – Program Director, WEEI
Ryan Maguire – Program Director, WQAM
Don Kollins – Program Director, 95.7 The Game
Isaac Ropp – Host of Isaac and Suke, 1080 The Fan
Randy Karraker – Host of The Fast Lane, 101 ESPN
Scott Shapiro – VP of Sports Programming, FOX Sports Radio
Evan Cohen – Host of the Morning Men, SiriusXM Mad Dog Sports Radio & Director of Content, Good Karma Brands
Why Is It More Important For a Host To Be Interesting Instead of Right?
Shapiro: It is a human impossibility for any host to be right 100% of the time. Wouldn’t that be nice though? Because it’s a stone-cold lock that our hosts will be incorrect frequently, there’s nothing more important in this business than them being interesting. It’s why Colin Cowherd always refers to the radio industry as the “interesting business,” not the “get it right every time business.”
Cohen: Our job as a host is to properly serve fans, teammates and advertising partners. Nowhere in the job description does it say anything about our opinions needing to be right. It is most important to consistently engage our fans, teammates and advertising partners in relatable conversation.
Zarbano: It’s much harder to be interesting than right. How many times have we heard someone say “I predicted that” or “I knew that was going to happen”? I don’t care. Anyone can get lucky and pick the correct result. Can you consistently tell me something interesting and say something compelling enough that I’m engaged and reacting to what you’re saying? That’s the true indicator of radio talent.
Karraker: To draw a listener in, he or she needs to hear an opinion or a side of a story that they hadn’t thought of and/or don’t necessarily agree with. A good communicator can come up with a strong foundation for their opinion, and that’s what I try to do. I know the background of what I’m talking about, and I’m able to form a reasonable opinion based on a foundation of facts. At the end of the day, we are offering opinions, and there’s no such thing as a wrong opinion. You can take the side you truly believe in, whether it’s popular or not, and be interesting. That said, a talk show host should never present incorrect facts. It’s our responsibility to educate the listener and use our place as “fans with access” to present our opinions based on correct facts, and be interesting with them.
Ropp: Being interesting translates more. As long as your content is interesting you can keep ears on your show. Most reasonable people know a host will be right some but also wrong some. Most are NOT keeping score. And to be honest, the idea of needing to be right is merely an ego thing for the host. The listener’s perspective isn’t coming from that place. They just want something to chew on for the 10-30 minutes they’re tuning in. Hosts fret FAR more about what they say than the listener does.
Maguire: A host needs to be accurate in terms of getting their facts right, but people spend time with the host/show that is the most compelling to listen to. The landscape is flooded with radio shows, podcasts, blogs, vlogs, snaps and tweets of people giving opinions and making predictions. There are so few though that can do so in a way that will make listeners want to invest their precious time with them.
How Concerned Are You of Losing Credibility With The Audience If Your On-Air Opinions and Predictions Turn Out To Be Wrong?
Kollins: The best host(s) can admit they were wrong to their audience. That’s absolutely the most powerful tool in the radio host handbook. It seems there are many hosts that get on their soapbox, spew their opinions, then move on to spew more on the next topic without much back and forth. If a host is willing to listen, ask questions, engage with listeners, and acknowledge when they’re wrong, that’s very valuable and powerful.
Maguire: If a host is compelling enough to listen to, then who the hell cares if they went 0-12 vs. picks against the spread? Stephen A Smith picked seven consecutive NBA finals wrong and is still pulling down an impressive paycheck. Why? Because he knows how to get people talking and keep them watching. The only kind of opinions/predictions that concern me are uninformed ones. A host has to do their homework before opening their mouth and putting themselves out there. Listeners will tune out a host who bloviates for hours with little or no substance behind it.
Cohen: When did I have credibility in order to lose it? I’m being serious. I have no interest in whatever credibility means. Relatability and sellability, those are the abilities I want.
Zarbano: I’m not concerned at all. Predictions aren’t always going to be correct. We constantly see the “experts” getting their predictions wrong whether it’s a game, the NFL Draft, March Madness, season predictions, etc. How many times have Mel Kiper and Jay Bilas been wrong? Tony Dungy is wrong quite often with his game predictions. Media personalities are not going to be right every time and the audience understands that.
Shapiro: What I look for in an opinion on the air is a well-thought out, well-researched opinion. Would I prefer that it ends up being the “correct opinion?” Sure. Who wouldn’t. But with thirty-plus hosts on a 24/7 national network, there will always be times when hosts are right and wrong. What I want is authenticity. I never want someone on the air to take the other side just because. Our audience is smarter than that and can see through the B.S. If the audience are treated like adults, and a strong stance is nuanced via research, context, and storytelling, then I care far less what the outcome of that opinion is. If it’s genuine and sincere, and you can make someone stop, listen, and think, then that’s what good radio is all about.
Ropp: I believe the best approach is to be known for holding a good discussion. If the host(s) present material with good points on both sides of an issue, each listener will identify with the one that matches their sensibilities. It becomes less about right/wrong and more about wanting to listen to a good discussion on the hot button issues of that day.
How Should Talent Be Held Accountable For Providing Accurate and Informed Sports Opinions and Predictions?
Karraker: I try to be as accessible to my listeners as possible. They can reach me on Twitter, Facebook, and via e-mail, and they can call my office phone. If there’s something a listener vehemently disagrees with, I’ll engage them and explain my thoughts more clearly. I want my consumers to hold me accountable for the product I’m turning out. Program Directors should have a playbook for how their hosts present opinions and predictions, and if the talent adheres to the playbook and there isn’t anything to account for, ultimately the listener will make the decision as to whether they like what’s being delivered. That’s the ultimate accountability.
Maguire: A programmer should talk to their hosts and producers and make sure they’re in the loop on what’s important. Usually it’s as easy as “did you see this?” Show prep is like staying shape, you don’t want to let your team skip too many days at the gym. If a host gets something wrong, own it. Some of the best hosts I’ve worked with make fun of their incorrect predictions in a humorous way. Being wrong isn’t a sin. It shows you’re human.
Ropp: This polices itself. Your reputation precedes you. People will figure out if you are a fraud or uninformed, etc. It’s very hard to fake it in radio. The host doesn’t have to be the expert on all things either. He or she can be a person that is thinking the same things about a game or topic that many of the listeners are. It’s OK to tell the audience you don’t have an opinion on something or don’t know enough about a topic to give an informed opinion. It enhances credibility because people know you aren’t going to BS them. It also makes the times when you are very passionate and informed about a subject that much more real and meaningful.
Zarbano: It’s the host’s job to be prepared and put in the proper effort to be the most informed, opinionated, and entertaining they can be. If that’s not happening then that person isn’t doing their job. It should be explained to them what the expectations are and if the prep work and effort still aren’t satisfactory then it might be time to find someone else.
Cohen: Hosts should be accountable for serving fans, teammates and partners. If the #1 thing that all three of those groups care most about are accurate opinions and predictions, then a host should be held accountable for them.
How Do You Feel Social Media Has Changed The Game When It Comes To Recalling Positions and Predictions From Talent on Various Sports Subjects?
Ropp: Predictions or commentary on social media sits on the internet for everyone to refer back to. What is said on the radio vanishes off into the cosmos and most people don’t remember what was said. For this reason, social media has created a currency. It can help some hosts and hurt others. That all depends on the hosts approach on these various platforms.
Kollins: I consider social media the new studio phone. It’s a great way for hosts to get a sample of “how hot” a topic or opinion is. In addition to the phones, it’s absolutely essential to incorporate social media into all opinion based segments.
Karraker: The audience is smart and likes to use social media to remind hosts of things they’ve said. I give opinions for twenty hours a week, and don’t necessarily remember every point, opinion or prediction I make on the air. If a listener hears me say something that they disagree with, especially if it’s one that’s gone awry, then I’m going to hear about it. And I should. That’s what makes the show work. Social media helps increase the engagement.
Maguire: Once you say or post something in a public forum it’s chiseled into the internet for eternity. Don’t try to back track it or split hairs over something you got wrong. You’ll only sound like the kind of person nobody wants to be around.
Cohen: It makes it more fun because we can all be more interactive and trackable in a relatable way.
Zarbano: I believe it has helped. It gives the audience a better opportunity to react to a host’s prediction, whether right or wrong. It also gives the listener a chance to engage in the show and with a personality outside of the normal show hours which helps strengthen relationships.
Why Should a Listener Invest Time In a Host or Radio Station If The On-Air Talent Is Consistently Wrong With Their Opinions?
Maguire: If a host is unique, compelling and entertaining, listeners will return no matter how often they make an inaccurate prediction.
Karraker: As a consumer, I have trouble giving time to someone that hasn’t earned credibility. If they’re consistently wrong, they don’t deserve the listener’s attention. There are hosts that never make it to a game, don’t talk to people to try to find out WHY something happened, and will spout off about things and be completely wrong. If someone is only correct once in a blue moon, I can’t listen to them. There are different kinds of listeners, and I’m glad there are alternatives for those consumers. But, I think people in our business that don’t do their homework and don’t build their opinion on a foundation of facts are being incredibly irresponsible and are doing a disservice to their listeners. We’ve heard the term “fake news” a lot over the last few months, and I don’t think there’s a place for opinions based on fake news in sports talk radio. It’s lazy and unnecessary, and I’d hope listeners would see past investing their time in stations and host that produce it.
Shapiro: A host who can admit he/she is wrong and provide additional perspective, has great potential to gain credibility points with people, even if they were wrong initially. If we can poke fun at ourselves and admit that we aren’t perfect with our opinions/predictions, listeners won’t have an issue investing their time with us.
Cohen: If a fan of a host knows that the host is always wrong, then that host has done a great job of getting the fan/listener engaged enough to track his or her opinions.
Kollins: Sports is opinion and every sports fan and host have an opinion on every topic. IF the topic is well-researched, well-executed and the host has an open mind for discussion on all platforms, it’s worth discussing in the pre-show meeting.
Ropp: If a host is consistently wrong, they should stop trying to be right. If they don’t change up their approach, I’m not sure why a listener would continue to invest their time.
