By Rhonda
It was announced that ESPN signed former Fox Sports broadcaster Troy Aikman for $90 million over 5 years, Tony Romo money. The sports world was startled when CBS gave Romo a 10-year contract worth $180 million as John Madden’s $8 million per year with Fox was the previous top salary. Further, NFL players sounded off saying there is no way an announcer should be making more than 90% of NFL players. Can you blame them? As an announcer, Romo will likely surpass his earnings as an NFL player, and with Aikman inking this deal will now earn what he did with the Cowboys in just about a quarter of the time with ESPN. Just wow. Goodbye football, my boys are enrolling in broadcasting school.
This leads to a couple of questions. Are network sports announcers worth the multi-millions they’re paid? Do they affect ratings? My answer – NO and NO. I do not tune in to a game because of broadcasters. I tune in to a game because of the players and the teams. Nobody tunes into a game for the announcers and nobody shuts a game off because of them. Announcers can add to your viewing experience, but they have zero impact on ratings.
If you are my 13-year-old son, who is borderline ADD at this point due to his PC, his phone, and social media, you are barely even listening to the announcers. You are multi-tasking – checking TikTok, Snapchat, and scrolling during a game. Most young kids are only aware of announcers because parents say, “Son, that’s Troy Aikman! He won three Super Bowls for my Cowboys.”
The money is ridiculous, but if networks are willing to pay, then take the money and run. And though these broadcasters are severely overpaid, there’s no denying that the headline appeal that guys like Romo, Aikman, Jim Nantz, and Al Michaels bring to a network can attract valuable advertising dollars. Further, it’s a much more appealing job for many ex-NFL players and coaches. It’s why Rams head coach Sean McVay, at the young age of 36, was considering leaving his station after becoming the youngest head coach to win a Super Bowl! It’s reported Fox would’ve paid him $15 million a year – as an unproven analyst – to replace Aikman. Why wouldn’t he? He would live comfortably and carefree with no stress, and nobody telling him what to do. It even worked for John Gruden for a while. That’s a deal I’d take.
Picture Credit: Wikimedia
