Tom Brady to be lead NFL analyst on Fox when he retires

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
My god, are we really doing the whole "doesn't want to spend time with his kids" thing seriously? As in not as a joke? I think the vast majority of 45+ year olds have less time to spend with their family during the year than Brady will have on this gig.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
My god, are we really doing the whole "doesn't want to spend time with his kids" thing seriously? As in not as a joke? I think the vast majority of 45+ year olds have less time to spend with their family during the year than Brady will have on this gig.
Vast majority of 45 year olds need to work to support their families
He doesn’t

it’s hilarious that this contract is larger than his playing contracts combined
 

Patriot_Reign

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2011
1,150
$375 million seems like a wild overpay.

Brady has always struck me as wanting to be loved - wouldn't that attitude run counter to being a TV guy? At least a successful one?
 

Traut

lost his degree
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
12,750
My Desk
Someone on the radio this morning compared him to Joe Montana, and I see it. I just don't think Brady's locker room charisma translates to TV. It really never has, across the multitude of things he's done. Which is fine, he can be competent and that's all FOX wants, really.
If Alex Rodriguez can be good on TV - there's plenty of room for Brady to do so. His social media team and marketing are on point. I really think the guy is milquetoast because he is just that focused on trying to win games. I remember one interview with him early in his career on EEI in the afternoon where he was talking about how a great night was staying in, eating pizza, and watching porn.

The guy is beyond driven. Their are plenty of coaches for this kind of gig. He will do well.
 

j-man

Member
Dec 19, 2012
3,646
Arkansas
I still think this is a good 2-5 years off. I’d be shocked if this is his last year
i will be shocked if he plays in 2023 22 is it for brady as long as tampa gets in the playoffs only Inj can stop them form winning in 22 brady is year to year the only way i couild see him playing in 23 is SF goes 7-10 Lynch and shanny are fried SF trades two ones a 23 two and three to tampa because lynch has had 2 shots at brady and passed both times
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
Just ridiculous that Fox continues to get away with going way beyond the salary cap to bring in this kind of talent.

Tom Brady making more money in 10 years with Fox than in his entire NFL career combined is pretty fucking great though.

I look forward to debates in 5 years that when you factor in Romo / Manning’s careers + TV gigs they were actually better than TB12.
 

jaytftwofive

New Member
Jan 20, 2013
1,182
Drexel Hill Pa.
I love Tom Brady but this seems ballsy given we've never seen him as an analyst. My instinct is he will not be very good (based on his SNL appearances mostly).
Agree. I guess he can get better, but Peyton Manning was much funnier and better when he hosted SNL in 07. Made fun of himself being taunted by Pats fans when arriving at Logan. I think he is a better commentator.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,753
Pittsburgh, PA
Man, I really thought once it was over for him...it was over. I know I am biased, but I see this being "beneath" him?
Well, it'll set him up nicely if he wants to run for Senator or something, a la Tom Osborne (or a dozen others we could name). People are used to seeing him, but not used to hearing him talk and try to be interesting.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,457
I think elective office is probably a long shot. The baggage from Spygate and DFG would be messy in and election campaign and anecdotally, I know more than a few people who dislike him solely for the circumstances around his breakup with Moynihan.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I just think he got a glimpse of life post-football and realizes he needs some sort of transitional career rather than to quit cold turkey. This lets him do that while also cutting back his commitment to the game and making a ton of money, which even if he doesn't need it, provides a measure of justification for "walking away" that has nothing to do with his ability to perform, or lack thereof.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,767
Hartford, CT
I just think he got a glimpse of life post-football and realizes he needs some sort of transitional career rather than to quit cold turkey. This lets him do that while also cutting back his commitment to the game and making a ton of money, which even if he doesn't need it, provides a measure of justification for "walking away" that has nothing to do with his ability to perform, or lack thereof.
I think he really needs structure/direction, whether it is football or something else, I think he would go nuts with even six months of no structured work responsibilities.
 

TheGazelle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2009
1,210
I think he really needs structure/direction, whether it is football or something else, I think he would go nuts with even six months of no structured work responsibilities.
Yeah. This is a super-competitive, uber-successful 45 year old dude. Those types of people don't just go cold turkey and play golf in any industry. The fact that Tom wants to keep working is completely unsurprising. And if Fox wants to pay him $375MM for a few days of work a week, what rational person is saying no?
 

Bigdogx

New Member
Jul 21, 2020
145
Hey good for Tom getting that kind of scratch for something he hasn't even proven he can do yet. To me though, every live tv type speaking " non game" engagement i have seen Brady in, he has been pretty terrible at it! Shy and socially awkward is how i would describe it.

Good luck to him..
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
While there is a "natural talent" element to it that it seems he lacks (unlike, say Peyton, who seems much more at ease) we really dont have to look much further than Jerry Remy to see a guy who worked at it to get better. Obvious differences abound (Remy had games every day for 6 months at a time, for example), but Brady is certainly all about not sucking at *anything* so to the extent one can get better as a TV football head, he wont be lazy about it.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,612
TB12 has shown he can be effective, profane, insightful, and plenty snarky on camera. His HBO barbershop episode and Man in the Arena are plenty of evidence. Quite frankly, anyone who hasn't watched them has no business in this conversation.

I'm not sure how well it will all carry over, but I am sure Tom is 100% capable of deciding for himself how he wants it to go.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,330
Southwestern CT
TB12 has shown he can be effective, profane, insightful, and plenty snarky on camera. His HBO barbershop episode and Man in the Arena are plenty of evidence. Quite frankly, anyone who hasn't watched them has no business in this conversation.

I'm not sure how well it will all carry over, but I am sure Tom is 100% capable of deciding for himself how he wants it to go.
It’s no disservice to Brady to criticize FOX for this deal. To assert that people have “no business” doing so - in the media thread - feels like you are missing the entire point of the discussion.

I don’t care how talented Brady is - this is a massive risk for FOX Sports and it feels like a panic move after losing Buck/Aikman.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
I think elective office is probably a long shot. The baggage from Spygate and DFG would be messy in and election campaign and anecdotally, I know more than a few people who dislike him solely for the circumstances around his breakup with Moynihan.
Politicians have overcome far worst scandals than Spygate (which had nothing to do w/ Brady) or Deflategate. Herschel Walker may yet win a Senate seat; Tommy Tubberville did win a seat.

I think his chances at elective office are slim, just not for those reasons. Politicians do have to give voters reasons for voting for them, whether they be policy, charisma, "change", or a belief they will fight for their constituents on important issues. Having a name helps, but alone is hardly sufficient. And who really knows if Brady's heart would be into it; there are far less stressful things he can do with his life for far more money, like sit in a broadcast booth for 6 months. Still, Jack Kemp and Steve Largent had successful runs post-NFL, so I wouldn't count him out just yet.
 

Bergs

funky and cold
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
21,612
It’s no disservice to Brady to criticize FOX for this deal. To assert that people have “no business” doing so - in the media thread - feels like you are missing the entire point of the discussion.

I don’t care how talented Brady is - this is a massive risk for FOX Sports and it feels like a panic move after losing Buck/Aikman.
I agree. I wasn't adressing the "Fox" part of the conversation so much as the "Brady is boring and will suck at this" part. I should have been more clear.
 
Last edited:

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
If Alex Rodriguez can be good on TV -
So we are just going to let this slide? The idea Arod is good on TV?
Granted being the straight guy in a studio show he doesn't suck, but he is awful doing games.

If you mean people will tolerate Arod on TV, then yeah I agree.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,367
Florio mentions:

The deal begins when Brady retires from the NFL. It becomes an obvious factor in 2023, when he’ll have to decide between playing football or calling games. Presumably, it will take a lot more than $37.5 million to get him to keep playing.
I had not thought of that: Brady wants this news out now as negotiating leverage to teams, "Make me an offer that convinces me not to retire."
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
My god, are we really doing the whole "doesn't want to spend time with his kids" thing seriously? As in not as a joke? I think the vast majority of 45+ year olds have less time to spend with their family during the year than Brady will have on this gig.
First of all, Francis, lighten up.

Yeah we are gonna do it, because he said it. If he had not released stage managed publicist approved reason for retiring, we wouldn't talk about it. Ortiz said he could not handle the difficulty of the off-season, that training had become too hard at his age. Brady made him giving up football seem a saintly sacrifice, so any scorn thrown his way is well earned. He could just have said, 'I am Tom Brady and I decided not to play, and I may change my mind because you know what? I am Tom Motherfucking Brady and I get that choice." Well had he said that's would be much more of an appealing public persona. Again he didn't say that, he said his family "deserves him". Gag.

He called his wife and kids his “biggest supporters,” adding Bündchen “deserves what she needs from me as a husband, and my kids deserve what they need from me as a dad,” as reported by PEOPLE.

“I’m gonna spend some time with them and give them what they need, ’cause they’ve really been giving me what I need the last six months to do what I love to do,” he said in the podcast interview. “I said this a few years ago, it’s what relationships are all about. It’s not always what I want. It’s what we want as a family. And I’m gonna spend a lot of time with them and figure out in the future what’s next.”



https://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/2532198/tom-brady-retirement-kids/
 

CR67dream

blue devils forevah!
Dope
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
7,187
I'm going home
And I’m gonna spend a lot of time with them and figure out in the future what’s next.”
Well, at the time of the interview, he couldn't have dreamed someone would offer him over 1/3 of a billion to be on TV before he retired. I understand that means he can't spend every single waking minute in the role of husband/dad, but his workload will be much less taxing, and I'm guessing the family is OK with getting filthy rich(er) with hubby/dad taking this part-time gig. I can't fault him/them for that.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Well, at the time of the interview, he couldn't have dreamed someone would offer him over 1/3 of a billion to be on TV before he retired. I understand that means he can't spend every single waking minute in the role of husband/dad, but his workload will be much less taxing, and I'm guessing the family is OK with getting filthy rich(er) with hubby/dad taking this part-time gig. I can't fault him/them for that.
Again, his sappy interview or statement is why he gets laughed at.

He didn't say "my kids deserve me like 10 mil a year, you know, maybe 20, but north of 30? Yeah, Tommy deserves that green. I mean Giselle has her shampoo, and shit, but is she getting a third of bill in her 50s? Naw she ain't but Tommy is. Man I came across lame and wooden in an entourage cameo and they throwing this much. Hell yeah, I can hire Jimmy G to raise my kid."

Also I would be more interested in listening to my fictional version of Brady do games.

"So third and six, what would you do Tommy?"
"SHit man, I am like ten times better, not when I was his age, but right now, up here in my UGs drunk off my ass, ten times better than Mitch tblisky or whatever. So that's a bad question. But this fool I expect he throws to the tight end for a four yard gain then they punt and lose."
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I think he'll be fine. His biggest problem will be that more than half the viewers likely hate his guts and won't give him the time of day.
Is this still true? Getting away from New England seems to have done him some good.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,829
Unreal America
Is this still true? Getting away from New England seems to have done him some good.
Last data I saw was that Brady is the most hated player in the NFL. I don't think that matters much when he becomes a broadcaster though. People hated Howard Cosell too.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
8,429
Maybe it was just my TV, a bad makeup job or the Zoom connection, but Brady was interviewed on TNT before the Warriors game and looked like he'd spent the past few weeks under the knife/needle.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,619
CT
Maybe it was just my TV, a bad makeup job or the Zoom connection, but Brady was interviewed on TNT before the Warriors game and looked like he'd spent the past few weeks under the knife/needle.
Brady looks like this almost every offseason. I’m not saying the man hasn’t aged well, but all the water and avocados in the world don’t keep your skin that tight.

He has access through his money and wife’s connections to some of the best plastic surgeons on the planet, and to be honest, he has done it the smart way. If you get small procedures done at semi-regular intervals, it looks more natural than if you wait until you’re in your 40s and the change is far more drastic and noticeable.

Normally I would take zero issue with something like this, but when you sell and market the “TB12 Method” to regular folks as if you haven’t had work done outside of that to keep looking young, it makes you a bit of a snake-oil salesman in my eyes.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
Maybe it was just my TV, a bad makeup job or the Zoom connection, but Brady was interviewed on TNT before the Warriors game and looked like he'd spent the past few weeks under the knife/needle.
I saw that, too! Between the black shirt, the facework, makeup and eyebrows, he looked like he was auditioning for a Kraftwerk tribute band.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
He gets filler injections in his face every offseason.
Last night looked like more than that. Maybe he's just lost weight, or he let his kids put his makeup on, or the lighting in the rumpus room wasn't TV/zoom optimal. But he looked like a 55 year old trying to look 35. (IOW, like everyone I see in South Florida when I visit my 90-year old mother.)
 

JOBU

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 22, 2021
8,383
None of this surprises me. I’ve often believed/known this was the case. I remember a few interviews he’s done where is face had a slight red hue to it like a sunburn. I suspect it’s from microbeedling/chemical peel. Or something else that’s really cool and only available to the elite of the elite.
 

Patriot_Reign

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2011
1,150
Do people actually base their viewing choices on who the broadcasters are?

Obviously there'll be a ton of in intrigue the first time he calls a Pats game, but outside of that....?
I can't imagine ever turning to a particular station because Tomy Romo is calling the game.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
Do people actually base their viewing choices on who the broadcasters are?

Obviously there'll be a ton of in intrigue the first time he calls a Pats game, but outside of that....?
I can't imagine ever turning to a particular station because Tomy Romo is calling the game.
If you want to watch the football game on television, you dont really have much of a choice on the broadcasters, other than mute. To me, that's a solid "no" to your question. I suppose if you have two neutral games on opposite each other, you have some kind of choice, but I refuse to believe that more than a handful of viewers say, "I'm gonna watch Jags-Lions, not Giants-Panthers because I can't get me enough Adam Archuleta and I can't stand that James Lofton."
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,054
Hingham, MA
If you want to watch the football game on television, you dont really have much of a choice on the broadcasters, other than mute. To me, that's a solid "no" to your question. I suppose if you have two neutral games on opposite each other, you have some kind of choice, but I refuse to believe that more than a handful of viewers say, "I'm gonna watch Jags-Lions, not Giants-Panthers because I can't get me enough Adam Archuleta and I can't stand that James Lofton."
A handful is generous. You watch an NFL game for one of 3 reasons: 1) it's a marquee national matchup; 2) gambling / fantasy; 3) your local team.

Edit to add: 1B) rooting against a division / conference rival even if it's not a marquee game
 

rmurph3

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
1,196
Westwood, MA
Talking to a friend at Fox about this "do you really think more people will watch because of the announcers" question, and he says it's not so much that he'll actually attract viewers because he's calling the game, but it does resonate with advertisers. So this is a bet that they'll make it back with ad revenue (and why the glad-handing/appearances side of the contract is not trivial).
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
9,419
Kernersville, NC
I absolutely do choose what games and indeed sports I want to watch (or not watch) from time to time on the basis of who the commentators are, yes.
I’d venture to guess that you, a commentator yourself, are in the vast minority with this. A lot of us will pick and choose home/away announcers with MLB.tv because it’s an option. I highly doubt many people tune in just to hear (insert announcer)‘s commentary.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
Do people actually base their viewing choices on who the broadcasters are?

Obviously there'll be a ton of in intrigue the first time he calls a Pats game, but outside of that....?
I can't imagine ever turning to a particular station because Tomy Romo is calling the game.
I think the question is do you (or more particularly does a casual fan) watch football or do something else with that time, and having big name announcers etc might make it more likely that the casual football fan watches football instead of going apple picking or watching westworld on HBO or reading a book. Whether the network's math is right is another issue.
 
I’d venture to guess that you, a commentator yourself, are in the vast minority with this. A lot of us will pick and choose home/away announcers with MLB.tv because it’s an option. I highly doubt many people tune in just to hear (insert announcer)‘s commentary.
Oh, I very rarely tune into a game just to hear an announcer's commentary. But I'll absolutely avoid or turn off a game when the commentary is bad or annoying enough. And e.g. when I'm choosing which college football game to watch on a Saturday and I don't particularly root for or against any of the teams, who is commentating on each game absolutely makes a difference.

(Re: me being a commentator, occasionally I'll also dislike watching a sport for professional and/or personal commentary-related reasons - e.g., it's tough for me to watch NHL hockey games featuring commentators I think are significantly worse than I am, or games in any sport where nepotism clearly seems to be more important than quality in the commentary choices that have been made. But thankfully that doesn't happen *too* often...)
 

Patriot_Reign

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2011
1,150
it's not so much that he'll actually attract viewers because he's calling the game, but it does resonate with advertisers. So this is a bet that they'll make it back with ad revenue
Could you elaborate on this point a bit more? I would think advertisers would only be concerned with number of viewers (and demographics) during a broadcast that their ads get eyeballs on. Assuming Brady is getting the top tier game for Fox each week if he's not generating a significant bump in eyeballs versus the other guy why would advertisers be willing to pay more in revenue?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
Could you elaborate on this point a bit more? I would think advertisers would only be concerned with number of viewers (and demographics) during a broadcast that their ads get eyeballs on. Assuming Brady is getting the top tier game for Fox each week if he's not generating a significant bump in eyeballs versus the other guy why would advertisers be willing to pay more in revenue?
I'll take a stab, based almost entirely on cynicism, not inside knowledge. The highest-level decision-makers at the ad agencies and advertisers themselves are willing to pay so they can play golf with Tom Brady once during the run of the tv deal. This is less ( or no more than) about the overall soundness of such a deal than it is catering to the ego-driven whims of the corner-office people to buy another toy they can brag about. "We got Brady...."