Get ready to enjoy Super Bowl build up -- it's worth it

Get ready to enjoy the Super Bowl -- and all the build up.

With Peyton Manning possibly making his final NFL start for the Broncos in the Super Bowl 50, and with emerging superstar Cam Newton leading the opposition Panthers in the big game, the Super Bowl has individual superstars.

Collectively, the opposing defenses rank as superstars, too.

All those people, combined with five decades worth of hype driven by the NFL’s proven marketing and publicity machine, along with always complicit media members, means anyone playing even the slightest bit of attention will know all they want (and more) about the game.

Additionally, expect CBS, which has the broadcast rights to next week’s game (if you’ve somehow missed that during the regular season and playoffs) to parlay every possible gold-plated connection -- no matter how far fetched -- between the Super Bowl and its entertainment and news programming in an effort to drive more viewers to the broadcast.

ESPN and its less important, smaller imitators -- CBS Sports Network, Fox Sports and NBC Sports Network -- will do their part as well. Likewise, the NFL Network will produce hundreds of hours from the game site in Santa Clara, California.

A variety of cable networks will be there as well, creating more content and programming than ever before around the big game.

All of that could be overwhelming and unbecoming. But it’s really not.

To me, it’s one of the best weeks of the sports season.

Yes, it’s hype, sometimes-silly hype, but it’s also compelling and engaging. With so many people trying to find stories that matter, we sometimes do get good information.

We do pay for the good stuff by trudging through lazy, silly and superficial reporting and stories, but when we overcome those things, the good stories stand out all the more.

Best bets

To navigate the onslaught of Super Bowl media, it is best to pick a few key sources. Atop the list should be ESPN and the NFL Network.

Credit both, because of their connections with the league, with consistently finding different sites for their on-site shows. While radio stations from across the nation set up shop on Radio Row, ESPN stays away from that circus. That’s a good thing.

Additionally, ESPN and NFL Network have their own deep rosters of on-air talent, people who share fairly interesting information on a regular basis.

Yes, there are clowns among each network’s lineup -- anything or anyone associated with “First Take” on ESPN, and Deion Sanders comes immediately to mind for NFL Network -- but the network’s real NFL experts and reporters deserve the reputations they’ve built.

Tuner tidbits

n  Forget what we’ve known for years at Media Day at the Super Bowl. It no longer exits. Instead, this year marks the debut, in prime time, of “Super Bowl Opening Night.” That’s Monday, beginning at 8 p.m., when the media throng converges on players and coaches in front of fans at Levi’s Stadium. Because the NFL knows all about producing TV shows, the media availability effectively becomes another such show with a live studio audience.

n  Another TV show, “NFL Honors,” winds down the week of hype leading to the game. That show airs at 9 p.m. Saturday on CBS and serves as the season-ending awards show. Modeled after any number of other televised awards shows, “NFL Honors” allows the league to hand out all its hardware at one time. It was clunky and slow in its inaugural year, but the league has started to iron out the kinks in the made-for-TV program.

n  Few media entities can “lose” in the Super Bowl buildup, but my bet would be on CBS Sports Network to fall into that category. While its corporate big brother has the game and seems almost like the NFL’s preferred partner for anything (such as “Thursday Night Football”), the CBS Sports Network never seems to build on the relationships it network has overall. Maybe it’s because hardly anybody watches the channel, but hardly anybody watches because the programming is not taken seriously.

n   Finally, just beating the rush here, but expect the CBS on-air team of Jim Nantz and Phil Simms to struggle during the game. They did so with consistency during the playoffs, and there’s no reason to think their streak of B- performances during A+ games will end.

n  Millions of Super Bowl fans will have a better option, though. Travelers, people working at places without at TV (if you can imagine) or those who simply prefer radio -- and those combined groups number in the millions each year -- will be listening on Westwood One radio affiliates.

After inaugural Super Saturday success, challenges exist for Big Ten Conference with Big Apple doubleheader

Everyone associated with the inaugural Big Ten Super Saturday at Madison Square Garden should be proud.

More than 27,000 people attended the basketball-ice hockey, day-night doubleheader between Penn State and Michigan in person.

In addition, the event played well on TV. From pre- and post-event coverage to the actual game action, it was all a success.

Still, the first edition might have been the easiest for the Big Ten Conference as it works to establish its foothold for the event in New York City and set the stage for the Big Ten Tournament to be played in the historic arena in 2018.

A pair of Penn State-Michigan matchups produced competitive action Saturday. More importantly, the Penn State presence provided a critical mass of people at the World's Most Famous Arena and prevented the games from being contested before limited crowds with a sports-as-a-studio-show feel.

Going forward -- because the Big Ten plans to repeat the event annually -- it might not be as easy to attract crowds.

Next year, it's Wisconsin-Rutgers in basketball and Wisconsin-Ohio State in hockey. In 2018, the Big Ten set Ohio State-Minnesota as the basketball opener followed by Minnesota-Michigan State in hockey. In 2019, it's Illinois-Maryland basketball with the hockey matchup to be announced.

Without Penn State, though, it might be hard to get a crowd for many of those matchups beyond the Rutgers basketball game.

Even with just-half-decent basketball team, Penn State fans flocked to the inaugural event at MSG. On the university campus Friday, there was a pep rally in the student union building as a sendoff event. And on gameday dozens of buses filled with students left Happy Valley just after dawn to get to the event.

The energy all those people provided means something. And Penn State's proximity to New York City provides something that cannot be rivaled by any other conference school execpt Rutgers.

That makes RU a wise pick for next season's basketball game as part of the twinbill. Beyond that, though, no other team in the conference has enough alumni or a fanbase in New York City to ensure a solid turnout for the games. While Maryland and Rutgers pulled the footprint of the Big Ten toward the east when they joined (and, more importantly, helped the Big Ten Network gobble up some bigger cable fees from subscribers of those states), Penn State remains the only Big Ten team with any cache or history in the east.

With hefty marketing -- and a hefty influx of conference or school dollars to help with travel packages -- future Super Saturdays could go well. They'll just require much more work. That's because Penn State, and Penn Staters willing to support their teams, made the doubleheader idea an inaugural success. That was something people who were there appreciated -- and something viewers at home could see as well.

Opportunity exits in use of on-screen handles, hashtags

What looks like a missed opportunity to me represents either a best business practice or a small part of a bigger plan for some who work in TV sports.

Still, they just seem wrong -- especially the part-of-a-plan folks.

Here’s the situation: With social media more pervasive every day, it’s surprising that every live sporting event on TV does not include some overt encouragement for viewers to connect by social media.

While only a small percentage of people are actually active on Facebook and Twitter, many do react and watch games as part of a “second-screen experience,” meaning they have a smartphone in hand or are not far from a computer while watching. They might even be streaming the game online.

Despite that, few TV sports types feel the need to keep handles or hashtags on screen throughout a broadcast.

“We always want to have a second-screen experience. Facebook and Twitter are high-traffic places for live events, and we try to be in front of the conversation,” said Josh Baird, director of social media for Fox Sports. He adds a caveat, though. “The assumption that there is a huge overlap that are watching TV and the people on social channels is a bold one.”

Fox Sports concluded high-profile coverage of the U.S. Open and Women’s World Cup in recent weeks. Neither set of broadcasts included overt or regular on-screen social media signals. That’s just the usual plan for Fox Sports. Broadcasts exist as broadcasts, and social media is separate.

To its credit, ESPN takes a slightly more aggressive approach.

Dave Miller, a senior coordinating producer for remote production at ESPN, said his network consistently tries to brand shows or a series on social media. In addition, something like #PSUvsOSU is not unusual for a big game.

Like Baird, Miller framed social media as a complementary place for conversation. He said it can be a challenge for broadcasters to take part in that conversation. Still, ESPN boasts 19.9 million Twitter followers to 1.28 million for Fox Sports, and the approach to share on-screen handles and hastags could be at least a small part of that huge disparity.

It just seems wise to embrace on-screen social media signals, at least as a strong hint about where people should go to conduct their conversations. Miller said broadcast partners (a league or organization) often ask about finding a way to incorporate social media.

And making social media work with a live broadcast is not impossible. ESPN often rotates game locations, broadcaster names and social media in graphics, Miller said. Beyond that, a more engaged approach has been proven to work well, too.

Root Sports has shown that with its Pittsburgh Pirates coverage. Yes, baseball’s slower tempo allows for easier interaction, but Root’s use of #BucsBooth to encourage viewers to ask questions of broadcasters during a game works.

It’s one more thing for someone to do -- after all someone has to weed through individual tweets to see if a good question exits -- but it does unearth some gems, inform some conversation and, at the same time, provide a community, of sorts, for those invested in the game.

In that way, it seems like the people are embracing an opportunity. They’re correct to do so.

Addition to Cowherd's show a rare opportunity

Sports-talk radio listeners across the nation might hear something a little different in a few weeks from ESPN Radio.

Jen Lada

Starting in mid-August, “The Herd with Colin Cowherd,” which airs from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the East Coast, will feature another contributor along with the namesake host.

While Jen Lada will not be a full-fledged co-host, she will hold a regular role. Along with what listeners hear, Lada will contribute on social media, provide some exclusive digital segments and, no doubt, serve as a sounding board for Cowherd. That’s a good thing because Cowherd better engages listeners when he has someone to talk to, as opposed to when he dives into a monologue or offers his opinions about sports and social matters with no context or counterbalance.

Lada, who comes to ESPN Radio from Comcast Sports Net Chicago, becomes a member of a rare group -- women with prominent or regular roles on national sports-talk radio. It’s an extremely small group.

He’s hoping Lada thrives, and opens the door for a few more similar voices on sports-talk radio.

And, to be clear, it’s not hope simply for hope’s sake. Sports-talk listeners want quality sports talk -- compelling, interesting information -- no matter the gender of the host. As we eventually move toward more of that, it’s reassuring that a woman who has both been on air nationally and who brings strong doses of common sense and professional responsibility to her job has a role in selecting who gets on air and who does not.

Amanda Gifford, who started as an intern at ESPN Radio, commuting on weekends from Penn State to Bristol, Connecticut, and back when she was a student, believes sports-talk radio has changed during her time with the company. Still, the medium remains young. The first acknowledged all-sports station, WFAN in New York City, launched July 1, 1987.

“I do feel there’s more opportunity,” said Gifford, senior director of daytime programming. In that role, she’s in charge of Cowherd’s show, “Mike and Mike,” “The Rusillo Show” and “The Dan Le Batard Show.” Within arms reach of her office desk are two lists -- one with the show schedules and regular hosts’ vacations and another of ESPN talent who serve as replacement hosts. Clearly, she plays a big role in who gets on the air for ESPN Radio. She knows what resonates with listeners, and what impacts ratings.

“Sports talk itself has changed,” Gifford said. “It’s not as much about games, stats and what happened. There are bigger discussions, things that are relatable to life.”

A few months ago, ESPN Radio seemed set to add another woman, Molly Qerim, to a prominent role -- joining “Mike and Mike” as that show itself changed greatly, moving from Bristol to New York City. All that changed in the past few weeks, though, when the NYC move was dumped. As a result, Qerim gets a different opportunity at ESPN.

She’ll host “First Take” on ESPN2 -- so more visibility on TV, but a fairly familiar role for women in general as a moderator amidst the rants of Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith. It’s officially and interim position, but do not be surprised if Qerim stretches it farther.

Those host or moderator positions seem to be the major safe haven for women in sports, and for those who hire women. But, while they’re prominent, they sometimes seem overly gender-specific -- with the women serving as on-air moderators or moms. Qerim follows Cari Champion, who is moving on to host “SportsCenter.” Before her, Dana Jacobson was a “First Take” host, and any number of studio shows or update segments are handled by women.

Driving a sports-talk show requires a different skill set, and maybe that’s part of why finding quality hosts provides such a challenge. Beyond Jemele Hill and Sarah Spain, it’s not a long list of people who’ve proven themselves on radio in recent years.

Still, Gifford continually seeks out talent.

“Finding a host, male or female, is the same. It’s about the content they produce. Is it thought provoking? Is it original?” Gifford said. “In terms of women, it comes down to the individual person. Can she hold her own with her male counterparts? And, most of all, it cannot be ‘Hey, I’m female, but I can also talk sports.’ They just need to talk. Doing it the other way they marginalize themselves.”

Women's World Cup game plan for Fox Sports does not include presence of on-screen social media indicators

With the first part of the Women’s World Cup as proof, expect tonight’s U.S.-Germany semifinal to deliver on almost every level.

It’ll be compelling TV that attracts viewers (some 5.7 million people watched the quarterfinal victory over Japan), and it’ll be a quality broadcast, because the Fox Sports on-air and production team has been pitch perfect so far, delivering access and information with criticism and insight when appropriate.

Still, one thing tonight’s match might not deliver -- at least overtly and regularly -- is an on-screen social media connection. And that’s not an oversight.

While Fox Sports takes pride in its social media efforts, the network’s plan does not include a consistent on-screen presence for handles and hashtags for Facebook and Twitter during live broadcasts.

That’s really not unusual for any sports broadcaster. While it seems like a missed opportunity, those who conduct social media research and engage users on a regular basis insist the plan has merit. That’s because an often-referenced “second-screen experience” for sporting events -- an interaction by users or viewers with both the TV and a computer or smartphone -- is not necessarily a reality.

“We always want to have a second-screen experience. Facebook and Twitter are high-traffic places for live events, and we try to be in front of the conversation,” said Josh Baird, director of social media for Fox Sports. He adds a caveat, though. “The assumption that there is a huge overlap that are watching TV and the people on social channels is a bold one.”

Baird thinks an opportunity exists to drive viewers from broadcasts to social media channels. However, that’s not his overriding goal, or that of his team.

For the Women’s World Cup, the Fox Sports social media team includes two people embedded in Canada, one with the network's studio crew in Vancouver and the other traveling with the U.S. women’s national team. An editorial and social team at the network’s headquarters in Los Angeles complements and oversees the work of the two staff members in Canada.

Overall, Baird sees handles and hashtags as keywords, a way to curate content and engage a community. He does not see them as necessary standing elements of a live broadcast -- and that’s apparently standard convention across most networks with live sports, because viewers watching closely will invariably not see any on-screen social media indicators or signals for action.

Baird is proud of the network’s social media footprint. On Twitter that includes 1.28 million followers for Fox Sports and 538,000 for Fox Soccer. He said measuring viewership as a result of social media remains the “toughest nut to crack” for social media.

Still, if the women’s soccer game tonight draws nearly 6 million viewers, and if a broadcast can make some impact in terms of awareness or impact for social media channel, a consistent on-screen presence for handles and hashtags would seem beneficial.

If even a small portion of those millions of viewers would give social media a chance, the number of people for whom Baird curates content, and with whom his team engages, would seemingly increase. And that would be an added delivery of impact and value for Fox Sports.

A winning game plan for B1G -- stay with ESPN

As ESPN and other networks start pointing toward college football season by announcing game times for the fall already, fans of Big Ten Conference football need to be looking farther down the road than that.

Just two seasons remain on the Big Ten contract with ESPN that expires after the 2016-17 academic year, and every day until the conference decides whether to remain with ESPN or enter a potentially profitable partnership with another suitor (Fox Sports 1) provides important time for an exploration of the conference’s options.

It’s rather simple, though, the decision boils down to either money or exposure. 

Specifically, it’s a matter of great money and unrivaled exposure -- that’d be available by staying with ESPN -- or maybe even better money and much more limited exposure, which represents the best Fox Sports 1 has to offer.

Rights to Big Ten programming have become a hot property because they’re the last commodity on the market. Broadcast deals for major pro sports leagues and all other high-profile college conferences have been finalized long ago. With live sporting events among the most-watched programs on TV, that makes the upcoming Big Ten deal extremely valuable.

Most informed estimates put the potential windfall at as much as $45 million per conference member per year for the lifetime of the next TV deal.

During this and other high-profile sports negotiations, someone almost invariably utters the phrase, “it’s not about the money,” and it’s always untrue. In the case of the Big Ten and this deal, though, that should be the overriding mantra. It should not be about the money.

While there might be a slight financial difference by partnering with Fox Sports 1 (and remember parent Fox Sports own 51 percent of the Big Ten Network, so that could influence what happens), what ESPN provides in terms of exposure more than makes up for any additional income available with a different partner.

To be clear, the ESPN brand resonates across media platforms and across the globe. Even with a retreat in cable TV viewership, which recently pushed ESPN’s presence under 100 million homes for the first time in years, ESPN matters. Viewers know it, and know where to find it. It’s also the broadcast home of the College Football Playoff.

Fox Sports and FS1 have none of that cachet. But, Fox Sports 1 needs programming -- so much so that it might be willing to overpay for Big Ten rights. Still, a conference move to FS1 would be shortsighted and ultimately unproductive.

Additionally, while fans might not get a look at the negotiation process (ESPN has declined comment for this and all stories about the process), the outcome should prove informative about who holds the most power in the Big Ten. If some people in the conference only want money, that would point to a different partnership than the one championed by those who appreciate the power of a broader exposure.

No matter the partner, Big Ten schools will make more money than they’re getting in their current contract. It’s easy for me to write, and perhaps hard for athletic and school officials to justify with their budgets, but that should be enough.

Without getting into specifics, Phil Esten, the deputy director of athletics at Penn State, told regional sports editors last month that he does not expect the next TV deal to go backward. He also said Penn State’s business-minded approach to intercollegiate athletics was that “profit is a result, not a purpose.”

If that mind-set in any way transfers to TV rights deals for the entire conference -- and it should -- staying with ESPN would seem to be the right deal.

Another weekend, another role for Anderson

Brian Anderson

What difference does a week make?

College basketball viewers get to find out Saturday, when Brian Anderson handles play-by-play duties at the Final Four -- at least part of the Final Four.

It was just a week ago when Anderson drew deserved accolades and praise while working the NCAA Tournament as a fill-in for Marv Albert. Despite drawing the assignment on short notice, Anderson produced a top-notch performance.

Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch provided details about all that went into Anderson's assignment.

This week, Anderson's back in a similar and strikingly different role. He'll the the play-by-play man for the Michigan State "team stream" that airs on truTV from the Final Four.

His assignment, along with color commentator Mateen Cleaves and reporter Shireen Saski, will be to focus on Michigan State exclusively during the game. According to the "Team Stream Presented by Bleacher Report" model, the team-specific broadcasters are there to provide "local flavor including comprehensive team and player storylines."

Last year's initial rollout of team-specific broadcasts -- then called "teamcast" because there was no presenting sponsor -- was a success on almost all levels. With the main broadcast on one channel and two other feeds of the same game on two other channels, the Final Four games were seemingly everywhere. That meant some additional revenue, and it also came with generally positive response from critics and fans.

There was some confusion because some viewers mistakenly confused a team-specific broadcast with the lead broadcast on CBS, but that was minor.

This year, the confusion could be heightened a bit because CBS has no role with the national semifinals Saturday night. TBS will carry the games with broadcasters Jim Nantz, Bill Raftery and Grant Hill. Michigan State-Duke tips off at 6:09 p.m. and Wisconsin-Kentucky at 8:49 p.m.

At the same time, TNT has broadcasters focused on Duke and Kentucky while truTV gets on-air teams focused on Michigan State and Wisconsin. (It's kind of a BTN affiliate for the night.)

One of the best things about last year's team-specific broadcasts was that they were different. Not overly in cheerleader mode -- though they had their moments -- they just gave another side or sense. For fans of team involved in the game, it was probably a welcome option. For those of us without a rooting interest, it was just interesting to watch how colors, nicknames and tone were treated during the game.

For Anderson, that's where it becomes interesting. A week after a stellar, national-level job, he's asked to be similarly stellar but, in fairness, a bit biased. He's supposed to be the Michigan State voice Saturday night, just as Tom Werme will be the Duke guy, Dave Baker the Kentucky guy and Wayne Larivee the Wisconsin guy.

It's just a different challenge, and it'll be interesting to see how he handles it.