The more things change, the more they stay the same. Tom Brady retired from football over two years ago, yet ethical controversies still follow him.
The actual or potential conflicts between Brady’s roles as a National Football League broadcaster for Fox and a 5 percent owner of the league’s Las Vegas Raiders have come into stark relief in recent weeks. And generally, when the kinds of conflicts arise that could lead one to ask, “whose side are you on?” the simplest answer seems like the best one: Pick one side and stay there.
Dual Roles
Week two of the NFL season brought these conflicts into stark relief. That Sunday, Brady sat in the broadcast booth calling a rematch of February’s Super Bowl between the Kansas City Chiefs and Philadelphia Eagles. The very next day, Brady sat in the coaches’ booth for the Raiders — who play in the Chiefs’ division — during their game against the Los Angeles Chargers.
Beyond general shock at the picture of Brady in the coaches’ booth, and looking very formal in a jacket and tie, came the question of whether Brady had divided loyalties. By broadcasting Fox games, he and his colleagues get access to team coaches, players, and other personnel via pregame production meetings. Could Brady use some of the intelligence gleaned from these special-access interviews to pass information on to the Raiders’ coaching staff about the Raiders’ opponents?
Following the Monday night game, the NFL issued a statement claiming that “there are no policies that prohibit an owner from sitting in the coaches’ booth or wearing a headset during a game.” But the league didn’t help matters by publishing a tweet during the game — deleted hours later — stating that “Brady and Raiders [offensive coordinator] Chip Kelly work closely together to help with the game plan,” followed by a clapping emoji.
Conflict of Interest Questions
More importantly, the league and its partners seem intent on ignoring the elephant in the room. Asked about the conflict-of-interest problem the day after Brady showed up in the Raiders’ coaching booth, Fox Sports CEO Eric Shanks said: “Good question — I’m not going to answer that.”
By contrast, outside observers haven’t hesitated to offer their views. Marcus Spears, a former defender and current ESPN commentator, said that Brady’s appearance in the coaches’ booth “should not happen with him being a commentator of NFL football games. It actually questions the integrity of the NFL.”
A 2019 Los Angeles Times story about pregame production meetings explains concerns about the behind-the-scenes information Brady has access to as a broadcaster. CBS Sports’ Jim Nantz revealed that Sean Payton, then the coach of the New Orleans Saints, tipped him off in the pregame production meeting to a surprise onside kick that helped change the tide of Super Bowl XLIV in the Saints’ favor. Nantz claimed he received that private heads-up because “production meetings are predicated upon one word … trust.”
Joe Buck, then of Fox and now of ESPN, told the Times in 2019 that “if a guy has been somewhere forever, and he knows that he can trust us, the information is plentiful.” But Brady wearing dual hats changes that dynamic. Either Brady could get access to otherwise-private information, and the team he owns could benefit. Alternatively, coaches and players could (understandably) clam up in meetings where he is present, which might make the broadcast more bland.
Divided Energies
Another argument against Brady wearing multiple hats comes down to a version of the argument against congressional stock trading: Shouldn’t you have better things to do with your time? Fox is paying Brady a reported $37.5 million per year for a decade for his broadcasting role. That’s more than Brady made most seasons as an NFL quarterback, and more than twice the $18 million per year that CBS reportedly pays the next-highest paid announcer, Tony Romo. (At nearly $2 million per game over the course of an NFL season, it’s also making more in a single afternoon than some people make in a lifetime.)
With Fox paying Brady all that cash to work for them, it’s a fair question to ask: Why is he spending time in the coaches’ booth “working” for the Raiders? To be sure, any time studying the Raiders’ play calls may help him in his Fox role (although the fact that Brady can call Raider games for Fox raises other questions of journalistic ethics). But with Fox making a $375 million commitment — repeat, a $375 million commitment — to Brady, why not just keep the main thing the main thing, and focus on learning the broadcast booth?
Special Privilege for the Golden Boy?
Even before the “Deflategate” controversy during his time as a Patriots quarterback, some football fans complained about the NFL’s favoritism toward Brady. His dual roles in retirement have only raised those concerns. Last fall, Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio called it “ridiculous, frankly,” that Brady could “perform in the supposedly neutral and objective role of game analyst” when a team he owns is on the field. Those concerns apply in the opposite direction as well, as it relates to information obtained via his Fox job getting funneled to Raiders management. There is, of course, a simple solution that solves both problems: Brady can be an owner or an analyst — but not both.
When attending football games, fans have to decide which side of the field they want to sit on and which team they wish to root for. The same principle should apply here. If Brady wants to own a piece of the Raiders and become involved in its football operations, more power to him. But then he should nix the announcing gig and stay the heck out of the broadcast booth.