1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The End of Play by Play on Radio?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by LanceyHoward, Jan 25, 2021.

  1. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I know nothing about the Canadian radio industry. But in the United States AM radio is on it's deathbed. And I do know that the higher up the AM dial you go the worse the signal is. When I see an AM station on a frequency above 1000 I would guess that it is a station that has a basically non-existent audience that picks up the satellite feed on the cheap. And I counted 18 AM stations and three FM stations in the Blue Jays network.

    Can anyone with a knowledge of the Canadian radio industry tell me if my assumption is correct?
     
  2. wicked

    wicked Well-Known Member

    A lot of big Canadian stations moved over to FM (not as crowded there as in the states) about 20 years ago. Stations like Toronto’s CBL, which was on a clear channel, totally abandoned AM. The CRTC did issue new licenses for some of those frequencies.
     
    maumann likes this.
  3. justgladtobehere

    justgladtobehere Well-Known Member

    The Bruins are popular in the Maritimes because the team's radio station was 50,000 watts clear channel and crossed the Atlantic into Canada.
     
  4. Dan Omlor

    Dan Omlor New Member

    AM Radio is certainly not dead here in Kentucky. Sports shows keep it alive in the morning and early evening. Political call in shows keep it alive during the afternoons and late evenings. Fans listen to their favorite announcers call University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, Western Kentucky University and Murray University football, basketball and baseball games. They watch the away games on TV but turn down the sound and listen to the radio announcers. They even have special radios that allow them to synch the radio sound to the TV image, since often there's a delay. Fans go to the games and wear headsets or earbuds so they can watch the game in person but hear the background statistics and analysis by their favorite announcers. The pregame shows begin two and a half hours before the games and the postgame shows go on for two hours after the games. The hosts of these sports call in shows are local celebrities, earning extra income endorsing products and appearing at promotional events. Advertising rates for these shows are quite steep and there's a waiting list to grab any spots that open.
     
    Liut, Jesus_Muscatel and maumann like this.
  5. Tighthead

    Tighthead Well-Known Member

    I’m sure it’s split more evenly now, but i. The 80s it was way more Sox. Expos might have been more popular than Jays then

    When I was young the Ottawa station broadcast the Expos, and then late 80s they switched to Jays.
     
  6. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    Larry Munson’s finest hour on the radio had nothing to do with sports.

     
    Machine Head likes this.
  7. crimsonace

    crimsonace Well-Known Member

    The two areas where radio PXP will survive and thrive - NFL and college sports. The reasons why are simple - the NFL has a national TV contract, while college teams (outside of Notre Dame and Texas) have their TV rights negotiated through their conferences. Radio is the *only* place where the team/school can control and make money off its media rights, sell/cater to local sponsors and have the "homer" announcer build a direct connection with the fanbase.

    I know the Orlando Magic and Toronto Blue Jays have axed their radio broadcasts for TV. Several NHL teams have (Dallas, Buffalo, Carolina off the top of my head. Dallas and Buffalo have *always* simulcast. Carolina did so recently after new ownership bought the team, lowballed Chuck Kaiton and then eliminated the dedicated radio broadcast when he declined their offer).

    Hockey is a bit easier to do because the fast pace almost demands a "radio call" even on TV (Doc Emrick made a career out of "radio calling" hockey on TV), but baseball and basketball are very different animals on TV and radio. If you try to radio call on TV you wear out your audience with too much description. If you try to TV call on radio, your audience has zero clue what's going on. Radio is about painting a picture. The problem with today's simulcasts is, the announcers TV call it. In the old days, it would be a primary radio call sent to TV.

    But the reality of professional sports is similar to newspapers - both have ownership who will be looking to trim any "unnecessary" or "extra" expense. The radio broadcast is a pretty easy expense to cut as it doesn't generate a ton of revenue and a typical bean counter will say "why am I paying two broadcast crews to do the same game?" The next frontier before things being permanently cut will be that remote road broadcasts - especially for radio - will likely be permanent. The dropoff in quality is there, but it's fairly marginal. Meanwhile, the cost savings are enormous when you're looking at cutting out flights/hotel rooms for your talent for 41+ road games a year.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2021
    maumann and Liut like this.
  8. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I think you omit one big cost savings. If someone is an NBA or NHL PBP announcer it seems to be a full time job. Those guys don't seem to have many other broadcast jobs.

    I read once NBA radio announcers make about 200K a year. But if the travel component is eliminated then it can be treated like the position of PA announcer as a gig job. A team could hire some guy for $250 a night plus whatever the fee is for commercial reads to sit in front of a screen during the games.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2021
    Liut likes this.
  9. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    I thought that Texas received an equal portion of the Big 12 media revenues. Texas does have the Longhorn Network for games not covered by national television outlets. But Texas is not unique in that regard. For example, I think Kansas has a local network for their basketball.

    I ask because what Texas does with media rights in the next round of negotiations is going to a very large impact on the future of the Big 12.
     
    Liut likes this.
  10. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    The Big 12 splits their media rights into different tiers. Longhorn Network (and things like PPV for Jayhawks non-conference basketball) is considered local revenue and the school keeps whatever it can make. So tough shit to TCU if they can’t find any takers.

    By contrast, the SEC and Big 10 splits all media rights evenly. I think ACC and PAC-12 does the same now but not certain.
     
    Liut likes this.
  11. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    I missed the broadcast debut of this the other weekend but finally caught it tonight on ESPN Plus. It was a good watch but could have been twice as long for my taste. They barely got in mentions of Cawood Ledford and Jim Hawthorne and virtually nothing on Paul Eells and Dave South. But it isn’t like they spent too long on someone else. There’s just that much to cover.

    The SEC's golden radio generation remembered in 'More than a Voice'
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2021
    Liut and maumann like this.
  12. maumann

    maumann Well-Known Member

    Did Otis Boggs get a shout-out?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page