What is "the Manningcast," for those of us that avoid studio football shows?

Eli and Peyton did some Monday Night Football games on ESPN2 this season with guests.

so instead of watching the traditional broadcast, you are listening to a pair of longtime ex-NFL QBs analyze what just happened.

both obviously are blandly likable figures, but they gummed up the works with guests in each quarter who stole a lot of the oxygen. they got a lot of current superstars - I think Aaron Rodgers was on the last one - and legends like Bill Parcells and Bill Cowher and also some major comedians and other A-list celebrities. some excellent, and some terrible.

to me, at least, it was appealing in small doses. but the setup as the weeks went on seemed to leave the Mannings not paying a lot of attention to the game.

Cone is very good and cerebral on the Yankees' YES Network. no way I'd watch an A-Rodcast over that one.

ESPN is reportedly looking at a booth consisting of Karl Ravech doing play-by-play and Eduardo Perez and former New York Yankees pitcher David Cone doing analysis.

Why Eduardo Perez? So-so, at best, IMHO. One would think a national prime time broadcast might warrant a bit more.

The Manningcast is great. Peyton and Eli treat each other the way brothers should, with real affection and putdowns, and their analysis is insightful and educational even in just its throwaway moments. The guests are hit or miss (Julian Edelman was especially bad, since he tried way too hard to be outrageous and funny), but when they get a good one, the show really sings. Snoop Dogg was amazing the other night.

The Manningcast is excellent, more entertaining filling of dead air than you get with a normal broadcast. It's more like sitting with friends.

I am all for A-Rod having his own broadcast, anything to get him off the normal broadcast.

The Manningcast is great.

Agree, it was great because they showed some real insight into how the game is played, and had some fun playful banter. IOW, two things A-Rod is terrible at.

Who would actually be good at this? I would nominate Peter Moylan. I've seen clips of him breaking down pitching that have been really great and he has a terrific sense of humor.

I like the Manning version of MNF and I think this would work with the Cal and Billy.

The Manningcast is a really good idea, but a few things:

1) If the game involves a team you really care about, it is not what you want to watch. For example, during the Patriots game against Buffalo several weeks ago (the one where New England threw three passes the entire game and won), I just wanted to focus on the game - the down and distance, who was lined up in the backfield, etc. If you want that kind of "just the facts, ma'am", then the Manningcast is not for you. But if you are just casually watching a game because that's what you do during the football season, this is better than the mediocre ESPN main broadcast team.

2) This only works because the two Mannings are likable, and have obvious, understandable chemistry. If you don't put the right couple of people on a baseball version of this, it will suck. I cannot imagine ARod being the right person for this format. I suspect that as other sports or networks try to repeat this success, they will find the sneaky-hard challenge of finding just the right pair of people for their broadcast. For baseball? I don't know who it would be now, but when I was young, Earl Weaver and Jim Palmer did some ABC stuff together, and they had the right kind of relationship for this. Weaver was straight-talking, understood strategy and sabermetrics without thinking of it that way, and was funny. Jim Palmer was tall, extremely handsome, well-spoken, and made to do TV. He would often come across as sort of stiff at first, but then open up, getting pretty candid with his criticisms, a little bit of a dry sense of humor. When they put the two of them together, it got funny because Weaver would talk to Palmer like he was still his manager in the booth, and Palmer would be like, "Shut up, old man! We're not on the mound now!" It was pretty good, and you could see how something like that would have worked on a Manningcast sort of format today.

3) I'm not sure how well this would work in hockey or basketball, where there is non-stop action, and where play-by-play is a lot more helpful. In football and baseball, there are lulls followed by action (actually, in baseball, it is all lulls, with moments of action).

4) One thought: Maybe it doesn't have to be baseball people doing the Manningcast. For example, what if ESPN in 2022 decided to try something more reality-TV-ish, where regular people could spend this winter auditioning to do a Manningcast version of Sunday Night Baseball (or try it with some lower-profile broadcast on the network, like Tuesdays or whatever), but they are regular people who might happen to be really good at it. They audition however ESPN wants to do it, and then you spend the first half of the 2022 season trying out different teams of the best "applicants" up until the All-Star break. Then, ESPN opens up some kind of fan voting to determine who the best two people were, and those two end up being the team for the rest of the regular season.

Here's the thing. We all know plenty of people who are always saying, "I'm better those people on TV!". Most probably aren't, but there are always a few people you know who...probably would be better, if given the chance. This would provide a way for a few dozen people of the best people who volunteer to actually try it out, and I'd bet ESPN would end up finding at least a few people from the process who would end up having a high-profile job in sports after the experience. It would fun to watch - more fun that ARod.

They should have Brandon McCarthy and Sean Doolittle do one.

yeah, I wonder how much time the Manningcast fans here actually spend watching it, and would be curious if the ratings held up over the course of the season.

as I previously noted, there is some appeal to it - and, as just noted, it's distracting at best if the actual game matters to you. would not be surprised if Manningcast either doesn't return this fall, or it does but ratings sink. feels like a novelty to me.

. For example, what if ESPN in 2022 decided to try something more reality-TV-ish, where regular people could spend this winter auditioning to do a Manningcast version of Sunday Night Baseball (or try it with some lower-profile broadcast on the network, like Tuesdays or whatever),

I think there are lots of less traditional media figures that might be good at this - Jay Jaffe, Ben Lindbergh, Hannah Keyser, Mike Petriello (who already was terrific on Statcast), Kevin Goldstein, Dan Szymborski, Jomboy, or Pitching Ninja.

3) I'm not sure how well this would work in hockey or basketball, where there is non-stop action, and where play-by-play is a lot more helpful. In football and baseball, there are lulls followed by action (actually, in baseball, it is all lulls, with moments of action).

For basketball, I would love an alternative option where the game takes up a portion of the screen, while another portion is dedicated to showing us what's happening with the schemes, etc. It would be difficult to pull off, and would best be in small doses, but a Draymond Green type explaining what's actually going on would greatly improve my appreciation of the game.

I've seen the random youtube video of him explaining plays or his thought process on defense, and whoa boy, I'm missing 95% of what's actually going on. Plus, who cares about the middle part of a regular NBA season game. Everyone half watches until the end anyway.

If those changes are made, Rodriguez would leave “Sunday Night Baseball.”

So, no down side.

For basketball, I would love an alternative option where the game takes up a portion of the screen, while another portion is dedicated to showing us what's happening with the schemes, etc.

CBS did this with Tony Romo last week, and I hated it. And I generally like Romo. But interfering with what you can see on the field is annoying.

Let's just have Bill Burr do play by play like he did while watching the Stefon Diggs catch for the Vikings in the 2017 playoff vs New Orleans.

Pedro and Ramon Martinez.

I have no idea if they are available. I have no idea how Ramon would be (I don’t know if he’s ever done commentary). But Pedro would be fantastic at something like this. His baseball knowledge is absolutely brilliant, he’s highly likable and entertaining, and is a big enough name to be a draw. Then you have the brother dynamic with Ramon.

Oh, and don’t you hate pants

One thought: Maybe it doesn't have to be baseball people doing the Manningcast. For example, what if ESPN in 2022 decided to try something more reality-TV-ish, where regular people could spend this winter auditioning to do a Manningcast version of Sunday Night Baseball (or try it with some lower-profile broadcast on the network, like Tuesdays or whatever), but they are regular people who might happen to be really good at it. They audition however ESPN wants to do it, and then you spend the first half of the 2022 season trying out different teams of the best "applicants" up until the All-Star break. Then, ESPN opens up some kind of fan voting to determine who the best two people were, and those two end up being the team for the rest of the regular season.

ESPN kinda did this way back when when they tried a game show to find a new Sportscenter anchor. I know the winner, Mike Hall, is now on BTN. According to Wikipedia, it looks like he was quickly demoted from Sportscenter on ESPN to ESPNU and lasted only a couple years. He apparently still does some sideline work for Fox, and has done improv all over Chicago, including appearing at Second City. The guy, no doubt, is talented and entertaining enough to be on TV, and is passionate enough about sports to know his stuff. But even he wasn't good enough to do an half-hour of highlights on ESPN at 6 AM, much less be the star of a 3+ hour show in primetime. That #### is tough, and pulling even the very best of the best of the candidates that are coming off the street are unlikely to be remotely qualified.

I'm glad to have one more way to ignore A-Rod. And if this gets him off of Sunday Night Baseball, all the better.

I have no idea if they are available. I have no idea how Ramon would be (I don’t know if he’s ever done commentary). But Pedro would be fantastic at something like this. His baseball knowledge is absolutely brilliant, he’s highly likable and entertaining, and is a big enough name to be a draw. Then you have the brother dynamic with Ramon.

It's been awhile but I remember Boston writers noting how different Pedro and Ramon were. As gregarious and worldly as Pedro was (fluent in English and Spanish and very good if not fluent in French as I recall) Ramon pretty much stuck to Spanish and was very reserved. It never sounded like he was made for TV. Pedro of course is.

I don't know who but a pair of gregarious long-time teammates would seem the best bet for baseball. They can give each other ####, reminisce about some stuff ... but seems they'd have to be pretty big names to pull in quality celeb guests. It's sort of interesting that they were able to get such big stars as the Mannings. Big baseball stars doing TV afterwards seems pretty rare -- maybe less than one per generation with ARod, Morgan, Palmer ... unless you want to count guys like Mark Grace and Rick Sutcliffe. (And of those 5 names, as somebody noted, Palmer's the only one who might be able to pull off something like this.

At its base are baseball's general issues with modern culture. How many celebs under 40 even care about baseball? Do enough people watch Sunday Night Baseball (or whatever) that an alternate broadcast even makes sense? How many people even have a clue who Tim Hudson is, much less Sean Doolittle? We bemoan that Trout isn't a pop culture phenom ... who's the most famous baseball duo of the last 30 years?

Let's face it, it's baseball. For something like that to work in terms of ratings, it's almost certainly going to need a heavy helping of "good ol' boy." If you want to tap into new markets, then it probably needs a heavy Latin presence. If Chipper Jones and Bartolo Colon (how's his English) are secretly friends, outoing and very good on the mike ....

I think the problem is that the most likeable guys weren't the biggest stars. Preston Wilson, Eric Byrnes, Sean Casey, and Cliff Floyd would be good (based on their MLB tv outings), but are they household names?

I don't know who but a pair of gregarious long-time teammates would seem the best bet for baseball.

Papi & Pedro weren't longtime teammates - just '03 and '04 - but they'd be a lot of fun (says the Red Sox fan). Who was the guy who kept rubbing Adrian Beltre's head? Is that pair available?

Another option which I figure might be good for baseball is the obvious one - get at least one person from each team's broadcasters, put them together, and let them bring out what they know about their team and needle each other a bit. Maybe you have one constant as a moderator, but that doesn't seem like a good fit for A-Rod as much as a good play-by-play guy (someone like the Padres's Don Orsillo, who did great work adapting to a new partner every few days with the Red Sox during Jerry Remy's illness).

There's not much avoiding the inane banter (as Orsillo's predecessor in Boston would put it), but you can find guys whose banter supports the game rather than treats it as background static.

No currently-active baseball player is as much of a household name as Peyton Manning is today. And Eli - though pretty well-known himself - is obviously the supporting cast member to his older brother.

In no small part because of both gambling and the chasm in the general popularity of the NFL vs MLB, there are probably at least a few dozen retired (or soon-to-be-retired) NFL players who would be more of a draw than any recently-retired MLB player.

In baseball, who would be the best known retired players under the age of, say, 70? Jeter, Rivera, Griffey, Pedro, Ortiz...I agree with an above comment that having a strong Latino presence on such a team would make a lot of sense.

In football, almost any big-time retired QB is going to have the name ID to be a potential draw, if they are good at it. It is the Mannings, but Brady, Brees, Aikman, Steve Young, Kurt Warner, Marino, Elway (if he wasn't working for a team already), Bradshaw...they are all already doing TV.

Russell Wilson is very good on TV already; he's a natural. Mahomes is very good on TV already, so is Rodgers. Cam Newton is another example: I got to see him all the time for a year as a Patriots fan, and although he clearly has lost it as a player, he is extremely charismatic and likable, and when you listen to him talk about the nitty-gritty of football, he is excellent. Belichick talked regularly about how smart and coachable Newton was - he just lost his arm strength.

Anyway, one of football's advantages here is that you've generally got to be very smart to be a successful QB, and if you listen to most of the QBs who really command the position today - Mahomes, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Herbert, Josh Allen, Burrow, Kyler Murray, etc. - it is clear quickly that they are processing a lot of information quickly, and successfully. That's got to translate to some extent to being good on live television.

I'll hold out for the Vottocast.

Let's wait ten years for Rizzo and Freeman. :)

If it's now, there are plenty of good suggestions above. Pedro + anybody would be interesting. (Maybe not Gerald Williams, though.)

Curtis Granderson isn't famous enough, but he'd be great.

Ken Harrelson is available.

Reportedly, Michael Kay will be joining A-Rod for the 10-12 Sunday Night Baseball broadcasts that will also be ‘manningcast’.

wow, I enjoyed A-Rod in the booth for about 5 minutes of 5 different games and then - not so much.

Kay will make it all about himself to the extent that he can.

earlier I questioned how long the Manning gimmick will last. well, one season at least.

"Kay-Rod"? oof.

yeah, I wonder how much time the Manningcast fans here actually spend watching it

As they liked it, more time than you?

Am I correct in assuming that the Mannings are doing it remotely, and are not at the stadiums?

I liked the ManningCast, too, as noted - in small doses. If anyone more than once watched an entire game via that broadcast, I'd be interested to hear about it.

and yes, the Mannings and all guests do this remotely.

Thanks.

I never thought of it this way, but while pondering who would be good for a baseball "Manningcast" it occurred to me that a lot of what one would like in that kind of broadcast is what Jerry Remy brought to Red Sox broadcasts. He wasn't that great with interviewing guests in the booth, but great game insight combined with the kind of goofy nonsense you'd get if watching the game with a buddy was his thing.

I watched three or four of them all the way through. If you're interested in the mechanics of football, which I understand a lot of people aren't, they're incredibly helpful. This past Monday, for instance, Peyton explained that when the quarterback points to a linebacker before the ball is snapped, it's a signal to the receivers that if this guy blitzes, you should run your "hot" route.

I love hearing that stuff. It's explaining how the sport really works, whereas most broadcasters are much more superficial and interested in establishing a storyline. I also understand that most sportswriters find that technical kind of thing boring, and would rather write about fights between Jeff McNeil and Francisco Lindor. To each his own.

ARod was really good in the booth the first couple seasons but- and sorry if this has already been noted in this thread, I didn't see it- he has been mailing it in for a while now. Like well, well below average. His nonsensical, contradictory commentary was routinely mocked across the interwebs during the playoffs.

I'd guess it might be at least partially a time thing- he's now involved in the Wolves ownership in the NBA, etc., maybe he's just not putting in the prep work anymore. But I don't know.

As noted above if I was ESPN I'd be all over Don Orsillo as the Master of Ceremonies for something like this. The dude is remarkably good as a play by play guy but beyond that he does a great job of bringing out the best in a wide range of people.

Having said that I think this would be a good format for A-Rod. He has struck me as a LOT more comfortable and interesting when he's effectively shooting the #### with other players. He and Ortiz are pretty entertaining together and A-Rod really picks stuff up incredibly quickly. I think a scenario where he's able to just sit and chat about what he's seeing rather than trying to force something is good for him. In a traditional booth setting I think his old insecurities come through. He wants to do the job the way it's "supposed" to be done rather than just doing his thing. In retrospect his career was like this, he never quite understood why Jeter got the love he didn't and often came across phony. A-Rod's like the high school kid who is bad at first dates. If he lets himself go he seems a lot better.

If you're interested in the mechanics of football, which I understand a lot of people aren't, they're incredibly helpful. This past Monday, for instance, Peyton explained that when the quarterback points to a linebacker before the ball is snapped, it's a signal to the receivers that if this guy blitzes, you should run your "hot" route.

I love hearing that stuff.

that's the part that I liked, too. but they got sidetracked by a very erratic quality of guests - to the point where I didn't get enough of that, frankly. maybe someone puts together a Youtube of the 10 or 15 minutes total where they go through letting us see a play through their eyes. I'd watch that.

I haven't watched him regularly in a couple of decades now but Steve Stone was great at the "technical" side of baseball. Really it's got to be a pitcher in that role as they're the only ones handling the ball every play and they're ultimately the ones making the biggest contribution to what happens on a play. Listening to prime Stone explain how he'd set up a hitter (or what he would not do) then watch the pitcher either do what Stone suggested or not was always good. He wasn't great at the silly side though and he's not the guy you'd want in the role in 2022. But I wouldn't mind listening to Pedro (or Maddux or Greinke or ...) talking through the decision process several times a game.

Not sure somebody like Clemens or Unit would be who you'd want. "I'd throw him a 95-MPH fastball here ... I'd throw him a 86-MPH splitter here ... stupid pitcher." And as Stone shows, it doesn't have to be a former star to do a good job, you need the star name to draw eyeballs and guests. Are there any former players who hang out with a lot of "Hollywood stars" (these barely exist anymore ... tonight on PedroBall it's special guest Kate Winslet) or rappers or whatever? Where's Jay Johnstone when you need him? (I know the answer to that question.)

maybe someone puts together a Youtube of the 10 or 15 minutes total where they go through letting us see a play through their eyes. I'd watch that.

Kinda like if you reduced a football game to the 10-15 minutes of actual play ...

And as Stone shows, it doesn't have to be a former star to do a good job, you need the star name to draw eyeballs and guests. Are there any former players who hang out with a lot of "Hollywood stars" (these barely exist anymore ... tonight on PedroBall it's special guest Kate Winslet) or rappers or whatever? Where's Jay Johnstone when you need him? (I know the answer to that question.)

Kershaw was hanging with a couple of football players of some note (apparently, beats the #### out of me who they were) at the Mavericks game the other night. I'd bet a bunch of the Dodgers know more than a few starlets.

Incidentally while Stone wasn't a superstar he did win a Cy Young.

not sure if MSG Network still does it, but they used to reduce Knicks games to one hour on a repeat broadcast. but I think nowadays the appetite for watching even shortened games may have lessened with social-media lovers who can't possibly not know the result of a game as soon as it ends.

Does A-Rod have a large fanbase? I mean, he's really famous but that's not the same thing. Old school fans don't like him because of the steroids and because he didn't win a World Series with the team that drafted him. Analytical fans don't like him because he's a terrible announcer.

ARod is totally unlikable and a terrible announcer. I expect/hope this fails bigly.

What might work but would turn off your boomer demographic would be a Latin themed A-Rod show where the conversation and chatter would be between great Latin beisbol stars and or personalities who maybe fans of the game.

Maybe it brings out a different personality in A-Rod to do mostly everything in Spanish.

Everything would be subtitled.

I'll bet Adam Wainwright would be good at this. Funny, smart, and knowledgeable. He's the closest analogue to Peyton Manning I've seen among baseball players.

-Some duos that I would watch, and I betcha lots of other people would watch, maybe even non-baseball people.

-I know, each one of these lists starts with Pedro Martinez. But, I think, Pedro Martinez is the smartest guy in the room, whatever room he is in. So you start with him.

Pedro Martinez and David Ortiz

Pedro Martinez and Barry Bonds

Pedro Martinez and Greg Maddux

Pedro Martinez and Mike Maddux

Pedro Martinez and Randy Johnson

-I have never heard either of these two folks on a broadcast, but I always thought they were interesting and I would for one like to see it.

Pedro Martinez and Jimmy Rollins

Pedro Martinez and Rajai Davis

-now getting more into the entertainment-

Pedro Martinez and Spike Lee

Pedro Martinez and Eddie Vedder

Pedro Martinez and Flea

Pedro Martinez and John Cusak

Pedro Martinez and Rebel Wilson

Pedro Martinez and Jason Batemen

-now starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel, but, hey, I thought Punch Drunk Love was good.

Pedro Martinez and Adam Sandler

I've really enjoyed the Manningcast. I haven't watched a full game, but I've watched maybe a total of eight quarters of MNF this year, which is eight more than I would have watched without the Manningcast.

Sometimes they're just two people chatting with a guest, but as #35 notes, occasionally Peyton will drop some bit of football knowledge which is actually really enlightening and helps your understanding of the game.

And as Stone shows, it doesn't have to be a former star to do a good job, you need the star name to draw eyeballs and guests. Are there any former players who hang out with a lot of "Hollywood stars" (these barely exist anymore ... tonight on PedroBall it's special guest Kate Winslet) or rappers or whatever? Where's Jay Johnstone when you need him? (I know the answer to that question.)


I might watch a broadcast featuring Justin Verlander and Kate Upton...and I bet they know some famous people.

Does A-Rod have a large fanbase? I mean, he's really famous but that's not the same thing. Old school fans don't like him because of the steroids and because he didn't win a World Series with the team that drafted him. Analytical fans don't like him because he's a terrible announcer.

I think he's a terrible announcer, but I don't think ESPN would keep putting him on TV if he was driving fans away. They seem to be reasonably competent, we're just not their target audience.

Pedro Martinez and Doug Glanville would be so tremendously entertaining, I might even watch a live game again.