Rarely able to watch the Raiders play in-person due to a high-profile second job, Tom Brady did survey the team he partially owns Monday night in Las Vegas. ESPN cameras spotting the QB legend-turned-owner/broadcaster in the coaches’ booth has drawn expected scrutiny.
Brady watching the Raiders-Chargers matchup from the coaches’ booth would certainly not be cause for concern if he only served as a Raiders minority owner; being in Year 2 as FOX’s top color analyst has triggered pushback — to the point another NFL statement on the matter surfaced.
“There are no policies that prohibit an owner from sitting in the coaches’ booth or wearing a headset during a game,” an NFL spokesman said in a statement (via CBS Sports’ Jonathan Jones). “Brady was sitting in the booth in his capacity as a limited partner.
“… Tom continues to be prohibited from going to a team facility for practices or production meetings. He may attend production meetings remotely but may not attend in person at the team facility or hotel. He may also conduct an interview off site with a player like he did last year a couple times, including for the Super Bowl. Of course, as with any production meeting with broadcast teams, it’s up to the club, coach or players to determine what they say in those sessions.”
While the NFL’s Brady policy of sorts prohibits him from attending production meetings with coaches and players onsite, the league made a notable change this offseason by allowing him to attend them virtually. Last year, Brady could serve as FOX’s lead analyst but could not attend production meetings. The image of Brady in the coaches’ booth Monday reignited the uproar about this conflict of interest.
The league’s ownership contingent had continued to delay Brady’s Raiders stake from being approved. While Mark Davis‘ stake price was part of a stalling effort that lasted over a year, the eventual approval last fall came with stipulations regarding the 23-year QB veteran’s FOX gig.
Brady has not entered another team’s facility due to that part of his rule set remaining in place, but he has been given access to remote production meetings. Concerns about this part of the popular announcer/owner’s deal are still generating issues from other teams, according to the Washington Post’s Mark Maske, Tashan Reed and Ben Strauss. Though, a high-ranking team official told the Post the NFL has dismissed other clubs’ concerns about this “unfair” Brady arrangement.
Several owners were hesitant to approve Brady’s dual role, per the Post. That was effectively understood due to the length of time between Brady’s stake agreement (May 2023) and its unanimous approval (October 2024). Since, Brady has taken on a lead role in Raiders personnel.
Although Brady’s day-to-day Raiders role remains murky, Mark Davis had said he wanted him front and center for the team’s QB and HC searches. Brady input led to the Raiders firing GM Tom Telesco after one season (the one-and-done Vegas GM is now working at Sirius XM Radio), and the Spytek hire came after he and Brady both overlapped with the Buccaneers and as Michigan teammates decades ago. Brady also led the Raiders’ recruitment of Matthew Stafford during trade negotiations, and the former AFC East mainstay’s hesitation on Sam Darnold led Las Vegas to go another way at QB.
With Brady heavily involved in Raiders matters, his broadcast team will naturally be unlikely to receive many useful nuggets during pregame production meetings. Brady called the Commanders-Giants’ Week 1 matchup; the Raiders face Washington in Week 3. In Week 4, Brady will call the Cowboys-Bears game before seeing the Raiders face the Bears in Week 5.
While Ben Johnson — whom Brady used his FOX job to scout as a hopeful Raiders HC option last year — downplayed this conflict of interest, ESPN’s Peter Schrager said OC Chip Kelly told him he discusses film and the gameplan with Brady two or three times per week. Pete Carroll then denied Brady’s Kelly meetings occur that frequently, per Maske, Reed and Strauss. The NFL, per Sports Illustrated’s Conor Orr, also deleted a tweet about the Brady-Kelly conversations.
“We have conversations. I talk to Tom, and Chip talks to Tom regularly,” Carroll said. “We have a tremendous asset, and we all get along well and respect each other. And so, we just talk about life and football and whatever comes. He has great insight, so we’re lucky to have him as an owner.”
Teams are also leery with regards to future Raiders free agency pursuits, according to Jones, as pregame meetings could help the minority owner — though, perhaps not substantially — file information away for his team down the line. Information regarding teams’ values of certain players would stand to be another potential issue here. But this matter continues to be one the NFL is willing to live with in exchange for having Brady continue to play prominent roles.
Raiders need all the help they can get.
Yet they still loss.
Lost
Is this really the main thing Goodell is worried about? Of all the things he should be worried about this is what bothers him the most? Gimme a break.
Goodell had to find something new to worry about now that the “tush-push” issue has been resolved…lol.
Brady brings nothing to table from an announcer standpoint. He’s improved from terrible to mediocre. He’s not better than Greg Olsen and I don’t see him getting any better from here on out. To be honest, I mute the games he covers because I find his voice annoying and his analysis adds no value to the game.
I think he should resign his Fox gig and take a day-to-day job with the Raiders (obviously in addition to his limited ownership). That will solve the conflict of interest problem and I think he would be a better team builder for the Raiders than he is a color analyst.
Every rational football fan feels the exact same way as you. Unfortunately, the NFL is more likely to remove the actual football from the game than to place any scrutiny whatsoever on their golden boy.
Fans saw this as a disaster right away. The owners dragged their feet and ultimately chose to go back to the bar, taking no action.
They would have been doing Fox a favor if they made him exit broadcasting to become a minority stake team owner.
Of course he is cheating. He’s Tom Brady. Just ask his ex wife
The most successful people are rarely paragons of virtue. Tom Brady, like Michael Jordan before him, never has seen another human being as someone to enjoy, but to exploit. It’s all the more the case for institutions.
Most humans are not paragons of virtue and those who act like they are usually have the most skeletons in their closet.
Tom Brady hasn’t broken a single rule, no matter how much the court of public opinion wants to chastise him because they saw him listening into play calls. Literally any owner in football has the ability to do exactly what TB did on Monday night and people are butthurt because everyone knows who he is.
Let’s please not act like we saw him communicating into the headset directly to Geno. Jesus people.
Rules will never apply to some people.
NFL: sets rules for Brady as an owner and broadcaster
Brady: follows the rules
Internet: Cheater!
Bingo!
Internet police need to chill out, that includes radio personalities like Dan Patrick who think they see something illegal with their eyes yet don’t take the 10 minutes necessary to read a rule and see everything TB has done is above board.
Sorry people don’t like it but they need to get over themselves.
And some people will gladly slurp them while acting like we don’t know their history.
“After they changed the rules and used dubious interpretations of them, they deemed that he has, IN FACT, (retroactively) followed the rules and now I will slurp him for being such a good boy!!!”
Enjoy.
And jealously of internet trolls like you will always be glaringly obvious even in the written word. You’re clearly a simple minded idiot who cannot manage nuance and live in a binary world.
I feel sorry for you.
I don’t understand how these announcers get paid so much. Literally no one watches the game because Tom Brady, Troy Aikman, or Tony Romo is calling the game. You could have some no-name backup QB from 20 years ago on the call and you’d get the same ratings and save a ton of cash.
Because you would be stuck with someone like Dennis Miller calling games.
I would take Dennis Miller any day of the week over Brady, Aikman, or Romo, even acknowledging how much Dennis Miller sucked.
There’s a big difference between signing someone who has never played football (Miller) vs. some run of the mill former QB. JT O’Sullivan would be fantastic–or at least decent. I’m not asking for Jim Gaffigan.
Not familiar with JTO but I’d like him over the three I mentioned above. Unironically, I would take Gaffigan over them as well.
Can’t stand Aikman (and I’m a Cowboys fan), nor his broadcast “buddy”Buck who is also terrible. I like Romo, but Brady adds nothing. Gaffigan is entertaining.
rct and earmbrister – I picked a comedian who is relatively popular and inoffensive. But I after I hit send, I thought, “you know Gaffigan probably wouldn’t be terrible–better than some we’re already stuck with.” So I’m with you.
That said, just put someone in the booth who knows football, speaks clearly, and does no harm. I’m OK with vanilla.
Check out The QB School on YouTube. Good stuff.
Yes. Agreed. I watch JTO regularly. I also like Chase Daniel’s analysis of QB play.
Everything you said is correct, but it misses the part where a big name like Brady has a lot of value to a network by having him schmooze with sponsors.
Matt Cassel would not have that value.
The networks don’t need to schmooze sponsors. They all know the viewership numbers will be within a certain range along with a range for the number of viewers, subject to variations due to popular teams and blowouts.
“Sales tactics won’t work because consumers are entirely rational” is a take of sorts.
So Proctor & Gamble will only advertise on an NFL game if they can meet Tom Brady? No.
“Only”? No. Guessing you’ve never heard of upfronts.
Answer your own question then…why are they paying him all that money?
No, they don’t “need” any of that, but it’s still something that these echo chamber execs bring to self-congratulatory quarterly reviews, so there’s that. Unfortunately.
66 – Maybe the Fox Sports execs are the ones who secretly want to hang with Brady.
Not true. I’ll prefer a game with Romo over almost anybody else.
Sadly, the only colour commentator with both insight, enthusiasm for the game and reasonable delivery is Romo. Surely the broadcasters could do better. Tongue-tied ex-stars is hardly the way to deliver a first-rate viewer experience.
There’s a few I’ll turn off on first listen (the woman with drill sergeant voice, Chris Collingsworth) but most of the bad ones I don’t know. Greg Olson is terrible but not outright annoying. Listening to him is like being stuck watching in a bar with a local good-humoured loudmouth.
Brady is Brady and Goodell won’t be squat to him because of who he is. It will be ip to each team to divulge whatever tehy feel comfortable and hopefully none of them divulge anything
Goodell works for the owners. If they want Brady out he will be out. But given where we are at, it seems only fans care.
Only fans? The delays in approval point to some owners having serious issues with this arrangement.
Yeah, but not enough. I don’t think that the league office actually likes football, to be honest, and probably only a handful of the decision making owners actually do. That handful, plus the ones who think this scenario to be detrimental to the brand/offensive to their spirit of competitiveness, are the ones who are opposed to the name branding that Brady brings. Does fan opinion affect revenue? It’s a struggle beyond our lowly fan pay grade. I think most of us would say, resoundingly, “Yes.”
Of course Goodell won’t do anything because THERE HAS NOT BEEN A RULE BROKEN.
Divulging information to any announcer team has always been up to the clubs discretion. As Ben Johnson said this week, he’s not going into any meeting and telling people to do this or that to shut down Caleb Williams.
Holy cow people, get a clue and stop typing with emotion
Have you considered that people might be upset because they are upset about the scenario, not about whether it’s in line with the NFL’s rules?
Of course and this is the problem with people being upset about Brady being an analyst and owner. The scenario means nothing when related to ‘did he break a rule’ and therefore ‘should he be punished?
Sorry people don’t like the fact that a minority owner has a day job as an football analyst but being upset is an emotional reaction and one that is not based on any legitimate reasoning or critical thinking. They simply see a person with a headset and the pitchforks are out.
Why don’t actual NFL people have a problem with this? Because everyone is trying to gain an advantage in some capacity
Do you not recognize the massive conflict of interest there, or is it just your opinion that it doesn’t matter? Why exactly does Brady deserve the extra access and trust that others would not get? He already got his ownership at a much reduced rate-which is admittedly the owner’s own decision. It’s already a suspicious scenario, and then the headset incident plays into it. Why even keep the door open for such possibilities? What’s the allure or benefit, to anyone other than Brady? That’s why people are bothered.
Does the NFL want to address why Brady, Saquon, CeeDee, and others are playing flag football in Saudi Arabia? The government that bankrolled 9/11 and brutally murdered a journalist a few years ago (not to mention how they treat women) is paying Brady et al to play in a flag football tournament and the NFL has nothing to say about it?
Man with trophy cases full of asterisks doesn’t mind blood money.
“Patriot”-ic.
Either do promotions for the UFC or Boxing or LIV golfers or nearly every comedian you have ever heard of who are now over there telling jokes.
It’s a global world folks and there is as much blood money thrown around in the US and/or Europe as there is in the Middle East. Should Rhodes Scholarship recipients from the last 120+ years give back any accomplishments they have received because of where that money originated? Or are you not educated enough to know blood money doesn’t exclusively originate from brown people with oil?
So many logical fallacies and projection that I shouldn’t bother here, but…
A- When did I say that “blood money doesn’t exclusively originate from brown people with oil?”
B- Is your implication that if we have to call out people who are not the “other” then OBVIOUSLY blood money is A OK?
C- Why do you lay out other examples of blood money as a way of defending it rather than a means of lamenting it further?
Because this is the world we live in amigo. These are all legitimate comparisons yet you want to ignore them. Makes sense.
How are direct examples of people taking saudi money ‘logical falllicies’? I don’t think you know what that phrase means. Sorry if you see them as a straw man but they are literal examples of things happening in 2025.
I do not “want to ignore them”.
You want to deflect with them.
Because you are a special kind of sack licker and self back patter.
You have fun with that, “amigo”.
@MFitzpatrick: Sorry, I don’t care about whatever idiotic justification you’re trying to pull here. Taking Saudi money is wrong. They paid for 9/11. End of story. I don’t care about Rhodes Scholars. I’m talking about Tom Brady amd Saquon Barkley taking blood money. Also I hate UFC, boxing, golf, and all of the awful Rogansphere comedians taking this money as well. So you wasted your time bringing them up.
Got it. You want to be naive about some things and enraged about others. Totally makes sense, bet your household is a joy to live in.
You people are too easy.
There is a parallel to the Brady situation that applies here. When “American Bandstand” made Dick Clark a household name in the 1950s, he invested his newfound wealth in record companies, music publishing, even pressing plants. His holdings became an issue in 1960 when Congress held hearings on payola. ABC ordered Clark to sell his music industry holdings so he could remain in TV — and he eventually became a very successful TV producer.
It’s long past time for the NFL to tell Brady “you can have TV or the Raiders, not both”.
Well I’m impressed with this bit of historical research but I suspect that most viewers of American Bandstand cared more about the music than who hosted the show. It’s likely that 99% of viewers knew nothing about Dick Clark’s investments or even cared.
It was likely less a concern about which viewers knew about Dick Clark’s investments than it was about payola. If Clark had a vested monetary interest in certain acts due to publishing royalties, etc. it’s easy to see how he might push hard to have those acts represented on his TV show over others. I have zero idea if Clark ever engaged in that, but I’m willing to guess that was the concern.
Viewers may not have cared, but Congress did. Dick Clark collected big money on the side by claiming songwriter credit for songs he never composed. Publishing is where the real money is in the music industry — because songwriters collect royalties.
The effect of those Congressional hearings was to outlaw payola (or at least drive it underground) and for TV/radio to more closely control music programming.
Well now I’m a bit confused because if there is a connection between Clark claiming songwriting credits he didn’t own and Brady broadcasting for Fox…it escapes me.
He’s saying that the parallel was in forcing Clark to pick between his two roles. With that precedent in mind, Chucky is stating that it’s easy to instruct Brady to do so, as well.
You should probably be concerned if you can understand the mind of Chucky..lol. At least this time he didn’t go into his usual rant about the NY media and the tabloids 🙂
“Confucius say: whether or not man cheats sometimes not as important as whether it looks like he could be cheating”
(Confucius actually no say, Monkey’s Incle’s dad once said something like it though)
I have to give you props for this one, Monkey’s Uncle. Don’t tell Mufasa. Or Zazu.
Confucius also say: “Man who rushes through turnstile going to Bangkok”. 🙂
Imagine if the NFL and all the pundits put this much effort into ridding the league of women beaters.
Google claims 46-47% of viewers are female. Few other entertainment ventures would risk alienating such a large percentage of supporters but the NFL is basically a monopoly so they don’t give a damn.
brady is boring
he is awful like mom goose doris
call him dad goose
Yeah, Brady lost his shine being a color analyst…well, during broadcast #1. And Mustard Tiger, I’m with you — I mute the games too when Brady is speaking. His voice is indeed irritating.
Are you familiar with “The Peter Principle”? Well, when it comes to broadcasting, let’s just refer to Tom as “Peter Brady”.
That about sums it up, methinks.
People are actually bothered by this lma
One or the or the other, TB12, you can’t have both. If I were you, I’d take the reins of the Raiders and see if you can make them winners again.
Cheaters cheat.