Mark Madden: Loud, watered down TV sports debate shows are expiring

When I worked for ESPN Radio, I did a TV hit for the Worldwide Leader before the Steelers-New England AFC championship game in 2002 (2001 season).

A Boston-area radio host preceded me and gave several noisy reasons why the Patriots would win.

I responded by saying, basically, “Yeah, he’s probably right.”

I got chastised by the producer afterward: “Why didn’t you take the Steelers’ side?”

I responded, “You should have told me to do that.” Instead, I gave an honest opinion. (The Patriots won.)

Suffice to say, I did not “embrace debate.”

Meantime, ESPN has gone more and more in that direction. Fox Sports, too. Nonstop yelling. (A Fox executive said they’re moving away from debate. But Skip Bayless is still braying away Monday through Friday.)

Do you think Bayless and Stephen A. Smith (ESPN) organically disagree with their co-hosts on every single issue? It’s a work, not constant coincidence.

It feels like the era of sports debate shows on TV is expiring. Bayless and Smith have lapsed into cartoonish self-parody, their shouting and mugging exaggerated and done to still greater excess. It’s been said before, so say it louder.

The formats might change slightly. The personnel rotates around Bayless and Smith on their programs as well as on shows like ESPN’s “Get Up.”

But one thing never changes: The volume. These go to 11.

Are good points made? Opposite points are made, that’s for sure. I mostly get chased away by the delivery long before a conclusion is reached.

Dan Le Batard sees a racial element with Bayless’ show on Fox, claiming Bayless’ aim is “get somebody loud and Black across from me, and we will fight. Let’s do white man-Black man, and we’ll do the dog whistle, and sports will get dumber.”

Responding for Bayless by proxy, Smith said, “When white folks do it, y’all call it ‘passionate.’ But when the brothas do it, we be screaming. I don’t like that.” OK, but I’m not sure Smith responded to Le Batard’s accusation.

Le Batard is no better: His podcast on Meadowlark Media sees him sitting across from Jon Weiner, b/k/a Stugotz, the proverbial village idiot who makes Le Batard seem all the smarter. AwfulAnnouncing.com described Stugotz as “the least qualified voice in sports … conniving, defiantly uninformed and most of all lazy.”

There’s no racial component to Le Batard’s format, but that doesn’t make it any less calculated.

Debate shows are set up for their stars to look good: Fox’s Nick Wright was reportedly considered to sit opposite Bayless when the latter’s show was reorganized. But Wright is smarter, quicker and younger. He would eviscerate Bayless. So, no go.

Bro shows are an offshoot of debate shows: Speak loud, use slang constantly, appeal to ex-frat boys, bet on everything, the athletes are always right, we want to be their friends. As in, “HE’S A STRAIGHT DAWG! GIVE HIM THE BAG! YEAAAHHHH!” Then said athlete appears on the show and answers a barrage of lazy softball questions. Lots of laughs.

The preponderance of ex-athletes in sports media has dragged things down. They don’t want to offend the brotherhood.

ESPN’s Ryan Clark did, for a while. But now, when the ex-Steeler gets called out for it, he backpedals quicker than he did when he played safety. It’s a shame, because Clark was doing great. But now, what he says can’t be trusted.

The biggest villain is all the time that’s got to be filled. Look at all of ESPN’s affiliated networks. Streaming, too. It’s too much coverage. It doesn’t all have to be good, and it isn’t. But there’s no going back.

It’s probably occurred to you while reading this that I’m no better. It certainly occurred to me while writing this.

Shoutout to ESPN’s “Pardon the Interruption” with Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon. Founded in 2001, it’s the granddaddy of the debate shows except it’s done with taste, humor, nuance, pacing and appropriate volume. Kornheiser and Wilbon can be blamed for what they wrought, but their product remains impeccable.