Thoughts, postscripts on Aikman-Buck tension; Watt promotion; and NFL TV changes

Some thoughts and postscripts on major NFL media news during the past week, in the wake of CBS naming J.J. Watt as Tony Romo’s permanent replacement on its lead team and more details leaking about the friction between Joe Buck and Troy Aikman, whose ESPN future remains very much in doubt.

▪ Though Watt has been competent (slightly better than average) as Romo’s replacement through six weeks, CBS’ decision to name him to the lead team seemed premature and, in our view, a move that can be justified only if parent company Skydance has no interest in immersing itself in a bidding war for Aikman and Greg Olsen, who are better options. (We suspect that’s the case.)

CBS’ parent company, Paramount, recently completed its $111 billion acquisition of Warner Brothers Discovery, and the new company (Skydance) likely will need to cut $6 billion in costs during the next three years.

So Skydance is hardly in position to spend $20 million to $30 million a year on Aikman or compete with ESPN to land Olsen, whose Fox contract expires after the season.

Terms of Watt’s deal — which includes calling the February 2028 Super Bowl — were not disclosed, but it’s safe to assume that it’s not on par with Romo’s 10-year, $180 million contract that blew up in CBS’ face. The network reportedly is paying between half to two-thirds of the $72 million remaining on the contract after parting with Romo last month, two months after his arrest in Wisconsin on charges of operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Watt has several factors in his favor: He’s likable, enthusiastic and willing to criticize — to an extent.

But the enthusiasm seems a bit forced at times, and he’s not yet nearly as skilled as Aikman and NBC’s Cris Collinsworth in deftly navigating the nuances of television, including always knowing when to speak.

At the very least, Watt should be decent, potentially better. He’s a sharp guy, and it’s reasonable to expect there will be improvement, just as there was for Tom Brady after his first season at Fox.

▪ ESPN erred by breaking up the best NBA booth it ever had when it laid off Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson a month after the 2023 Nuggets-Heat Finals.

And now ESPN appears to be making the same mistake with the NFL by not offering impending free agent Aikman an extension (at least not yet) after locking up Joe Buck on a six-year, $108 million extension.

Buck and Aikman have been the gold standard for announcing teams during their 25 years together, and breaking them up seems self-destructive.

But there are two factors in play that make ESPN’s apparent decision more justifiable than the jettisoning of Van Gundy and Jackson:

1). A report from Puck’s Dylan Byers said one of Aikman’s agents established his value at $30 million, a significant increase over his current $18 million salary.

With Disney slashing $7.5 billion in costs — and ESPN previously giving enormous deals to Stephen A. Smith and Pat McAfee — it’s understandable if the company doesn’t want to pay that much for a lead analyst.

2). A move from Aikman to Olsen, who’s reportedly the lead candidate for “Monday Night Football,” wouldn’t be a significant step down, and some might view it as an upgrade. Olsen, Fox’s No. 2 analyst, was universally praised as Fox’s lead analyst before Brady took over that role. His contract expires after the season, and he has made no secret of his desire to return to a lead announcing team.

▪ Aikman always has been open about his contract situation, so it’s not a surprise that he said in two recent interviews that ESPN hasn’t offered him a contract and that he’s expecting to become a free agent after he calls next February’s Super Bowl with Buck.

What is surprising is the fraying of the Buck/Aikman relationship, considering how close they were for several years.

After Front Office Sports reported that the two men argued before an Oct. 12 Bills-Rams game, Puck’s Byers offered more details this week.

Among them: Aikman felt it was disloyal that Buck agreed to an extension months before telling him.

Aikman “saw it as the ultimate act of betrayal,” a source told Byers. “They cut this deal in May and put it in a drawer. ESPN didn’t tell him. Joe didn’t tell him.”

A source told Byers that Aikman had become “increasingly cold, difficult, short, making comments” and the tension came to a head before that Rams game, when “Joe finally snapped” and “basically said, ‘Dude, are we really going to do this?’ And Troy’s position was: You [screwed] me over!”

Before the Commanders-49ers game this past Monday, Buck apologized to Aikman and the entire production team for losing his temper, per Byers, who added that Buck’s message essentially was: “We’re all adults, we’ve all got jobs to do, let’s move forward, let’s have a great year.” Aikman reportedly did not respond.

So is Aikman overreacting? Probably.

But because of their quarter-century partnership, Buck likely should have given Aikman a heads-up about his contract extension. As a professional courtesy, that would have been the right thing to do.

But there’s another dynamic that put Buck in a very difficult position: Per the Puck report, during early negotiations in May, ESPN informed Buck that the network could potentially move on from Aikman when his contract expires. ESPN mentioned Olsen or Kirk Herbstreit as possible replacements, and Buck was reportedly most receptive to Olsen.

Buck might have been asked by ESPN executives not to share that information with Aikman, and Buck’s first responsibility is to his employer.

Buck also assuredly knows that telling Aikman that ESPN was thinking of replacing him would have been disruptive and potentially damaging entering what looks like their final season together, which will end with ESPN’s first Super Bowl in four months.

But at the very least, Buck could have told Aikman, in general terms, that he had a new deal and then encouraged Aikman to seek clarity on his own situation.

Because Buck was in a difficult predicament, Aikman probably should be angrier with his agency, CAA, which also represents Buck and Olsen and (according to Puck) kept Aikman in the dark after it negotiated Buck’s new deal. That’s the inherent challenge, and slippery slope, for agencies that represent clients with competing interests.

▪ Watt’s new deal shrinks Aikman’s potential options in free agency. An obvious landing spot would be Amazon; the streamer recently extended lead analyst Herbstreit, but only the first year is guaranteed, per The Athletic.

Would Amazon want to pay Aikman and pay off Herbstreit? Amazon’s preference reportedly would be Rams coach Sean McVay, but there’s no indication that he’s considering a move to broadcasting.

Aikman could emerge as a candidate for the analyst role on Netflix’s five-game package, which will be handled by Luke Kuechly this season.

It’s difficult to envision Aikman taking a significant pay cut to replace Olsen as Fox’s No. 2 analyst, though nothing can be ruled out if that’s his only option and if he wants to continue broadcasting.

Working in an NFL front office also is an option. At the NFL owners meetings this week, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones suggested that Aikman “is very capable” of working for a team.

“He’s very capable of doing any one of a number of things, certainly anything to do with football,” Jones said. “I don’t know of any area, short of getting back out on the field. … that Troy Aikman wouldn’t be qualified and competent to go into.”

Aikman did consulting work for the Dolphins during their December/January search for a coach and general manager but hasn’t done anything for the Dolphins in several months and doesn’t have a position with the team.

▪ Al Michaels, who turns 82 next month, was very sharp on Thursday’s Patriots-Bears game and recently suggested that he has no plans to retire.

“Well, either the people that I work for will tell me, or I’ll know myself, a combination,” he said when Dan Patrick asked when he will know it’s time to step away.

“Let’s put it this way. The folks at Amazon and Prime have been fantastic. Fantastic to me,” he said before revealing Amazon checks in with him after every season to gauge his interest in returning to the booth.

“If they come to me and say, you know, it’s time for us to move on … You guys have been fantastic. You’ve been great. I’ve done the NFL for 41 years, which is half my life. Love it. But you know what? At a certain time, it’s time,” he said. “And if they feel it’s time, great. And if I feel it’s time, I’ll know it. And I’ll say, ‘You know what? Thanks for the memories.’”

This story was originally published October 23, 2026 at 12:33 PM.