Welcome to the 40th media mailbag for The Athletic. Thanks for sending in your questions via the website and app. There were close to 200 questions, so this is the first of two parts.

Note: Questions have been edited for clarity and length.

The NHL certainly lucked into great publicity for its All-Star substitute activities, probably because there was nothing else going on in the major four sports, and the NBA had been so poor in its recent game. However, this NHL effort came at the expense of losing almost two weeks of local TV programming and in-arena revenue (food, tickets, etc.) during the prime attention period (after NFL ends, with cold weather). Is that a quality trade-off for the locally-based teams, particularly the TV partners? — No handle

It’s a good question. This is a net negative for the teams given lost revenue and the prospect of talent being injured in a game that means nothing for the franchise. But the league should have made this decision (and the Olympics years ago) because it has a responsibility to accede to its best players’ wishes (which is to play “best-on-best”). It’s also the best possible advertisement for the sport. The NHL just got 10 days of incredible publicity; the alternative would have been nil. Even if that does not translate to higher media viewership numbers, it has plenty of long-term effects on a sport’s popularity and investment.

Do you think the massive numbers for the NHL’s 4 Nations Face-Off can help NHL rest of season ratings? Any carryover? — Peter A.

I don’t see any significant carryover for ESPN or WBD when it comes to regular-season NHL viewership, but I think it sets up for a massive Olympic viewership for NBC in 2026.

Tom Brady’s forgettable performance notwithstanding, it seems implausible that Greg Olsen would remain relegated to Fox’s “B” booth. I’m not a fan of Kirk Herbstreit’s NFL work. Might Amazon lure Olsen for its Thursday night package? — Barry S.

There’s no opening for Olsen to jump to a top broadcast team unless a network breaks a talent contract, which is highly unlikely. That’s rightfully frustrating for Olsen given it’s a huge difference, at least in my eyes, between him and Herbstreit when it comes to NFL work.

That’s no knock on Herbstreit, a top college football analyst. Here’s the thing: Olsen is just 39 years old. Take Fox’s money for a bit and wait for a job to open because one will, including new NFL bidders coming in a couple of years.

Do you see TGL as a novelty that will quickly wear off and go the way of alternate leagues in other sports? Or do you think it has staying power? Ratings have diminished since Week 1. — Mark P.

I think it has staying power but you have to be realistic. Per Josh Carpenter of Sports Business Journal: TGL’s season average is at 634,000 viewers through nine matches. The low match was 544,000 in Week 5. The numbers will likely fall the rest of the season.

But the reason why I think it has staying power is because the production is really good, the players have taken it seriously and it’s entertaining content. It’s running after the NFL and college football and before baseball starts up. A good spot.

With the NFL and college football seasons both over for the next six-and-a-half months, which non-football sporting event do you predict will have the highest TV viewership this year? If I’m not mistaken, last year it was either the women’s college basketball championship or the Olympics. — Sal M.

The men’s college basketball title game is on CBS this year and has a bit of an earlier start time (8:50 p.m. ET) than previous years. So I’d take that, with the caveat being you still need a name-brand team in the final. The Kentucky Derby would be a contender, as would the NCAA women’s title game, depending on the teams.

What are the takeaways from this past season’s NFL ratings and particularly the postseason? Any evidence that the insatiable fan demand for more NFL games has limits? — Stewart R.

I’ll continue to say what I’ve been saying about the NFL for as long as I’ve written sports media: There is no other content property, sports or otherwise, that captures the attention of the public like the NFL and that gives the league all the leverage in business negotiations.

The Super Bowl just set a new viewership record. Sure, some of that is Nielsen’s changing measurement and the better counting of out-of-home viewership, but what other entity can command that many Americans? None. I don’t see any decline in fan support.

Would love to hear your thoughts on the future of Fox’s pregame/halftime crew. Too many folks, and especially Terry Bradshaw seems two years past his sell-by date. — Will F.

The chemistry of the show is excellent and has one of the most selfless hosts in Curt Menefee, who is an underrated TV person. But I can’t tell you one thing I’ve learned from that show in years, other than something Jay Glazer reported. It’s an entertainment show, not a football show. Fox is fine with that, by the way. The viewership remains very strong in the space. The show averaged 4.4 million viewers this year.

Will the new CBA in the WNBA impact television ratings and/or viewership? Do you anticipate high demand among television and streaming networks? — Dan C.

The new media deals are in place — and I am on the record that the WNBA will increase its viewership this season.

There have been rumblings of ESPN looking to get out of its MLB contract. If that happens, where do you see those rights going? — Brian K.

Excellent column here by my colleague Andrew Marchand on that.

In contrast to MLB Network, which has a prominent place in the media world, why is the NFL seemingly eager to dump NFL Network? — Mike T.

It’s not making enough revenue for the NFL and unlike MLB, it already has plenty of other outlets that essentially cover it 24/7. For every NFL question, nine out of 10 times the answer is money.

The score of the game should stay on the screen during commercial breaks. It might be distracting from the commercial, but if we have just tuned in and don’t know the score we’re going to check our phones. Do you agree? — Jeff H.

I would love this as a viewer, but it’s not realistic given the ad rates charged by media outlets. If you are paying six figures for a commercial, you are paying to choose your own creative.

You have written about Brady a lot, but why is he allowed to have an AP MVP vote (and presumably the other awards) while an NFL owner? It is a huge conflict of interest, much more than criticism of NFL officials when they make obviously questionable calls. — Hank G.

I trust Brady in this case to make an honest vote. There are sports media people with votes for awards and those votes impact significant contract bonuses. Conflicts are everywhere here.

The 1970s were littered with thirsty men in the booth. Do you know of any current announcers who drink while on the job? No need to name names (but I wouldn’t argue). A simple yes or no would suffice. — Douglas R.

One of the more unexpected mailbag questions I have ever received at The Athletic. I don’t think you could announce a pro or college game for a major company — and certainly at the network level — if you were three sheets to the wind. You’d get exposed by the audience given the navigation of being live. Also, any decent network exec would pull you. I honestly have not heard of any announcers drinking on the job outside of non-alcoholic stuff.

(Top photo: Bruce Bennett / Getty Images)