Out of Necessity or the Start of a Trend?

There were probably several reasons for NBC's decision to base all of its Olympic coverage from Connecticut, with the exception of the one on-site interviewer at each venue.  Part of it might've been respecting the U.S. government's diplomatic boycott, but it was probably more about COVID concerns and the required quarantine, as well as the distance to China (for people who just came back from Japan not too long ago).  But I suspect the biggest reason was the Super Bowl falling right smack in the middle of the Olympics.

Even with the Super Bowl in LA, which is a direct flight to and from Beijing (speaking of that, why in God's name did they make Tirico go from Beijing to Connecticut to LA, back to Connecticut?  Was that one-day stopover on the East Coast really necessary, especially when flights from Asia land on the West Coast?), having NBC's Olympic crew going back and forth wouldn't have made much sense.  Especially when so many of their key people were doing double duty.  So, the decision to do everything from Stamford wasn't really a surprise.

It's not like them basing operations from Stamford was a foreign concept, either.  They've been doing that for years at the Summer Olympics, only having on-site commentators for a handful of major sports with everyone else stateside.  The difference here is that virtually nobody is on the ground in the host city.

After two years of pandemic sports, I didn't think they announcers calling the game from a monitor would really make much of a difference.  And, for the most part, it hasn't.  If you didn't know they were in a studio, you wouldn't even be able to tell.  Does the broadcast lose something with them not being able to explain what it's like at the venue or watch practices?  Sure.  But not enough to be significant.

Which got me thinking...is this a one-time thing?  Or will it become a permanent change?  Will all of NBC's Olympic coverage be Stamford-based moving forward or will it be based on the location (they'll obviously be on-site for the LA Games)?

Frankly, I can see the benefits to both.  It's obviously much cheaper to not fly everybody out to the host city.  And the quality of the production hasn't exactly suffered.  However, with the last three Olympics having taken place in Asia, that's a lot of irregular hours for the crew, whereas they'd be on a much more normal schedule if they were in the same time zone.

I also like it that their analysts have a lot more flexibility.  They can go from calling the event to in the studio since it only involves walking a few hundred feet.  For hockey and curling, their game analyst has often been the studio analyst, as well.  However, not having anyone on-site limits the amount of athlete interviews they can do.  They've really only started to do them now...with athletes that have already returned home!

However, there are also none of those cultural pieces about the host city/country.  Those were unlikely to happen at the last two Olympics anyway because of COVID restrictions, but the Olympics are just as much about the host country as they are about the host city.  You need someone on the ground to tape those features, though.

Likewise, there's something missing without the host in the host city.  That's the biggest difference, and it's obviously noticeable.  You don't get the feel of what things are like in the host city during the Games.  They're doing the best they can in Connecticut, but there's only so much you can do when you're trying to describe the atmosphere by watching a picture on a TV monitor.

Of course, COVID is a factor here, as well.  COVID restrictions plus the distance to Tokyo and Beijing certainly impacted the decision-making.  So, you'd have to figure that come Summer 2024, COVID restrictions are no longer a thing that people need to consider (at least, that's what we all hope).  If so, what NBC does for the Paris Games could be a good indication of their plans moving forward.

Now, I fully expect NBC to go back to normal in Paris.  By "normal," I mean their pre-Tokyo strategy where they're primarily based on location with a handful of events being handled in Connecticut.  Announcers especially I'd expect to be there.  And, yes, part of the reason for that is because of how easy it is to go back-and-forth between Paris and the East Coast.

So, really, it's more the Milan-Cortina Games in 2026 where I'm curious about what their strategy will be.  Because, thanks to the NFL's ridiculous 17th game, every Winter Olympics moving forward will have a Super Bowl in the middle of them.  Which means NBC's crew will again have to split duties between the Olympics and the Super Bowl like they did this year. 

And, assuming their rumored succession plan is accurate, Mike Tirico and Kathryn Tappen will both be part of the Sunday Night Football game broadcast starting next season, with Maria Taylor heading up Football Night In America.  Even if it's not next season, it'll certainly happen by 2026, taking three Olympic hosts out of commission.  (There's no way Tirico would try to call the Olympic Opening Ceremony from Milan then do play-by-play of the Super Bowl two days later, right?)

Those 2026 Winter Olympics are in Italy, though, which, like France, is a much easier country to get to than China.  Do they have Lester Holt or Craig Melvin host from Milan for those first few days, then send them over right after the Super Bowl?  Or do they just say "Screw it!" and base everybody in Connecticut again?  And what about the people who won't be doubling up?  Are they based in Italy or Connecticut?  Or a combination?

If I had to guess, I'd say they go back to "normal" and go with the on-site/remote combination.  NBC spends too much money and is too invested to have its entire base of operations located at NBC Sports headquarters rather than in the host city.  But their role as the Super Bowl broadcaster in Winter Olympic years, and the fact that so many of their people work on both the NFL and the Olympics, certainly creates a unique set of problems.

Regardless of what they end up doing, the quality of their broadcast shouldn't suffer too much.  Because, as we've seen, they're able to pull it off just fine remotely.  Is it entirely the same?  No!  But, just like everything else, it has its pros and cons.  Both choices do.  Which is why I'm curious to see what NBC's coverage of the 2024 Paris and 2026 Milan/Cortina Games ends up looking like.