The Learning Leader Show With Ryan Hawk - 033: Erik Rydholm – How To Become ESPN's Most Powerful Producer

Episode Date: July 2, 2015

Episode 033: Erik Rydholm – How To Become ESPN’s Most Powerful Producer I am always fascinated to learn about how something great gets created… In addition to that, I love to learn about the day to day process on how that same thing continues to be great and improve on a daily basis.  Erik Rydholm shares the details behind how three great TV shows were created and the work it takes on a daily basis in order to continually improve.  This is an incredible episode of The Learning Leader Show.  Erik is extremely intelligent, engaging, and giving.  I love this episode. Erik Rydholm is Executive Producer of Pardon The Interruption (With Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon), Around The Horn, Dan LeBatard is Highly Questionable.  Erik has pioneered the growth of PTI as the program has increased ratings and viewership each year since its inception, and it earned the 2009 Emmy for Outstanding Studio Show. Episode 033: Erik Rydholm – How To Become ESPN’s Most Powerful Producer Subscribe on iTunes or Stitcher Radio. The Learning Leader Show “Here's my only real management philosophy: I turn the org chart upside-down—it's the responsibility of the boss to set and maintain the foundation from which everyone else in the company builds” Some Questions I Ask: What is one characteristic all successful people share? What is it like to work with two legends? Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon? Will type of disruption is Netflix causing in the television world? Walk us through a pre-show meeting…  What’s the process for creating a show? What are the most impressive aspects of Bill Simmons that we don’t already know? What are some things about you and your work that would surprise us? Which individual leader has had the most influence on you? In This Episode, You Will Learn: Why curiosity is so vitally important in successful leaders About the 10 laugh out loud moments a day he has with Tony Kornheiser and Mike Wilbon Erik’s thoughts on Steve Jobs’ leadership and how he’s different The tools Erik and his team use to create the show and share ideas The importance of a leader setting the foundation The elements that define a quality life  “Leadership is a decision making job” Continue Learning Read This Article by Richard Deitsch about Erik: Erik Rydholm Follow Erik on Twitter: @ErikRydholm You may also like these episodes: Episode 001: How To Become A Master Connector With Jayson Gaignard From MasterMind Talks Episode 002: How To Take Over And Set Bigger Goals With Chris Brogan Episode 004: How Todd Wagner (and Mark Cuban) Sold Broadcast.com To Yahoo! For $5.7 Billion Episode 010: Shane Snow – How To Accelerate Success Using Smart Cuts Did you enjoy the podcast? This was a jam packed episode full of great content.  Erik Rydholm is a thoughtful leader who brought huge value to The Learning leader Show.  Who do you know that needs to hear this?  Send them to The Learning Leader Show! Episode edited by the great J Scott Donnell   Bio: Erik Rydholm   Erik Rydholm is Executive Producer of Pardon The Interruption (With Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon), Around The Horn, Dan LeBatard is Highly Questionable.  Erik has pioneered the growth of PTI as the program has increased ratings and viewership each year since its inception, and it earned the 2009 Emmy for Outstanding Studio Show.

All anyone is trying to do in business is reward people's investment. There are some businesses where they ask for your cash. That is one form of currency that a customer would have. In this business, we are asking for the customers' time. So when you made the distinction, you said, you said viewers, there's also customers. I look at our viewers as customers, and what they have is they have a walletful time. And I want them to spend that time with us. So we have to make it worthwhile for them every single day and provide a great return on that

investment of time so that they say, I want to spend more time on that show tomorrow. Are leaders born or are they made? Our host, Ryan Hawke, believes that leaders can be made through determined, focused work on learning the art and science behind the makeup of other successful leaders. Now it's time to inhale knowledge and exhale success. You're listening to The Learning Leader Show with Ryan Hawk. Welcome to the Learning Leader Show. I am Ryan Hawk.

Incredible guest tonight, really intelligent, deep thinker, really smart guy. It's Emmy Award winning executive producer Eric Rideholm. He executive produces three shows that all air on ESPN. That's part in the interruption around the horn and highly questionable. He's an incredibly smart, deep thinker, very, very curious guy. I loved the back and forth we had on this conversation tonight. A couple of things we got into. The importance of energy and curiosity.

Eric talks a lot about people he's met that have those two traits and how that has led them to success. Also, the potential disruption in the television world. Thinking about Netflix and Amazon, Apple, those types of companies who are doing things that could disrupt and kind of already are disrupting the world of TV. and also his process for creating the TV shows every day. He does three shows every single day. It's pretty incredible. Ladies and gentlemen, without further ado, it's Eric Ride Home. Okay, Eric, you've been around a lot of very successful people in your life,

and you happen to be one of those people as well. What is the one common characteristic or trait that the successful people you've been around share? Um, you've limited it to one. Let me put a blend in there, which is because I think they're intertwined. Um, energy and curiosity. Um, if you, if you don't have energy in your life, if you are not feeling every day, uh, like you want to on some level, assert yourself, you do not have the ability to be curious. You let life happen to you rather than going ahead and taking action. And so for me, what's interesting about it is that the people who have been the most successfully

are not the smartest. It's not raw intelligence or anything like that. It's people with drive and people who are curious not just about things that they know something about. Obviously, it's about stuff that they don't know about. And if they fail, if they make a decision and they fail, they're curious as to, Why, and they have no problem going ahead and reversing course, because the thing about leadership is you ultimately, like leadership is a decision-making job. You make decisions, and you are going to make bad decisions.

It is inevitable. We all do. None of us is perfect. And so when you make them, that's okay. But the key is when you make a bad one, recognizing it and changing. And that's how that's sort of foundationally how I see it all. It all starts with energy and curiosity and then leads through being self-aware. I love that, Eric.

And I don't know if you've looked at or no, we did talk about my website, Learningleadershow.com. That's the curiosity aspect of it is so huge to me. And I even right, are you massively curious? Because I think it's not only being curious, but being really, really into thinking and questioning everything into asking, simply asking the question, why? you know, why do we do it this way? And especially that there's nothing worse than when somebody says, well, that's just the way we've always done things, you know?

And so I love that that was your answer. And so I actually just prior to us recording read this piece by a guy named James Altisher about bad leaders and what are their characteristics. And he lists some of them out. And I'm curious because you obviously know what great leadership looks like. what are the characteristics of people who are not good leaders? Is it just the inverse of what you just said, or is there something in addition to that? I mean, I suppose there's a character. I mean, that's part of it, I would suppose.

But I can only speak from my own personal experience because I don't study leadership broadly. I can just tell you that I have been an employee under people who I did not respect as leaders way back early on when I was first out of college. And those were the types of people who, I think, put too much stock in the org chart. They saw themselves in a position of authority, which they thought meant was a position of superiority. And that's a confusion that they had. But what they felt then is that it was their job to tell everybody what to do when it's actually their job to support what everybody does. and the way I've most effectively looked at an org chart,

and if I have any management philosophy, it boils down to this, just turn that org chart upside down. The person who traditionally is on the top of the org chart is actually the foundation piece of the organization or should serve as the foundation piece of the organization, so that what they are doing is setting the foundation so that everybody else can go ahead and succeed at their jobs. I love it, man.

I've read stories where you've seen, said that. And that's that's literally one of the lines in the story that intrigued me the most about you because in addition to producing and creating really, really popular, wildly successful TV shows to see that you have this thought process around org charts and management and leadership really struck a chord with me. And so let's take a quick step back, Eric, for the people who are listening who don't know you. I'd love to give you the floor here to explain your little mini bio of what you're currently doing and how you got to this place. Yeah, sure.

So right now, I have my own small company in Washington, D.C., and we oversee three shows a day for ESPN, part of the interruption around the horn, and highly questionable. They run between 4.30 and 6 o'clock p.m. every day on ESPN. PTI was the first show, and we started that almost 14 years ago now. Prior to that, it's weird to run backward. Actually, let me start with this. I grew up in Chicago. I was the son of an ad executive, creative director, and then my mother, who stayed at home

and did an exemplary job, taking care of us and shaping us and molding us. And both mom and dad had a real balance of creative abilities, and I would say the more traditional organizational abilities. They had a really beautiful blend on it. And so that's why Dad was a successful executive. And Mom is a beautiful and talented artist as well as somebody who managed our lives so well. But so it was out of that that I aspired and I went through some creative education to do something creative in the world. And when I got out of college, I ended up in really a position that was for a few years that was not creative and was really struggling with it. and beating myself up about it.

I worked in television as first like a news writer and a news producer, ultimately. And it was limited. It was limited as to how much I could actually do, how much of it myself could ever be reflected in the work. And that sounds selfish, but it was something that I needed in order to give me energy and to grow. So along that way, about five years in, four or five years into my career, I decided I needed to start taking small risks. And one of the small risks I took was I wanted to learn how to invest.

It doesn't sound like that's a small risk. But anything that breaks your pattern in life is a risk. And this one was just one where I said, okay, I have $3,000 in my checking account. I should do something with this money rather than let it sit there. And I started calling around and one of my friends said, go see my brother. He knows how to invest. And so I went and saw his brother. And it was such a wonderful investing lesson that the first thing that came to mind,

and this is where the creative application came in. I said, what are you doing with this? I mean, this is so much fun. You've, like, combined investing with baseball statistics and humor. And so he said, I'm not doing anything with it other than investing. And I said, more people can benefit from this. And so out of that, my friend, his brother and I started a little newsletter for family and friends called The Motley Fool.

And those guys went ahead and brought it online in 1994. I was still working in news at the time, television news. And it started to grow. By the year 2000, I think we were up to 400 employees. Wow. And yeah, and then the bubble burst, the internet bubble burst, and we had to let go of so many people just to stay alive as a company. We held on by our fingertips, went down to 75 people.

Dave and Tom did a masterful and beautiful job at redefining the business model and setting it up in a way that has led to a great success and the company has rebounded so beautifully and it's done extraordinarily well and I'm so proud of it. But around that time, just after that, we were going through those massive changes in 2001, I got the opportunity, was approached by a guy I'd worked for for four months years before in television news, actually at ESPN named Jim Cohen, and he just, you know, he had seen an article that I had written and wanted to congratulate me on it. as we started talking, he said, oh, yeah, you're in Washington, D.C., because this had been

seven years before since I'd worked for him. And he said, you have to read Kornheiser and Wilhelm. And I said, yes, I revered those guys. And he said, what do you think of a show that would be based around them? We've been batting around that idea here, where they would just talk about the sports news of the day, to which I immediately said that I thought it could be on the air for 20 years and I put together 18 pages on how the show could work not because I wanted the job but because I wanted that intellectual exercise and that and to have that fun because we were going through such a tough time at the Motley Fool that I love this creative outlet and they loved the pitch and unexpectedly called me and said that he said my boss wants to hire you to do this show I said

Jim I haven't been in television for seven years and he said we'll get you help so I said okay let's do it so that's what we did wow and now it's what 14 years later a couple a couple additional shows in addition to pTI which you know ptii is known and i'm sure um and this is coming from someone who's not currently in the tv world but it's just an remarkable success and i you know like i said while i was i was preparing for our time together i was reading a lot about what people said about you. And it's pretty, it's got to be pretty gratifying that to be the guy who wrote those pages had made this big

audacious statement that you think it'll be on for 20 years. And now you look out and you're like, that's just six more. You'll probably go a lot longer than that if you guys want to. I mean, it's incredible. Well, I don't know.

I mean, you know, the thing is that the business is transforming right now. And so if it were stable and people continue to watch. television at the same rate and turn to television for the same thing that they used to, I would feel extraordinarily confident about that. But what I look at in television is a world that is ripe for disruption in a way that could be reminiscent of how newspapers were ripe for disruption 10, 15 years ago.

And before that, department stores and those types of things. And so when that happens and people's view and viewers have its change as they have, success obviously becomes relative. Relatively speaking, we could still be success, but the absolute numbers can diminish because there are more options for people to seek diversion or as creative and intellectual pursuits and outlets. And so it used to be when I was a kid, I remember quite well being bored. I don't know really how that's possible anymore because you carry in your pocket the world.

You have access to anything and everything that is happening, has happened, and might happen. And so if you are bored, that is on you. You have to take a hard look at yourself and say, okay, what am I doing wrong? Because I wish that every day was 100 hours long and every week was a month. month long and every month was a year long. There's so many things that I'm interested in want to do and pursue. And so I am not concerned about disruption in terms of this. I think it only open opportunities in the same way that disruption in the media business

opened up an opportunity for the Motley Fool, a couple of guys who are, you know, Xeroxing off a newsletter and Kinkos, you know, that we ended up having good success with that. So this only open up opportunities, but in the shows as they are, I don't know, I hope that they last 20 years. I love doing them. So that's a fond hope. But we'll sleep. By disruption, do you mean, I mean, obviously, that's with our cell phones and

social media, but do you also mean like Netflix, Amazon, everybody being able to just kind of. Exactly what I mean. They're on-demand viewing. So is that, like, do you see the potential for the model to be changing for how a show like, like, I'm thinking of PTI, who it's like, it's on, it's on people. people's calendars almost, like this is what I'm going to do when I get home from work or whatever. And maybe even the age range of who watches that show, if it's starting to skew older,

or people have grown up with the show. If you started with a 25-year-old guy 14 years ago, well, then he's, you know, that guy is a little bit older now. Is that what we mean by that? I'm not so worried about the age adults. We've always been able to replenish our audience because what ends up happening, you know, Because people sort of start adopting the show when they're younger, maybe in high school or in college. And then as they grow, they actually move away from the show a little bit because in their

20s and 30s they're working extraordinarily hard. And then we have higher viewership among the older ages, obviously. So there's always sort of a replenishment with people who are slowing down who start to watch more television and we were always pretty good in the beginning with the younger folks. But yeah, I mean, I think that obviously with the devices, younger folks, folks have more options. What I'm actually speaking about, though, is the Netflix's and the Amazon's and the apples, the YouTube's, the Hulus, the vessels, these are not, what you see now is not what they will

be. They will be significant, I believe, transformative media players. The standard in television and in entertainment, more than. broadly has been television over the last 20 or 30 years and it's been extraordinarily stable in its business model where people pay a certain amount to the cable company and the cable company pays a certain amount to the stations which it has on there and ESPN has been a wonderful, it's developed a wonderful business model based off of that and that's great but that model is facing challenges because it's gotten very expensive for

people at home obviously to have all of those channels in one bundle and so as you see so many of the cable providers are now trying to provide mini bundles and smaller bundles of channels and we'll see how that all sort of plays out. But the one thing I can see happening is folks like Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, Apple. I could see them ultimately, especially when it comes to sports television, moving into sports rights. And if that happens, you have major new players with very, very deep pockets. In fact, much deeper pockets than anyone in the media landscape has right now. I'm not saying anything controversial here. Everyone knows that this is a possibility. So that's interesting to me and a possible source of change, but also in addition to the bundle

going away, what also seems to be going away, and this is something that you sort of alluded to, is the notion of just watching a 24-7 linear network. I mean, I was talking with a guy recently, and he said he was sitting with his daughter, who was an high schooler, and she was asking him why he was flipping through the HBO channels. And he was like, well, I'm looking for something to watch. And the concept to her was entirely foreign. Why would you flip through channels to watch movies that might be halfway done? Why wouldn't you just go and watch one from the beginning or watch a show?

And to him, that's how he grew up and was trained. So the notion of having a 24-7 linear network, that very notion is one that I think will be challenged in the not-too-distant future. I don't know how necessary they will be. Yeah, it's a great point. And so it leads me the question. You think of, you said the words, the words is transformative media players. And when I think of that and like disruption, I think of how Steve Jobs approached the music industry and how the initially when he was saying that, you know, people don't want to buy an entire CD if they only like two songs.

Or, and these big media guys just laughed them out of the room. And then obviously Steve kind of had the last laugh to how Sony and all those other leaders of those industries just basically collapsed because they didn't, they were scared to change or to understand where things were going. So you being obviously an intellectual leader, how do you get ahead of this change that is probably happening right now? Okay, here's where I will reveal myself to be not such an intellectual leader that you've just built me up to be, which is that my philosophy and what I'm most comfortable with is actually staying about a half step behind the curve. I am not focused on staying ahead of the curve because the folks who are ahead of the curve, there are a lot of pioneers. There was a famous saying back in when we were on the internet, the internet was just growing in the 90s. And I remember going to conferences and somebody says,

you have to be careful when you're a pioneer because pioneers were the ones who ended up with arrows in their back. And the, anyway, the point was that there are a lot of companies who go on the bleeding edge and fail. And that's not where I've been the most comfortable. where I've been the most comfortable is looking to figure out what people want, how they can access it easily, so it can be part of their life, and then provide the entertainment or enlightenment that I think that they crave. And so in doing that, like, let's look what I did. Okay.

I started a television show 14 years ago with Tony and Mike and with ESPN. That was not bleeding edge. You know, television had been around an awfully long time. PN had been around an awfully long time before we created that show. And so what I tend to look for is where people are rather than where they're going. Now, if I had nothing, if I had no responsibility right now, I might throw myself whole hog into guessing what's going to happen next and maybe taking a few small risks there in terms of maybe trying to hit something.

But no, we are, from my standpoint, I feel much more comfortable with playing inside. an existing model that already is delivering people rather than one that needs to attract new customers. It's so interesting to hear you say that because a lot of people I talk to, I don't know if they just want to seem like they're, and it is almost worn off on me a little bit as that kind of was the framework of my question and that people really are constantly thinking of how to get ahead of things. And your perspective was so interesting to me because it's like, no, you can find a way to

be very successful and basically listening to your customers and listening or in your case the viewers are understanding what they want and then crafting it around that. So two things on that. One, when I say it, when I say what I've said, I do prefer to go into a growing market. Okay. So rather than one that's shrinking. So that is one addition that I'll make to my statement there. And I can't remember the second point I was going to make sadly.

It's all right. No, it's good. You brought up, you know, Tony and Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon, and I know a lot of people listening to us, watch the show. And it feels to me like, you know, there's such a great camaraderie with those two. And I got to believe that you're right there with them, even though you're not the one on screen with them. What is it like working with those guys? What I can tell you is that if you can have a job where you come in and have 10 laugh out loud moments a day, you've got a pretty nice job. And at that point, I'm not even sure you'd call it a job.

And so that laughter is not born out of people trying to make each other laugh and gags. It comes out of a unique, wonderful, authentic connection that we've all had for so long. It's starting with the connection between Tony and Mike, which is what we tried to bottle up and serve in the first place. And they've been gracious enough to allow us to be players in their lives. But the connection that comes first and foremost is the rare chemistry between those two. And simply being a party to it, not just on the air as everybody gets to be. and we hope to share, but behind the scenes, where it goes on and on and on and on about sillier and sillier things and in potentially more offensive language.

But it is, it's a joy. And to be able to collaborate with people who not only love what they do, but want to only do what they do. They have no interest in doing the things that you do, managing and producing those types of things. They simply want to go out there. They look forward every single day. They organize their day around showing up, arriving on the set, and going after each other for a half an hour a day. And that is a complete joy. And I think that's shared across all of the shows, across around the horn and across highly questionable as well. We've been really lucky to work with people who have unique views of the world.

They have unique takes on the world. And because of that, it doesn't matter what topic comes up. These people will be thoughtful about it. And when they're thoughtful about it and they can make me think, then I feel like, you know, we're most of the way home. What's the preparation look like? Can you walk us through a pre-show, pre-recording meetings? Who all is involved?

You know, who does the majority of the talking? How does that, what's that look like? Yeah, I mean, it's a strange thing that's happened here in the last 20 years is that when we started The Motley Fool, I was in meetings all the time. And now we basically, our day is just a wonderful free-flowing meeting. We have an open office with just a sort of a news pit, if you will. It's just we're all gathered around a series of low-rise desks here. and we can all just communicate with each other all the time.

So the reason I make this point is that there are no sort of meetings and assignments and those types of things. Everyone knows their role. Everyone knows what they're coming in to do. And we have a format for the show. And what we really try and do is populate that format with stories every single day. So I wake up at 7.30 or so. And the first thing we do is we have a shared Google document.

And this, I'll speak specifically to the PTI experience here, but around the horn and HQ have the exact same setup where I hop on to the Google document. I start putting in stories as I research around and look at all the different websites that I look at and touch base with, start putting stories into the show with angles that I think could be interesting for the guys to discuss. And then as folks arrive into the office at 830, 9, 930, and 10, they just open up that Google document and there's stuff in there already. and then they just start adding it, moving it around, adding angles. And at that point along the line, Matthew Keller, who's the coordinating producer on PTI and has been with us since day one and is amazing and is responsible as the primary contact

and preparer of Tony and Mike for the day's show, he starts going through the stories with them over the phone just to make sure that they have a sense of what's coming up and to see what their energy level is like and to see whether they agree, disagree, whether the angle works, all that sort of stuff. So we have some pretty good idea by 1 o'clock in the afternoon what it is that's going to work or not going to work. I go over into the highly questionable taping at 1230 every day. That's done by about 1.30 every day. At 1.30, around the horn starts taping until 2.30. That show is run by Aaron Solomon and Tony Realli, and they pretty much handle that along with their really talented staff and a group of panelists. Then we start

taping PTI around 430 every day. And so all the shows end up somehow being on air at 435 and 530 every single day. And at 6 o'clock, I come up, log out of my computer and walk the 6 blocks home. Really? Wow. So there's no like you guys don't all get in a meeting around the table and say, okay, here are the topics. I'm thinking of like the newsroom, like the TV show, you know, like here's the rundown or whatever.

Here are the topics. And then and then there's there's potential disagreements. There's arguments. Occasionally people raise their voice. Like that's not happening with you guys? Well, I think it does, but it happens throughout the day rather than in a single meeting. I think single meetings, which were much more what I remember when we first started working and also which are portrayed in television shows, I think probably for reasons to juice up the drama.

Just don't, they're not part of what we do here. So we just have an open and collaborative working system. We all know our roles. And Matt and I, especially, go back and forth on stories, the time, especially after he's talked to Tony and Mike and has their sense of whether they're excited about something or curious about something. And we, of course, there are other people in the office as well. I mean, there is some nod at a meeting.

We go around the room once around 10, 30, or 11 o'clock every morning. But for the most part, people just put their thoughts into the document. And if something seems wildly off base, then somebody just says, hey, this seems wildly off base, and then we have a discussion about it. And for the most part, it's not in the structure of a single editorial meeting at 430 or anything like that or at 130 or whatever. It is just much more of a free flow and open environment where anybody can speak up and everybody is expected to as long as it serves the show and makes it reward the investment the viewers

putting into it. And that was the point that I forgot to make on the last time when I said I forgot my second point is that all you are doing with here with these shows, all we are trying to do, with these shows, all anyone is trying to do in business is reward people's investment. There are some businesses where they ask for your cash, that is one form of currency that a customer would have. In this business, we are asking for the customers' time. So when you made the distinction, you said, you said viewers, there's also customers.

I look at our viewers as customers and what they have is they have a walletful time. And I want them to spend that time with us. we have to make it worthwhile for them every single day and provide a great return on that investment of time so that they say, I want to spend more time on that show tomorrow. Exactly. It's kind of like that's the same. My feelings towards this podcast is I'm so gracious for all the people that listen to it, that I feel a huge obligation and responsibility to these people, especially when they're telling

their friends as I see the growth of it to make sure that it's done with high quality, with great guests like yourself. And so I think that's, I love that reward people's investment. I think that's a great way of putting it. And so like I said, in preparing for it, there's a lot of really impressive people who speak incredibly highly of you. And one of them that comes to mind is Bill Simmons, and he's been in the news lately for everything that he has going on with his role.

But I'm going to take it back a little bit. and he had said that he has huge admiration for you talking about, he says you just have an immense professional generosity with all of your colleagues. And that's literally, I feel like one of the best compliments a person can get is that the others view him, especially coming from a guy like Simmons, who's like the most honest guy that you see around, but that you have a professional generosity with colleagues when that might not always be the case in the world that we live in here?

Bill and I came into ESPN around the same time. And I actually didn't even know Bill for the first, probably five years at ESPN. He was on page two as a calmness, and we were doing the show. And it wasn't until, I think I met him at like an NFL draft party years later. And we finally met maybe after having exchanged notes or whatever. I'm such an enormous Bill Simmons fan because what Bill did reminds me so much of what we did with the Motley Fool. With the Motley Fool, we were just some people who at the time, I mean, nobody would give us jobs to write. So we just decided to start writing and that's what, and we created our own newsletter and that grew into an online site and that sort of, and that's what Bill did in sports, you know, and whatever it was, 1998, when he started his digital,

that he's Boston column, he just went in and started posting his columns and people. He started building a following, little by little, growing, growing, growing. And here's what he never gave up. Okay, so the two most impressive things I think about Bill, beyond anything that he's written and anything that he's done with 30 for 30 or anything like that. The foundation of his success to me, which I really admire is one, he's in a constant conversation with his audience, whether that's through mailbags. Heck, even when he's not actually putting the mailbag together,

if you're just reading the comments, you are seeing, you are being able to pull from a greater intelligence than that that is in your brain. And that helps, and if you're a curious person, that helps you come up with your own take something. Certainly, the Motley Fool, we had something similar. We have these message boards where everyone would talk about stocks. We'd say, ah, that's an interesting idea to write about. So that constant conversation keeps you fresh.

It keeps you relevant. And Bill understood that very early at a time when media wasn't in a constant conversation with its customers. In fact, it sort of avoided them. It sat there and people would write their stories and would never hear from anyone who read them, except unless they ran into them at a cocktail party, in which case people would be very nice to them. And I don't actually want to dismiss it. I'm sure they heard from them in other ways, but not as directly as they did.

and they didn't solicit it as directly as you can, as Bill started to, back in probably 98, 99, 2000. The second thing that I really admire about Bill is that Bill has taken his individual success, and he could have just sat on it and collected money for his individual success. But what he did is he tried to transform his individual success into a platform so that he could hire the people that he admired and believed in and wanted to help them. grow and develop into something larger than himself. And that doesn't sound necessarily, oh, Bill started Grantland.

That's great. That's rare. Because if you can get paid a huge amount of money just to do something on your own, most people in that don't then turn and say, I would like to grow something larger. I would like to take a risk. I would like to risk my reputation. I would like to risk my time, my investment of time. I'd like to risk all of this on others.

And when Bill did that, I just, I admired that hugely and wholly. And so Bill and I have gotten along for a long time. And, of course, he and I are much different in terms of the types of people we are. He has opinions on everything and he'll share them. Sometimes that's a real positive for him. In fact, it's the foundation of his success. And sometimes it's come back to bite him on some time on other things. I'm a producer.

So I just try and find those issues that people who have opinions on everything can speak about. and have opinions on, I don't actually necessarily have deep opinions on them myself. So my role is a lot different, and that's the case with my friendship with Bill, is that I think I look at things, I look at things differently. I just look at issues that could crop up rather than, here's what I want to do all the time. And he has been incredibly generous toward me, and I'm appreciative of everything he's done, and the stuff that he's lent to us both professionally and personally when we were here.

But I'm as eager as anyone to see what the next chapter is. Yeah, I was just going to say I'm obviously a huge, huge fan. I love this work. And I think I admire the process in which he has seemingly no fear to say what he thinks at all times or to fist pump when his Boston Celtics choose the guy he wants to pick while he's on national TV. I'm not really going to be picked up. I mean, that little stuff, like he's a polarizing guy. and I still wonder why there are people who don't like it because at least you have to respect the fact that the guy is willing to put himself out there, always say what he thinks.

And I feel like when you talk to anybody who's spent time with him or been around him, I haven't heard anything bad being said. It's always good, you know? You know what, though? It's okay to be a polarizing figure. It's okay to have people not like you. In fact, it can be at the root of a lot of success. Howard Coasell is the obvious one. that everyone points to from many years ago.

But our guys aren't universally beloved on our shows at all either. Every time you take a strong stance on anything, it's going to make you unpopular within a huge segment of the popular within the significant segment of the population or the viewers or the customers or management, any of that. And so that's not unusual, but the reason that these people are hired is to take strong stances.

So I'm never surprised, when they take them about a lot of stuff. Sometimes I'm disappointed or sometimes I feel like my job as a producer is to protect them from themselves. And everybody, I think, can benefit from having a relationship with somebody. We call it here on these TV shows a producer and some other businesses. They're called the consigliary. Other businesses, you know, there's a trusted advisor, a chief of staff, those types of things.

But whenever you're out there all the time in speaking, it's always nice to have somebody you can turn to to touch. you the truth and give you a good reality check just so that you don't overstep your bounds. But anyway, the point is Bill has built something really, really phenomenal. And let's remember he started it as a column, his own initiative on digital cities in Boston when nobody was paying attention. So you know he has the passion, he has the love. And in that, he didn't create just opportunities for folks in Grantland.

He created opportunities for people across the web who followed in his success and created their own. I thought for the first time, oh, it's possible for me to start a sports blog or it's possible for me to start a sport podcast. Yeah. It's possible for me to do this as well. Yeah. And getting back to the polarizing, and I completely agree, it's almost like the people who

have the most success are polarizing. People, you know, love them and people hate them and there's not a lot in between. But have you had to personally in your role working with, you don't have to name people, but, like, in a way you have to have, it almost like you have to, you have that, you you got to block that stuff out or just realize, hey, there are going to be a fraction of the people who don't like me because I didn't pick their team to win or because I said something bad about the star player on their team. So as a producer, do you find yourself having to deal with on-air personalities and trying

to help them and understand that people on Twitter or other forms are going to not like them? It's an ongoing struggle in a lot of ways. Here's what's interesting about the business that we're in is that it creates fame. People see you and they pay attention to you and it creates fame. Fame is an exaggerator. It exaggerates everything. It exaggerates your paycheck. It exaggerates.

Actually, a better word than exaggerate. It's an amplifier. It amplifies your paycheck. It amplifies your voice. It also amplifies your opinions. It also amplifies the voices of those who disagree with you. It also amplifies the attention you receive negatively if you say something that is off-base or wildly unpopular or frankly just silly.

And so the risk you take when you're here and you're in this business is that all of the good stuff is amplified, but so is the bad stuff. So if you don't want that amplification, if you don't want to hear those negative voices, it's tough to be in this business, you know? Like, it's never going to be easy for people to take, but I do think from a conceptual standpoint, it's just part of the deal coming in. And it's just like if you, like you said, you played quarterback. If you have a bad game, you're going to get booed if you're on a professional level,

certainly. You're going to get booed. And so there are people who take. that person and I can't believe our home fans would boo us. Well, the reason you're making all this money and playing game for a living is because of the home fans and because they love you or they're willing to pay the prices to see it. Everything that you're doing, your entire pursuit is amplified because of them. And so, of course, will the negative be. It just comes with the territory. And so it's just an accepted part of the business, or it should be an accepted part of

the business to me. And then you have to decide not to, in my mind, just dismiss everybody wholly. but to look for trends and nuggets and pieces and you say, ah, that criticism might be on target or they're saying it in a way, which is difficult for me to digest. But I think I'm, you know, being self-aware enough or having somebody around you who's self-aware enough and serving your interests to take a look at it and say, oh, there's something here we might actually be able to work on or there's some truth. Yeah. It's probably good to not, to ensure that as an on-air talent, you're not surrounded with

just yes, man, you got to have people that's in your inner circle who are willing to tell you, hey, this is really good or, hey, this could be better. Maybe you could improve in this aspect. And that's why I thought maybe in your role, you are kind of doing that for some of the people that you work with from time to time, because it's part of your job. Actually, you know, I'm really lucky that I work with people who are, who are, I would say, on the whole incredibly humble people when it comes to taking feedback. But one of the problems in television that happens a lot, I think, is that producers become wary

of telling talent, giving talent, tough feedback because there's a big discrepancy in the size of their paychecks and also in the size of their fame. And then in the perception of the power in there. And so what you try and do, I think a lot of producers do, and I've certainly done this. I remember an early job when I was working with sort of this legendary guy in Chicago in which I had a difficult time, sometimes bringing critical feedback to him because he was sort of this legend guy, and I'd grown up with watching him on the news, and it was very difficult for me. But that's your job, you know, and you have to do it, and you have to figure out a way to do it.

And the way that I have figured out to do it is the only way I know is set the context, early before you ever get in an argument. You just say, I am here to make you better, which means that sometimes it's all going to be great stuff. And I'm going to say, that was awesome. And then there's other times where I'm going to say, here's something that seems to be concerning me, or here's something that does concern me, or here's something that I think you need to work on.

And so by setting that expectation early, people are much more willing to listen to it when, in fact, it comes around. It's in the heat of the moment when people don't want to listen as much. Yeah, I got to believe it. probably takes time, credibility built up, and people that trust that you certainly just have their best interest in all your main primary focus is creating the best possible TV show and that they're a big part of it and you're doing your job to help. But what are some things or one thing or two things that you think the general public would

be surprised to hear goes into making these great award-winning TV shows? Well, that, okay, here's a couple of things. We are, I sit here and every head on the stick that you see for role play, I have a table next to my desk that I print out the photos on a color printer. I cut them out myself. I spray mount them to a piece of foam board. I have a collection of foam board behind my desk. I then cut them out with Exact O'9. glue them to paint can sticks.

So this is not a, this is in so many ways a rinky dink operation. You don't have interns or something? No, we have about six to eight people probably who work on each show from an editorial perspective, if that, actually, five or six, I think, from an editorial perspective on every show. And it's all hands on deck. But, you know, if you ever see odds makers, you know, or if you ever see any of the other games over under all the cards and all the props, I make by hand,

single day. All the faces in the background of PTI. I print up, I cut out, I tape onto there right before that day's show. Yeah, that's like all that stuff is done. And that's sort of, you know, what we want, I think, or maybe it's the only way I know how to manage is for everybody to sweat the small stuff as much as the big stuff. Wow, that definitely surprised me. I would not have expected that to be part of what you do on a day-to-day basis.

You can probably get someone to do that for free. Just post a thing on Twitter and be like, hey, I need somebody to stick this stuff on a stick. I know, but sometimes, like, when it happens, though, you're like, oh, that wasn't the right photograph or they didn't cut that out neatly enough around the edges or whatever. So there's an aspect of me that's always like, well, I know exactly what I want out of this. So I'll do it. And then there's a therapeutic aspect, which is like, okay, this is something totally different I can do during my day, which is mindless, you know? Like, I can be totally in a moment cutting out a head on a stick.

and so it's a nice little break. I love it, man. That's awesome, Eric. So I have one more question because I know you obviously are very, very busy and you got stuff going on like right now. But one more question. That's in regards to what this podcast is all about. As you know, it's the title of The Learning Leaders Show. My passion, my focus is on the art and science of leadership and understanding the journeys of others

so we can possibly affect our own. and everything that entails getting better, being inspired, trying to help and inspire other people. And so when you hear the phrase learning leader, what is your definition of a great learning leader? Yeah. Okay. Well, you know, you got, and what's so nice about the phrase that you have there is that learning connotes that there's input and not just output. You know, so many people see leadership as somebody who's telling everyone what to do and organizing everyone and telling you, you go here, you do this, you go here and you do this.

But when you're learning, it's actually, it makes it a two-way leadership. I'm listening. What's working? What isn't working? I'm also, my ears not just inside the organization, but outside. What's happening out there? What's working? What isn't working?

It's being able to go out and lead first with your ears and then have your mouth follow after that. And so that's when you say learning leader, that's what I think about. Perfect. I love it. And the, the, the, being able to be a great listener is such an underrated skill that people seem to not talk about, but it's everything, I think, especially when you're leading and managing other people. It's the fact that you're willing and able to look them in the eye, listen to what they have to say, respect them, and have, have a great dialogue and great conversation. And so I really do appreciate you coming on this podcast, Eric. I love to stay in contact because you're a really, really interesting guy with a great story that inspires me.

And I know I'm sure a ton of people listening. And we love the work that you do. So I want to thank you for putting that work together. It's entertained me. You have certainly rewarded me for my investment into the stuff that you do. And I know a ton of other people. so thank you so much, man. Well, you're welcome, and we're just going to keep,

and thank you for your business, and we're just going to keep chipping away and keep hoping to do that on this end. So fingers crossed, thanks again for having me, generous of you as well. Of course, of course, man. We'll definitely keep talking. So, all right, Eric, I will let you go,

and I look forward to talking you soon. All right, later, Ryan. Thanks, bye. This episode of The Learning Leader Show is over, but we have plenty more to keep you locked in until next time. Head over to learningleadershow.com for more information and to request your favorite entrepreneur, CEO, world class athlete, or anyone else that inspires you. You can also talk to Ryan directly by reaching out to him on Twitter at Ryan Hawk 12. Thanks again and we'll see you next time on the Learning Leader Show.