Who Would Replace Stephen A. Smith On ESPN And First Take If He Runs For President?

Stephen A. Smith continues to tease a run for president, recently telling "CBS Sunday Morning" he is giving "strong consideration to being on that debate stage in 2027." And while it's debatable how serious his interest is, and whether he would be a viable Democrat nominee, any sort of campaign would likely require Smith to leave his role at ESPN, at least temporarily.

Smith is one of the network’s biggest individual draws, alongside Pat McAfee, Michael Wilbon, and Tony Kornheiser. Last year, he signed a five-year, $100 million contract. His daily studio show, "First Take," is one of ESPN’s flagship brands.

The show would likely continue without Smith. Before he signed his extension, executive Burke Magnus told reporters that "First Take" would remain part of the lineup if Smith departed.

"First Take would continue, obviously," Magnus said. "We’d figure that out. The great part about the environment that we live in, there is a wealth of talented people out there who, if given the chance, I think could also become superstars very easily on our platform. The format of First Take lends itself to that. It’s already an ensemble situation in many ways. So I don’t worry about that at all."

It’s worth noting that Shannon Sharpe was at ESPN at the time of Magnus’s remarks. Smith had previously hinted that Sharpe could be his natural successor. Today, the network does not have someone quite as ideal for the spot as Sharpe.

(Stephen A. Smith. Photo by Aaron M. Sprecher/Getty Images)

Still, ESPN and "First Take" would be fine. While Smith is a draw in morning sports programming on cable, ESPN faces little to no competition in the time slot. FS1 now airs a re-run of "Wake Up Barstool" head-to-head from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. ET. NFL Network, which ESPN now controls, re-airs "Good Morning Football." Neither the DraftKings nor FanDuel networks have found much footing or relevance.

If viewers want mid-morning sports talk on television, "First Take" is about the only option. In fact, the program wouldn't likely lose much, if any, in terms of revenue or long-term viewership if Smith left, despite his star power.

For one, ESPN is no longer as reliant on individual star power. Other than "PTI" and "The Pat McAfee Show," most programs feature rotating panels of analysts specific to the topic. Even "First Take" is not the one-on-one debate show it was when Stephen A. co-hosted with Skip Bayless and Max Kellerman. Most segments now feature Smith alongside two or three other commentators.

In theory, the network could rotate several pundits in Smith’s absence alongside new moderator Shae Cornette, who receives positive reviews internally, and see what and who sticks.

Chris "Mad Dog" Russo with his cartoon-ish, but signature personality is the best fit stylistically, but he is 66 years old, and the audience skews heavily toward young black men. An older white host who favors athletes of the past fits more naturally as a foil than as a successor to Smith.

Peter Schrager could be another option. The network has discussed building a new show around him in the 2 p.m. or 5 p.m. time slot. That said, Schrager is timid. Notably, he nodded along during Super Bowl week when Cam Jordan made several factual errors in what appeared to be a personal attack on Josh Allen in favor of Lamar Jackson. Schrager would need more edge to lead a daily ESPN debate show, or at least a stronger supporting cast. Perhaps ESPN could reunite him with his former co-host Kyle Brandt following its acquisition of NFL Network.

In any event, ESPN should consider the future of "First Take." Even with its success, Smith has become a tougher watch in recent months. With interests in politics, political commentary, podcasting, and producing, he doesn't appear all that knowledgeable or interested in discussing sports on a daily basis. 

Whether it is not knowing who coaches or plays on a team, Smith often looks disengaged from the topics and more focused on personal feuds. (See his ongoing issues with the Pelicans here.)

There is an argument that Smith would be better suited for a shorter, more produced show rather than two hours of off-the-cuff debate. He could be a fit at 5 p.m. as a solo host delivering a pre-written monologue that the network can ensure is factually and editorially sound. A 30-minute format would also allow him to focus on big-name interviews, during which he would not have to pretend to care about every game on the schedule.

Campaign or not, less Stephen A. Smith would not be a bad thing for ESPN.