NHL2Night axed again

[DevilMinder]

I may be in the minority here but, good riddance. Bye bye Melrose, see ya clement. Ciao Pang. Bye 4 other people I cannot even remember. The main venue for the public to see hockey is through the five bumbling idiots on ESPN/ABC.

The whole broadcast unit was a waste of ESPN money. They pick the wrong things to highlight (avs/giggy puff) and mananged to become so stupid as to be below NASCAR intelligience requirements. I will miss Bucci a little because he had genuine passion.

Last years butchering of the finals told me that this unit was beyond redemption. There was no kick, no real reason to stick around and see what they thought about the games.

[NJD Jester]

I may be in the minority here but, good riddance. Bye bye Melrose, see ya clement. Ciao Pang. Bye 4 other people I cannot even remember. The main venue for the public to see hockey is through the five bumbling idiots on ESPN/ABC.

The whole broadcast unit was a waste of ESPN money. They pick the wrong things to highlight (avs/giggy puff) and mananged to become so stupid as to be below NASCAR intelligience requirements. I will miss Bucci a little because he had genuine passion.

Last years butchering of the finals told me that this unit was beyond redemption. There was no kick, no real reason to stick around and see what they thought about the games.

I've been screaming this from the rooftops for seven years.

Everybody is sooooooooooooooo quick to slam hockey for being hockey. Ratings suck because of fighting, or foreign players, or the difficult rules, or the damn conference names....whatever. To me, the NHL has been held back because the television product isn't compelling. If a sport can draw 18,000 a night in most parts of the United States, it can do better than the anemic ratings hockey gets.

To me, the NHL's problem is:

1. There has never been a way to translate the speed, passion and excitement of the live game to television on a night-to-night basis.

2. The game has been marketed to casual fans who'll never watch hockey to begin with. Pitch the game's intensity (read: Physical play) to the youth market, and watch the same kids you watch Jackass, the WWE and the X-Games tune in for a scrap or two a game.

3. The announcers SUCK. All of them (save for Doc). Don't give me "Pang's OK" or "JD can be good." These guys aren't a bunch of Summeralls and Maddens. There's no reason to keep the same crew together for a decade, especially when the ratings indicate it just isn't working.

4. Hockey will never be seen as a major sport until it's treated like one. And that means a comprehensive nightly highlight show, a non-negociable schedule, and an approach in which hockey fans don't feel like they're watching a remedial course for newbies every nationally broadcast game. Dude, I know what icing is; tell me why the lefty D-man isn't on the PP point.

<JESTER>

[DevilMinder]

Don't get me started on that NHL Rules thing. I love Shania and all but you don't see Britney Spears explaining a quarterback sneak on the damned NBC broadcast of a Giants game. Its not that the rules are hard to follow NHL, its the damn broadcast team who can go 10 minutes without saying one on ice event!

[njdevils783]

Yeah but were there rating ever there for these shows? If not what would make another network pick up the sport if it seems to be dieing?

[NJD Jester]

Yeah but were there rating ever there for these shows? If not what would make another network pick up the sport if it seems to be dieing?

I ask again:

* A franchise in 24 major American markets in nearly every key geographical location.

* A national television contract

* 24 teams averaging at least 14,500 a game.

* International fan interest.

Who's dying again? Besides the Mainstream Media, which is dying to get rid of the sport?

<JESTER>

[njdevils783]

Yeah but it cant even come close to competeing with football, baseball, and even basketball. Hell nascar is becoming America's "4th" sport

[Triumph]

I hope we wouldn't resort to conspiracy theories against the NHL, the mainstream media doesn't hate it, but it isn't profitable to cover it. Its television ratings stink. Where it does great is in filling seats.

Here's the problem with the NHL:

1. Intermissions. I love hockey but I hate the intermission. There's too much dead time in a hockey game for it to work on television. Whenever I tried to watch a Caps game last year, I'd watch one period and then shut the TV off and try to do something productive (more likely, come post on this board). I don't see the NHL fixing this, it's not possible.

2. Obscurity of rules/terms. I know most people on this board don't understand this, but if you don't grow up with the game, you just don't know the rules and terms. And most people on the board say, so what, you learn. But these are people on message boards talking, a minority of a minority of die-hards. They could air Devils games at 2 AM and people here would still tape them and watch them.

3. Obscurity of players. The NHL is plagued by the fact that they don't have Gretzky anymore. Ask 80% of hockey fans to name the top 3 scorers this year, they couldn't do it. The fact that most of the best players don't get major mainstream press doesn't help.

4. Overload. How many sports are you going to watch? Hockey takes an investment of time that most people aren't willing to make. Bowling and poker do better on television, because most people have bowled or play poker. Basketball and football because people played them as children, and baseball too. But hockey has everything going against it: most people didn't play it, there's no interest in the youth/college version of it, it's difficult to bet on, and NHL fantasy leagues are no good either, IMO.

The NHL made the right decision to go after the casual fan, but it's still going to be a huge climb. They may as well give that up at this point, the people have spoken and chosen their favorite sports, and hockey just ain't going to be one of them. What the league needs is another Gretzky, because that sort of player gets people interested in hockey.

[njdevils783]

But with what the league is proposing, even Gretzky's name may get tarnished. What will it say to the common fan about our greatest player of all time if his records begin to be destroyed. With the proposed size of the goalie pads 70 80 and 90 goal seasons may become nothing special. I dont know i am probably making no sense to anyone but i try lol.

[NJD Jester]

I hope we wouldn't resort to conspiracy theories against the NHL, the mainstream media doesn't hate it, but it isn't profitable to cover it. Its television ratings stink. Where it does great is in filling seats.

But like you said, the TV ratings and the gate numbers sould even things out. Why does the women's NCAA tournament get more ink than the Stanley Cup playoffs in The Washington Post? Women's basketball doesn't draw flies in DC. There's zero interest compared to the crowds at the Caps games. Could it be that basketball is simply an easier sport to cover? Could it be that the NHL needs its own Title IX to even the playing field?

Here's the problem with the NHL:

1.  Intermissions.  I love hockey but I hate the intermission.  There's too much dead time in a hockey game for it to work on television.  Whenever I tried to watch a Caps game last year, I'd watch one period and then shut the TV off and try to do something productive (more likely, come post on this board).  I don't see the NHL fixing this, it's not possible.

I really, really don't think intermissions are what's keeping the ratings down. I mean, it give you a chance to watch NBA highlights on ESPN.

2.  Obscurity of rules/terms.  I know most people on this board don't understand this, but if you don't grow up with the game, you just don't know the rules and terms.  And most people on the board say, so what, you learn.  But these are people on message boards talking, a minority of a minority of die-hards.  They could air Devils games at 2 AM and people here would still tape them and watch them.

I never read "The Lord of the Rings." I saw the movie. Did I know every place, name or face on the screen. Hell no. Did I like when the elf killed the big elephant with his bow and arrow? Hell yes. I don't get why there's this notion that a physical, intense hockey game wouldn't transcend the rules and terms. Give them a reason to watch, and they'll watch (See: Cup, World).

3.  Obscurity of players.  The NHL is plagued by the fact that they don't have Gretzky anymore.  Ask 80% of hockey fans to name the top 3 scorers this year, they couldn't do it.  The fact that most of the best players don't get major mainstream press doesn't help. 

So you go from calling me Oliver Stone to claiming the mainstream press doesn't give the right players ink?

Hmmmmm...who to blame for the general public not knowing the stars of the NHL. Hmmmmm...what marketing genius could be behind the NHL's promotional push for the last decade. Hmmmmm...someone formerly of the NBA, perhaps?

4.  Overload.  How many sports are you going to watch?  Hockey takes an investment of time that most people aren't willing to make.  Bowling and poker do better on television, because most people have bowled or play poker.  Basketball and football because people played them as children, and baseball too.  But hockey has everything going against it:  most people didn't play it, there's no interest in the youth/college version of it, it's difficult to bet on, and NHL fantasy leagues are no good either, IMO. 

Fantasy hockey no good? Oh, you must be in the wrong leagues then

You make a good point that many people haven't "grown up with the game." But that's a racial and demographic problem the league will need generations to correct. For the moment, I think the real question is how to get more hockey fans watching hockey on TV. They're out there...how do they get to ESPN three nights a week?

The NHL made the right decision to go after the casual fan, but it's still going to be a huge climb.

You lost me there, bud. THERE ARE NO CASUAL FANS TO ATTRACT!!!! The fans who watch football, basketball and baseball, and don't watch hockey, are just not going to watch hockey. Meanwhile, marginal hockey fans are bored with the sport because it's been dumbed down, played out and oversold for a group of people who are never coming to the rink. Bettman and Co. castrated the game to get some basketball fan from Nebraska to watch Sergei Federov. Sorry, didn't work; give the game back to the Dale Hunters of the world, and watch this whole ship stop sinking.

<JESTER>

[NJD Jester]

But with what the league is proposing, even Gretzky's name may get tarnished. What will it say to the common fan about our greatest player of all time if his records begin to be destroyed. With the proposed size of the goalie pads 70 80 and 90 goal seasons may become nothing special. I dont know i am probably making no sense to anyone but i try lol.

You're making sense, save for one thing: the "second coming" of Gretzky will do little to turn the NHL into "must see TV." Unless they clone him 29 times...

<JESTER>

[shrubbery]

Why concentrate so much on the North American market when it resists so much? There's a great interest in hockey in Eastern Europe and Scandinavia. The NHL has to figure a way to penetrate this market interest.

There's a precedent. Look at football teams in Europe and the Asian market. Manchester United, Real Madrid, etc have all done tours that direction.

[Triumph]

You ask why the NCAA Women's tournament gets more coverage than the push for the playoffs. It's simple. The Capitals are out of the playoffs. So many hockey fans, the marginal ones, are the kind that root and follow only their team. That's why you see such decent gate numbers around the league, and such awful ratings for nationally televised games. Part of the reason for this is the fact that there is such awful coverage for the NHL, but I don't see more Capitals fans being generated by more coverage on the rest of the NHL in the Washington Post, nor do I see enough ratings on nationally televised games to say there should be more.

Intermissions may not be the reason, but in my mind they're part of the problem. How much dead time is that? So much time for the casual fan to flip around television and forget about the game.

Physical, intense hockey will only sustain interest as long as the hockey is physical and intense. Come on, how many people watched the 1980 Olympics, but how many of them knew who Marcel Dionne was? You get a lift from that kind of hockey, but it just isn't permanant. Every sports-playing male in my grade school/middle school picked a side by 95 about the Devils or the Rangers, but how many of them still follow hockey? You can't sell people on watching the best, all the time. It's why basketball has hit a ratings slide since Jordan's gone. Everyone had the three a$$holes in their middle school who had a Chicago Bulls jacket.

Are you telling me the NHL got more promotional before Bettman? I really can't say, but I have to doubt that. You can't promote most stars in the NHL, it's sad but it's true. The most electrifying players only play half the game. Plus, more than half of them have strange names and are not from the United States.

The Dale Hunters of the world are dying. The brawl mentality is too. That's no way to sell the game of hockey, because the fights are a sideshow and are not compelling enough to keep people who wouldn't be otherwise interested in hockey interested.

When I say Gretzky would be a good thing to happen to hockey, a player like that would only be a short-term solution. But more people interested in hockey with a player like that would be a good thing, because I honestly think the game is the best out there, and would sell itself better, if more people knew about it. The important market is kids, and getting them to play the game. On the street where I live back home, the 8 and 9 year olds play hockey now. I just hope most of them aren't like the kids who play soccer; love to play, hate to watch. For the future of the sport, Bettman and the owners have to ensure that those kids and kids like them all over Northern New Jersey will be watching the Devils and Zach Parise through the next decade.

[JesterDevil]

Bad press is good press. Look at the NFL and the NBA for example. How often do you hear of either a drug releated charge or a sexual assualt charge etc... against one of their players? Every other week right? So you hear about it in the news ala SportsCenter. The Bertuzzi incident for example, it became media crack and people had to have it, even someone who hasn't seen hockey ever (people at work just couldn't stop talking to me about it and haven't watched a game before). How much do you want to bet that if the Avs and Canucks met this year again, it'd be the highest American rated NHL game in history? Bertuzzi is a household name now. Even my mother in law who has no clue about anything knows his name and # and what team he plays for.

My point being, 99% of the time the NHL players are respectable people while the majority of America apparently doesn't like that. They want the WWE style or the NBA/NFL thug.

Its sickening that being so disrespectful has become so marketable.

Edited March 23, 2004 by JesterDevil

[njdevils783]

Bad press is good press. Look at the NFL and the NBA for example. How often do you hear of either a drug releated charge or a sexual assualt charge etc... against one of their players? Every other week right? So you hear about it in the news ala SportsCenter. The Bertuzzi incident for example, it became media crack and people had to have it, even someone who hasn't seen hockey ever (people at work just couldn't stop talking to me about it and haven't watched a game before). How much do you want to bet then if the Avs and Canucks met this year again, it'd be the highest American rated NHL game in history? Bertuzzi is a household name now. Even my mother in law who has no clue about anything knows his name and # and what team he plays for.

My point being, 99% of the time the NHL players are respectable people while the majority of America apparently doesn't like that. They want the WWE style or the NBA/NFL thug.

Is sickening that being so disrespectful has become so marketable.

Wow i could not agree with this more.. very well put.

It's a sickening thought but Americans thrive on other people suffering. They want to hear about players going to court, or see someone make a fool of themselves. Look at reality TV.

[NJD Jester]

You ask why the NCAA Women's tournament gets more coverage than the push for the playoffs. It's simple. The Capitals are out of the playoffs. So many hockey fans, the marginal ones, are the kind that root and follow only their team. That's why you see such decent gate numbers around the league, and such awful ratings for nationally televised games.

I'm sorry, but that's just illogical. I understand hockey being a regional sport, and I understand hockey fans getting all kinds of bitter when their team is eliminated. But the Post did a two-page, team-by-team spread for the women's NCAA tournament. That's one more page than their hockey preview, and probably two more than their NHL playoff preview. I refuse to believe that the audience for women's basketball is that larger in the DC area, especially considering the ink the Post gives the sport on a daily basis.

Part of the reason for this is the fact that there is such awful coverage for the NHL, but I don't see more Capitals fans being generated by more coverage on the rest of the NHL in the Washington Post, nor do I see enough ratings on nationally televised games to say there should be more.

I've been in DC for nearly a decade now, and I've never met a single Caps fan who wasn't interested in what the rest of the East was doing in the postseason.

Intermissions may not be the reason, but in my mind they're part of the problem.  How much dead time is that?  So much time for the casual fan to flip around television and forget about the game.

I'll give you the flip factor is high. But no more so than for (yawn) baseball.

You can't sell people on watching the best, all the time.  It's why basketball has hit a ratings slide since Jordan's gone.  Everyone had the three a$$holes in their middle school who had a Chicago Bulls jacket.

So true...I hated to see the MEadowlands 75% Bulls fans during Jordan's visits.

Are you telling me the NHL got more promotional before Bettman?  I really can't say, but I have to doubt that.  You can't promote most stars in the NHL, it's sad but it's true.  The most electrifying players only play half the game.  Plus, more than half of them have strange names and are not from the United States. 

No, I'm just saying that Bettman was brought in to expand hockey's fanbase. He's failed to grow new stars, failed to grow the fan base, and in the meantime, alienated the die-hards.

The Dale Hunters of the world are dying.  The brawl mentality is too.  That's no way to sell the game of hockey, because the fights are a sideshow and are not compelling enough to keep people who wouldn't be otherwise interested in hockey interested. 

Who said anything about fighting? Hunter was a physical player back when the NHL was a physical game. You still see it sometimes, but for the most part it's two teams skating around for three periods shooting the puck into the other guy's shin. Go back to a hardcore divisional schedule, like Marty suggested.

<JESTER>

[GA Devil]

Let us not forget another reason all these sports (with the exception of NASCAR) receive more television exposure in the U.S.:

Cultural Diversity.

In baseball, football, and basketball the minority youth have scores of potential heros to choose from. LeBron James, Yao Ming, Ichiro Suzuki, and Donovan McNabb receive SOOO much exposure and coverage because people of all races and economic status have an emotional investment in these guys.

Face it, the inner-city youth of today couldn't give two hoo-hoo's about the captain of the Calgary Flames and how many goals he winds up with this season.

They have no idea who Grant Fuhr is.

They certainly have no interest in a scrappy Inuit who plays in Nashville, even though he perservered through his brother's suicide.

It probably all stems from the fact they didn't play a lick of street hockey, nor do they know anyone who did.

That's a gap that is difficult to close. Frankly, I do not know if it could ever be.

[NJD Jester]

Its sickening that being so disrespectful has become so marketable.

True, and a good post. But I think what people miss about the NHL are the characters. The tough guy/goons who didn't need to score 40 goals to make you want to go to the game. The NHL has run away from marketing the few players they have left like this either because they don't score enough (Stevens, Peca, Ricci, Barnaby) or because they're all on a team half of whose ratings don't count in the Nielsen's (Toronto).

I think had the NHL pulled back from the Federov/Forsberg/Sakic marketing and highlighted the more physical players over the years, maybe some of those mythical casual fans would have discovered the sport.

<JESTER>

[PeteyNice]

Don. allegedly there is an NHL Channel in Canada. They show classic games, highlight shows and go around and show bits of each live game a la CBS during the early rounds of the NCAA tournament. I would love to get it here but it is not available in America.

*nod* I do know of its existence. Thus my "it is playing The Legend Phil Esposito 6 times".

Go to TSN. Along the top banner there is something called "NHL Network". Click that, then schedule to get an idea of their programming. Friday they have Game 2 vs Detroit (the famous Neidermayer goal + hero Dowd).

What I meant by "I don't know about it..." is that I'm not sure it adds anything to my viewing pleasure. I think there is too much hockey in my life already without needing to spend another $3/month. Maybe I'll order it in the summer. Or next year when there is no NHL hockey.

Heh. Oooookay. I was checking out what I had available for specialty channels. I noticed that WTSN (womens TSN) was gone, so I checked into it. Apparently most of the specialty channels are bleeding cash. While "Canadian Idol" 20 second ads are going for $30,000, the same ad on ESPN Classic Canada will cost $11. The only specialty channel that is making a mint in Canada: Lonestar. It shows western movies from the 50s and 60s. It has a staff of two people.

We should make some kind of ad for the Devils and put it on ESPN Classic Canada. I'll cough up the $11. (-:

I am so envious. I would gladly kick in $3 a month for the NHL Channel. You have to understand, CI is the only saving grace for a hockey fan in the US. Classic Sports never shows hockey games (and when they do 2/3 of the time is it a Rangers game from the 94 playoffs). To get a channel that even considers showing game 2 from the 1995 finals would be huge (and not just because we lost our power that night so it is the only Finals game we have played that I never saw live).

[Pepperkorn]

They have no idea who Grant Fuhr is.

Isn't he the QB of the team that wears cheese on it's head?

[GA Devil]

<----- *GROANS*