ESPN won't show hockey

[STL FANATIC]

Frankly, I've never cared for national broadcasts anyways.

While I like the local stations for Avs games, I have to admit that Gary Thorne made national broadcasts about 1,000,000 times better.

On a side note then, what do/did you think of John Kelly? I'm too young to remember any of his announcing years ago in St. Louis. I've heard he can be too much of homer, but I dunno.

My anger has died down since it's been so long without hockey, but I was very angry when the Blues let Ken Wilson go and then brought Kelly in.

Also, I think the majority of the ESPN announcers are/were horrible.

[Puckguy14]

A few things...

1) While the NHL has survived without ESPN, however, the NHL needs ESPN more than ever. The league has wanted to expand the game in non-traditional markets. They were able to do that with ESPN. They need a national TV for the sake of those revenues from playoff coverage and to try to expose the league one more time.

2) While we all love our home broadcasters. For me its all about Randy Hahn (who to supplement his income is doing "Evening Magazine" here in San Francisco and Drew Remenda (who could be the second coming of Don Cherry down the road) for the Sharks. The national tv again is expand it to all areas, so those roots in places like Las Vegas to Idaho to Arkansas (ok, I'm stretching a bit perhaps) to get those roots going so in a few years, there might be a fan base to grow on.

3) Gary Thorne is a great announcer, I do prefer Mike Emmerick, but both are VERY good at what they do. Clement is good, gotta love Panger ( I think I'm taller than he is ) A new TV deal will be interesting to see how it plays out.

4) As for a TV deal, while ESPN is a huge loss. Time to push for Fox and FSN. FSN desperately needs help and could be a good deal negotiating push. Or go the NBC route and take NBC and USA.

[jkrdevil]

A few things...

1) While the NHL has survived without ESPN, however, the NHL needs ESPN more than ever. The league has wanted to expand the game in non-traditional markets. They were able to do that with ESPN. They need a national TV for the sake of those revenues from playoff coverage and to try to expose the league one more time.

1. Like I said the NHL will have a cable deal it will be with the NHL for less or with another network. On top of that they still have a deal with NBC so there is some national tv coverage. Personally I think the NHL being on NBC is great because they promote unlike ABC.

4) As for a TV deal, while ESPN is a huge loss. Time to push for Fox and FSN. FSN desperately needs help and could be a good deal negotiating push. Or go the NBC route and take NBC and USA.

Like I said FSN is not viable because you can't get a national game. FSN is a regional network. There many of them but it's not a national network. If there was a national game on FSN half the markets wouldn't get it because of other local NHL or NBA games. On top of that there isn't a FSN in every market. I don't belive there is a FSN in New England. So FSN isn't a option. If not ESPN I think it would be USA or even Spike. Both of which I think would do a great job of promoting the game.

[tp49]

Gary Thorne Sucks. Just had to get that out of the way.

I like Gary Thorne. He's for the most part, the voice of hockey in the States and a pretty good announcer compared to some of the national announcers out there *coughjoebuckandjimnantzcough*. As for his partner Bill Clement, now that guy I cannot stand!

Yeah, when I think of Gary Thorne I think of hockey. Now, hearing him do baseball and college football weirds me out sometimes because I'm so used to hearing him during the Stanley Cup Finals. I miss hockey

I remember Thorne as an announcer for the Mets in the 80's in fact he wears a 1986 World Series ring.

[Gamingboy]

I don't like Hockey that much, especially Pro Hockey. But it's sad whenever a entire sport essentially tries to blow itself up. And by the looks of it, the NHL has succeeded.

So now the NHL has been officially bumped to the "second echelon" of pro sports leagues (where it joins the MLS, the Lacrosse leagues and Arena Football).

[slapshot]

I think ESPN will get the NHL again, but at a significantly lower price. As it's been said before, the NHL needs ESPN more than the other way around. There is no other nationwide cable sports network, because FSN is regional. If Fox bought the rights, it would either put them on broacast Fox channels (like it did years ago with the streaking puck) or FX. NBC could show them on NBC or USA, but I think the average sports fan is only going to look to ESPN or ESPN2, not FX or USA.

The NHL has fluffed itself up its own ass with this lockout. The NHL didn't realize the non-impact the lockout has. Not that it was a niche sport before, but except for the diehards, there aren't as many people missing hockey as the NHL would like you to believe. ESPN has found enough couonter-programming (like the 105th showing of the World Series of Poker) to fill in the gaps in the schedule.

And for the record, ESPN does show the AHL All-Star Game. Not the skills competition, but the game itself. I think ESPN has broadcast that game for at least the past 6 years. I think that ESPN should have broadcast a few AHL games this season, and especially the Calder Cup Finals.

[HedleyLamarr]

4) As for a TV deal, while ESPN is a huge loss. Time to push for Fox and FSN. FSN desperately needs help and could be a good deal negotiating push. Or go the NBC route and take NBC and USA.

NBC has already picked up the NHL for "Game(s) of the Week" broadcasts. Their deal is very similar to the deal NBC has with the AFL: No money given to the league, and both entities share the advertising revenue.

As for a cable partner, it will basically be ESPN (Why you gotta hide the truth about them, anyway? ) or bust. FSN is completely regional-based, and too many teams have deals with FSN to try a weekly night for them. USA doesn't get many viewers to begin with, and bringing the NHL won't help either party (Just check out their tennis ratings. The only other candidate that has the numbers and money would be Turner (TBS/TNT), but they have a lot of money tied to the NBA and other programming. And with ESPN dedicating more airtime (and getting higher ratings) to bar games, game shows, and "reality" TV shows, they certainly have more pull. And the longer the NHL and the PA dick around, the longer it will take (if at all) for the league to recover. It took the US fans almost 3 seasons to even think about MLB, and close to 6 seasons for attendance to reach levels they had pre-August 1994 (And it basically killed baseball in Canada....see Montreal), and the game is considered America's pasttime. It will take at least 15 seasons for the NHL to come close to today's figures in the US (Canadians will come back....it's either that or curling....), and probably longer.

[OB33]

As much as I miss the NHL I'd be ok if they didn't return as long as this guy comes back

[DEAD!]

As much as I miss the NHL I'd be ok if they didn't return as long as this guy comes back

Hey where's his mullet?

I'm afraid that the NHL will have some work to do ,especially in those non-traditional markets like Carolina, Florida, Tampa and Phoenix. Dallas, LA and San Jose will probably not be as affected, if at all because they all have decent fan bases.

What the NHL and NHLPA should do is assume that revenues will be nowhere what it was before the lockout, or even before the teams lost millions, get a CBA and start from there. They can reduce ticket prices to make it more affordable for fans, well except for Toronto.....

The NHL at half of what it was in terms of revenue will still be a strong and viable league.

As for announcers, Gary Thorne is a pretty good announcer. Sure beats Joe Buck, that's for sure. Mike Emerick did pretty well announcing the two NLL games on NBC.

[NJTank]

Hopefully the NHL ends up on USA or Spike, and Gary Thorne-less.

[Puckguy14]

To quote a source inside ESPN today, " I think ESPN will still have hockey, Erik. just not at 60 million per season." So how low can the price tag go?

Also, when Fox signed their first deal with the MLB in 1996 (two years after MLB's brutal strike), they had games on Saturday night on FX, and Thursday nights nationally on Fox Sports Net (if there was no game on regionally) let alone the Saturday game on the main network. You know if there was ever a way to get back and quick and to smother the States with coverage, that might be a way to go. USA is owned by NBC-Universal, however, its gotta be a great deal to tell ESPN to go play with their basketballs.

For a possible Fox-FSN deal:

*Saturday regional coverage on Fox

*Thursday night on FSN (to my knowledge when most the games are played during the week)

*Pregame on Saturday Fox coverage

*Bring back Peter Puck (or something similar to MLB on Fox's "Scooter" to explain the game to kids and adults)

*Assist in creating the NHL network in the US, to allow spillover coverage, HNiC coverage in the US.

*A clause to never attempt to bring back Fox Trax with the lone exception to have a speedometer for how fast a puck travels (IMHO the best feature of lé glow puck.)

[Mac the Knife]

To quote a source inside ESPN today, " I think ESPN will still have hockey, Erik. just not at 60 million per season."  So how low can the price tag go?

$2.50 CDN and a bag of Cheetos. That's how bad this is for the NHL. ESPN has them by the short-and-curlies, and they're going to milk it for all its worth.

While I agree with those here who say the NHL can survive without ESPN and its money, let's face it - the odds of all 30 teams surviving without a U.S. television deal of some sort is virtually nil.

It'll take years, perhaps as much as a decade, but you're going to see some teams disappear once the labor agreement is finally reached. The pie these guys are fighting over keeps getting smaller and smaller, and by the time they're done, there probably won't be enough crumbs to feed all 30 teams.

[Puckguy14]

I'll say this, if that June 12th drop dead date for the 2005-06 season is true, more than a handful of teams will go by the wayside if 05-06 is cancelled 4 months before the season would begin.

[WSU151]

On a side note then, what do/did you think of John Kelly? I'm too young to remember any of his announcing years ago in St. Louis. I've heard he can be too much of homer, but I dunno.

John Kelly is a good announcer, but sometimes he can be completely monotone and boring to listen to. Here's an example of his announcing: "Sakic has the puck............on to Forsberg.............to Hejduk.................back to Sakic..........................puck flies into the stands" and he'll get into that pattern for at least a period. Just pretty basic announcing. "OH THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!", "Super Joe!!' or "Peter the Great!!" are his trademark catch phrases when a goal scores.

He teams up with Peter McNabb (former Nordiques player, I think) and the two of them are the biggest homers in the world. But that's what they're supposed to do, since in essence, they're getting paid by the owner of the Avs. Mike Haynes on the radio is far much better to listen to than Kelly, and Haynes probably wears an Avs jersey to games, to give you some idea of how much of a homer he is. Oh well. It's fun to listen to.

[WSU151]

Hopefully the NHL ends up on USA or Spike, and Gary Thorne-less.

I don't understand why people HATE Gary Thorne. Emmerick is good - he does the Devils games, right? But in the USA, the Stanley Cup Playoffs and Thorne are like peanut butter and jelly. Oh well. I also respect the fact that Thorne has passed the bar for the Supreme Court. That's pretty impressive, I think.

I don't understand why people HATE Al Micheals either. I guess I'm so used to how they present the game and the tone and styles that I can't imagine someone taking their place.

[NJTank]

All Gary THorne does is scream it gets annoying after a while.

[WSU151]

All Gary THorne does is scream it gets annoying after a while.

Wow. I'd never thought I'd hear that reason, because I've never heard him scream, except after goals. I find him to be incredibly calm, especially compared to a high-pitch guy like Emmerick.

Suit yourself, though.

[jkrdevil]

My problem with Thorne is that he gets the names wrong all the time. I remember Game 7 2003 Devils vs Senators. With about 2 minutes to go Grant Marshall comes down the ice passes the puck to Friesen for the game winning goal. As Marshall is coming down the ice Thorne is calling him Gomez and even after the goal he calls him Gomez. The 2 players don't even look alike. He always gets the names wrong alot of time confusing what player plays on what team.

I don't like most of the espn announcers as they trash the league. Before the lockout thay always called the game boring. I don't care if it is boring you can't say that if your trying to market the game. This is the NHL's fault as they approve the announcers. The only one the really tries to hype and promote the game is Barry Melrose. I liked when Emrick did the games for fox and I like him on the Devils broadcast because he doesn't trash the league and the way he calls a game adds more excitment to it. That is what the league needs especially after this lockout.

Also, Puckguy where are you getting this FOX thing from. They did a great job when they did have the games. But currently the NHL has a deal with NBC. Dick Ebersole and NBC Sports does a great job of promoting the game. Also FSN isn't in every market. I don't believe there is a FSN in NEw England and it might end in New York with the MEt Network starting next year. The Devils are probably going to leave FSN and go to either YES or the Met network. That leaves only the Islanders who might leave. I doubt Cablevision will keep FSN with know team when they already have MSG. That would leave FSN with no Northeastern presence.

[slapshot]

There certainly is FSN in New England?FSN New England. I'm not sure what it is in New York, but FSN took over all the former SportsChannel regional networks.

[redsfan39]

fsn got replaced by MASN here Mid Atlantic Sports Network