NHL gives CBC the finger

[Fred T. Jane]

The Sena-whats? Is that the team with the centurion-looking dude for the logo? I thought they were the farm team of the Maple Leafs.

Funny. Just make sure you're not in our neighbourhood after dark...

[jkrdevil]

Right now, NHL hockey is beaten in the ratings by bowling and poker, so if the league has a shot at placing its best game in the driver's seat of its only truly national US network, it needs to do so.

But why? Why is catering to 1.1 million U.S. viewers, on a network that pays far less to the league, more important than 2.5 million Canadian viewers?

Because they are already getting a set price from CBC for the games. Where as with NBC the money the league makes from that depends on the ratings. So by giving NBC the Penguins the league is hoping that will draw in extra viewers increasing the ad rate which increases the money the league.

That said I'm with you as I rather see Pittsburgh-Ottawa at night and Tampa-New Jersey during the day. Mainly because as of now have to try watch my teams games over the internet with an internet connection that constantly drops out.

[Snazel]

Again to re-emphasize the point...

You look at the playoff [ratings] numbers, and they have been beaten pretty soundly by poker and bowling," said Paul Swangard, managing director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon.

In other words, last year PLAYOFF games were getting beat by poker and bowling on ESPN.

This is why the NHL must ensure the NBC gets the best game it can, because every dribble matters. If you fail to draw much more than you did last year, NBC will wash its hands and start broadcasting, oh I don't know, bowling I guess.

The CBC is invested, not going anywhere and isn't going to suffer a ratings tumble regardless of what game it shows.

I don't think its so horribly unfair. We all want the game to do well don't we? Canada does not have exclusive rights to the game, and the league has rightly chosen to let the network that is suffering the most with its sport, to pick which game they want to broadcast.

Just because the CBC dines on NHL ratings like swine, and then squanders the profit to make yet another "Wayne and Shuster" special, doesn't mean they should automatically get the best game. The potential for growth in ratings is much higher on the NBC broadcast, so give it the best and most lucrative seed and let's see what happens.

I hope it works. It probably won't, the NHL playoffs aren't getting any real attention. We have a league that's slowly dying, but apparently we're all supposed to be outraged that Joe Canada, can't watch a Canadian team on Saturday night. I say whatever it takes to help save the game from complete attrition.

It's just business folks, and in this case, it seems like a smart business decision to me. There's plenty of hockey to watch up in Canada, and personally I don't think this move is such a huge tragedy.

[CC97]

Bah, I give up, I obviously don't get it anymore.

The NHL of today seems so much worse to me than it did 10-15 years ago, I don't know if it's Bettman or what it is, but I find myself becoming less and less of a hockey fan every year -- maybe it's just me... but for the first time in my life I will probably only be watching a couple of playoff games, which will likely be in the finals -- one to see what the SC Patch looks like on the uniform ( ) and again to watch the team lift the cup over their head.

I have little to no interest in any of the match ups, nor do I really care what will happen.

I could blame the Leafs failure on my lack of interest lately, but I seem to recall getting right into the post-season back the last time we were an ass of a team for multiple seasons.

Whatever, Go Jays, Raptors.

/gets off soapbox

[NoHoJoe]

Yeah, it does kinda make sense.

Miller Park also makes sense, being relatively close and with the retractable roof.

Another fun trivia fact: Milwaukee hosted nine Chicago White Sox home games in 1968 and eleven in 1969. The attendance in Milwaukee for those few games represented one-third of the total Sox home attendance in those years - don't think we'll see such numbers for the Indians (nor will we see the Indians almost move to Milwaukee).

Great...Gothamite stole my round of trivia!!!!!!

Whoops!!!!! Wrong topic thread!!!! PLEASE MOVE IT!!!!

[jkrdevil]

Another thing to note I just remembered is the Ottawa-Penguins series is the only Eastern Conference Series that doesn't feature a New York City Metro team. NBC which is doing regional action can't air them at the same time unless they do split screen.

[spyboy1]

It's all very simple really.

NBC stands for Nothing But Crosby.

Vs? Virtually the Same.

It's all Penguins all the time here in the USA. Thank God for the Center Ice package so I can watch something else.

JeffB

[vikmurphy]

I Just don't feel a connetion like i do with Gophers hockey. Probably because they weren't originaly here like the Northstars were. Anyway I like college basketball but i don't like the NBA I never have.

[DEAD!]

NBC stands for Nothing But Crosby.

Well in the 80's it was

Nothing But Cosby

Nothing But Cheers

[OMMF]

I Just don't feel a connetion like i do with Gophers hockey. Probably because they weren't originaly here like the Northstars were. Anyway I like college basketball but i don't like the NBA I never have.

Uhh, the North Stars (two words, Portland fans) were also an expansion team. So, they weren't "originaly" there, either.

Do the ratings back up your support for NCAA over NBA?

I get why you like college hockey over the NHL and why you even like high school hockey over it, as well. I just don't see how it relates to the topic at hand. *shrug*

[cAnMaN]

I think the NBC move was arguably the right move. Don't get me wrong, I love the CBC broadcasts but the NHL needs to focus on developing the American side of things. Putting games with the young star in Crosby that they are trying to market as the new face of the NHL in a Canadian only market hardly makes sense for them.

[Roger Clemente]

I'll take a Saturday where they only have an afternoon game easily when it means there is a triple-header on Sunday.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

[gojetsgo]

Here's an article by Randy Turner that pretty much says what Chris is saying.

Why give NBC Sens-Pens show when hockey bores Yanks?

Randy Turner

JUDGING by the latest insult to hockey fans north of the border, it's high time the owners of Canadian-based NHL teams grew a pair.

To review: The NHL, in its infinite wisdom, had a choice to make this week between NBC and CBC when it came to broadcasting tomorrow's playoff battle between the Pittsburgh Penguins and Ottawa Senators.

The CBC wanted an evening game in order to maximize its Hockey Night in Canada ratings. NBC wanted to feature the game -- and its star attraction, Sidney Crosby -- in its afternoon slot.

Guess who got their way?

Sure enough, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman listened to and ignored the CBC's protestations so that Crosby could be exposed to a larger American audience on NBC.

Now let's just forget that only a few days ago, the CBC cut the NHL a cheque for around $500 million to extend its broadcast rights agreement with the league to 2014. That's in the neighbourhood of about $500 million more than NBC currently pays to reap a lousy 1.0 rating on their NHL broadcasts.

Bettman, however, stubbornly clings to the notion that somehow, some way, Americans who have been exposed to hockey for about a century -- who didn't get won over by Rocket Richard or Gordie Howe or Bobby Hull or Wayne Gretzky or Mario Lemieux -- will see the error of their ways and stop watching football played in an arena or Texas hold 'em instead.

Can you believe that, fellow hosers? After a lost season, after millions of dollars being sacrificed chasing a fatally flawed dream, Bettman, and presumably a majority of American owners, still hold hope that U.S. sports fans can be lured en masse to the NHL product.

Question: At what point will the Canadian networks and owners demand more control over a league headquarters philosophy of "Americans first"?

Enough already. They change the rules to attract American viewers. They change franchise locations to develop the American television market. They yield to American broadcasters at every turn.

Perhaps that was the reality of the last few years, when American networks did pay more for broadcast rights and Canadian franchises were, in many cases, financial weak links.

These days, however, the six Canadian teams, which represent one-fifth of the 30 league teams, are reportedly generating one-third of the NHL's total revenue.

At the same time, American broadcast networks such as NBC and Versus (whatever the heck that is) have deals based on advertising revenue, which is another way of saying they get the rights for free.

Of course, we all know why the NHL can continue to jilt Canadian fans: because they can. No matter what the injustice, large or small, the Canadian fan will keep coming back for more. Lose an entire season to a lockout? No problem. As soon as the game returned, the Canadian rinks were full. Television ratings were higher than ever.

Not so in the States, where the league, already suffering from plummeting exposure, continues to struggle to get America's attention. Which is why it's understandable that Bettman would be desperate to showcase young Crosby to as many U.S. fans as possible.

But at what point do Canadian team owners say, "Wait a minute. Why not ditch that national television deal pipe dream and begin to cater to the game's true fans?"

It's astounding that the NHL is perhaps the only major professional sports league that goes to such lengths to accommodate those who don't watch, have never watched, and will never be interested in watching their product. Does the NFL cater so blatantly to those who aren't interested in football? Does the NBA make rule changes to attract viewers who aren't basketball fans?

Of course they don't. And one of these days, the owners of Canadian NHL teams and this country's broadcasters -- who now account for more than their fair share of NHL revenue -- should start standing up for the fans who are really paying the bills.

That means you.

randy.turner@freepress.mb.ca

[AndrewPF]

i miss good hockey. I was in Quebec last spring and i watched the NHL playoffs on a Canadian broadcast, it was great. I wish Americans cared about hockey

GO BRUINS!

[Fred T. Jane]

Here's an article by Randy Turner that pretty much says what Chris is saying.

Yeah, no Americans would want to watch the Senators play hockey, obviously...

[IceCap]

Here's an article by Randy Turner that pretty much says what Chris is saying.

Yeah, no Americans would want to watch the Senators play hockey, obviously...

No offence Fred, but come on. How much of an American fan base do you think the Sens actually have? Most Americans probably don't realize that Ottawa is the Canadian capitol.

I realize you're a fan, but honestly, I think you're probably just part of a small minority of American hockey fans.

IMO the only reason the Sens are even being covered by NBC is because they're playing Sidney Crosby's Penguins.

[HedleyLamarr]

The Senators have been on Versus before, but I don't think that matters

...in last year's playoffs. As I stated, they haven't been on ESPN/ESPN2/ABC/NBC/OLN-Versus for a regular season game since 2000.

What fanbase would ESPN/Versus be pulling in to watch when one of the competing teams doesn't have access to that particular channel?

[Fred T. Jane]

What fanbase would ESPN/Versus be pulling in to watch when one of the competing teams doesn't have access to that particular channel?

Doesn't matter. The rumour I heard is that the Senators are a part of the National Hockey League. Another rumour I heard is that ESPN/Versus had/has the contract to broadcast NHL games, a league which the Senators just happen to be a part of (All hearsay, I know). It didn't stop them from broadcasting regular season games in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, or have games in the US involving the Oilers also. None of those markets have direct access to those channels, yet they got regular season games. *

Face it, the NHL's broadcasting schedule in the US is simply shambolic. How many times are fans subjected to the excitement that was the New York Rangers before the lockout, St. Louis Blues hockey last season and Philadelphia Flyers hockey this past season when other teams were tearing up the league? Heck, how many times your employer has been on national TV broadcasts since the lockout? Florida? Nashville? Columbus (not involving a game when they play Detroit)? Washington (not involving a game against Pittsburgh)? I could go on.

Simply put, the league lives in a bizzaro Ivory Tower world where on one hand they push expansion into new markets in order to attract new fans, but on the other hand they are petrified at the prospect of showing them on national TV, so they make up for it by either broadcasting mediocre established teams and over-exposing one of the league's new stars to the point that in less than three years from now, Sidney Crosby may be the most reviled "Future Face of the League" in sports history.

*I'm not conspiracy theorizing here. It's just puzzling that those Canadian teams would manage to get on US broadcasts, yet Calgary and (in my case) Ottawa would get the short end of the stick)

[CC97]

What fanbase would ESPN/Versus be pulling in to watch when one of the competing teams doesn't have access to that particular channel?

Doesn't matter. The rumour I heard is that the Senators are a part of the National Hockey League. Another rumour I heard is that ESPN/Versus had/has the contract to broadcast NHL games, a league which the Senators just happen to be a part of (All hearsay, I know). It didn't stop them from broadcasting regular season games in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, or have games in the US involving the Oilers also. None of those markets have direct access to those channels, yet they got regular season games. *

Face it, the NHL's broadcasting schedule in the US is simply shambolic. How many times are fans subjected to the excitement that was the New York Rangers before the lockout, St. Louis Blues hockey last season and Philadelphia Flyers hockey this past season when other teams were tearing up the league? Heck, how many times your employer has been on national TV broadcasts since the lockout? Florida? Nashville? Columbus (not involving a game when they play Detroit)? Washington (not involving a game against Pittsburgh)? I could go on.

Simply put, the league lives in a bizzaro Ivory Tower world where on one hand they push expansion into new markets in order to attract new fans, but on the other hand they are petrified at the prospect of showing them on national TV, so they make up for it by either broadcasting mediocre established teams and over-exposing one of the league's new stars to the point that in less than three years from now, Sidney Crosby may be the most reviled "Future Face of the League" in sports history.

*I'm not conspiracy theorizing here. It's just puzzling that those Canadian teams would manage to get on US broadcasts, yet Calgary and (in my case) Ottawa would get the short end of the stick)

Well at least we can both agree on one thing with this

[HedleyLamarr]

What fanbase would ESPN/Versus be pulling in to watch when one of the competing teams doesn't have access to that particular channel?

Doesn't matter. The rumour I heard is that the Senators are a part of the National Hockey League. Another rumour I heard is that ESPN/Versus had/has the contract to broadcast NHL games, a league which the Senators just happen to be a part of (All hearsay, I know). It didn't stop them from broadcasting regular season games in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver, or have games in the US involving the Oilers also. None of those markets have direct access to those channels, yet they got regular season games. *

Face it, the NHL's broadcasting schedule in the US is simply shambolic. How many times are fans subjected to the excitement that was the New York Rangers before the lockout, St. Louis Blues hockey last season and Philadelphia Flyers hockey this past season when other teams were tearing up the league? Heck, how many times your employer has been on national TV broadcasts since the lockout? Florida? Nashville? Columbus (not involving a game when they play Detroit)? Washington (not involving a game against Pittsburgh)? I could go on.

Simply put, the league lives in a bizzaro Ivory Tower world where on one hand they push expansion into new markets in order to attract new fans, but on the other hand they are petrified at the prospect of showing them on national TV, so they make up for it by either broadcasting mediocre established teams and over-exposing one of the league's new stars to the point that in less than three years from now, Sidney Crosby may be the most reviled "Future Face of the League" in sports history.

*I'm not conspiracy theorizing here. It's just puzzling that those Canadian teams would manage to get on US broadcasts, yet Calgary and (in my case) Ottawa would get the short end of the stick)

Actually, the Thrashers have been on National Television more since the lockout than prior to, though that can be attributed to their better play.

The NHL puts the Rangers, the Red Wings, and the Flyers on National TV more because they attract better TV ratings. ESPN/Versus will schedule the occasional Toronto or Montreal game because they have their huge followings in the US (I've seen them come in packs to a weekday game at Philips). Ottawa and Calgary don't have that big of a following in the US.

There will never be equality in National TV exposure in the NHL. The NHL would be fools to give up New York and Detroit games for the likes of Florida and Nashville, just for the sake of equality.