NHL Renews with NBC and Versus

[sportsfan0518]

Versus scoring graphic also ticks me off. I like it when the teams and scores are right next to each other. Not on opposite sides. Thats the same problem MLB on FOX has.

[IceCap]

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm a supporter of keeping American national telecasts limited to big-city teams in the northeast and midwest, because that's the only way NBC is going to cobble together enough viewers to justify doing this hockey thing. But I think you're underestimating the extent to which they air the crap out of the Rangers. If it's not every week, it feels like it. I don't think any organization has ever gotten more mileage out of a championship than the Rangers did with 1994; I give no f-ck about a single skater on their roster and yet they're treated as the Yankees of hockey because they are based in the same municipality.

Are the Rangers really aired that often? Just doing some quick research it looks like they get more love from NBC then the Leafs do from CBC. Wow.

Consider my earlier statement (somewhat) retracted then.

I still think it's a good idea to limit national coverage to the more established teams though. Not to hate on Ducks, Sharks, Kings, or Preds fans, but admiral's right. Focusing on the Rangers (to a lesser extant then they do now), Flyers, Penguins, Bruins, Capitals, Red Wings, and Blackhawks is the only way they're going to draw a strong (well strong for the GDNHL) number consistently. Sure, they can use those teams to build up interest in other teams (like using a Blackhawks-Ducks game to build up the Ducks), but the established northeastern and midwestern teams need to remain the centrepiece of national coverage.

I will say that if the Blues and Wild can get their acts together and become relevant they could easily join the rotation due to their Great Lakes/Midwestern locales. They just need to start winning again so that their games mean something on a national level.

[ninersdd]

My main argument for showing a Sharks is that they're an elite team, and if you look at the playoffs against the Wings the last 2 years, all but one have come down to one goal. It would be a great battle to show on NBC. Also, didn't they show the Ducks and Wings in '08?

[IceCap]

The Sharks are an elite team. More so then the Rangers, actually.

The problem is that the Sharks just aren't a ratings magnet. Sure a Predators-Sharks game may be great, but will your average sports fan in Toledo want to watch it? Probably not. Who are the San Jose Sharks and Nashville Predators to him? Red Wings-Blackhawks has enough name recognition to catch his interest though.

It's unfair and it does leave some elite teams like the Sharks out in the cold, but hey. Networks do what they have to do to get ratings. Given how much NBC overpayed for the NHL rights they're going to make sure that the games they air have the highest name recognition possible to the casual American sports fans, because those are the people you have to appeal to in order to get a solid number for hockey in the States.

You still have Versus too. Aren't they better about airing more teams?

[njmeadowlanders]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/25/nhl-on-nbc-game-of-the-week-2011-schedule/

18 of the 24 American teams had a shot at an NBC game last season:

For those of you keeping track (and I know you will) the teams break down this way for the maximum number of times they could appear on NBC’s Game of the Week.

Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and N.Y. Rangers – 5 times

Detroit and Minnesota – 4 times

Washington, Buffalo, and New Jersey – 3 times

Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles , and Tampa Bay – 2 times

Atlanta, Florida, N.Y. Islanders, Columbus, and St. Louis – 1 time

While not all of these teams will get the chance to appear on NBC, this makes for an incredible cross-section of teams across the United States. While everyone will have New Year’s Day circled on their calendar for the Winter Classic, February 20th becomes a must-see date for fans across the country as well.

[Still MIGHTY]

also fyi NBC has had every team in the league on TV except Florida and Toronto

Is that regular season and playoffs? Or just regular season? And what's the overall distribution of the teams? How many teams have had just one or two regular season games on?

My main argument for showing a Sharks is that they're an elite team, and if you look at the playoffs against the Wings the last 2 years, all but one have come down to one goal. It would be a great battle to show on NBC. Also, didn't they show the Ducks and Wings in '08?

They did. I was actually at that game for my 18th birthday present. That was the year after the Ducks had won the Cup and the Ducks/Wings had an awesome playoff series. So at the time they had a level of relevancy. But besides their series against the Wings in 2007 and 2009 and the 2007 Cup Finals, that's been the Ducks lone regular season game on NBC.

And what Ice Cap said earlier is basically all I'm asking for. I understand they need to show their core 7 or 8 teams that will draw ratings, because well they need all the ratings they can get. But the games don't always have to exclusive feature two of those seven or eight. You can have a Sharks/Wings, Ducks/Hawks, Kings/Bruins, Canucks/Capitals, Tampa/Philly, etc. to try and expand the casual fan's knowledge or exposure of the rest of the league somewhat.

Hopefully with NBC starting their NHL coverage at Thanksgiving, they'll almost be forced to expand their broadcast roster out of necessity. They are going to run out of matchups of their exclusive ratings teams and may have to throw a bone to the other teams.

And one other thing I'd like to see more from NBC was what they did with Hockey Day in America. Regional coverage. I thoroughly enjoyed that when they did that. Fox does it with baseball on a weekly basis, and while I don't know the actual logistics or financial/ratings side for that, I would think that might please the general populous a bit more. Have the staggered start times like they did and depending on the game that affects your area most you'll be switched when that game starts.

[The_Admiral]

The Sharks are an elite team. More so then the Rangers, actually. The problem is that the Sharks just aren't a ratings magnet. Sure a Predators-Sharks game may be great, but will your average sports fan in Toledo want to watch it? Probably not. Who are the San Jose Sharks and Nashville Predators to him?

Petty, most likely, but I wonder if the San Francisco Sharks would do a little more for the hearts and minds of a nation than the San Jose Sharks do. I mean, either way, they'd still be teal-clad choke artists whose west coast location makes NBC games a bit of a logistical snarl, but at least San Francisco is considered a great American city on par with New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, or Boston. San Jose is an office park where people make search engines, for all anyone cares. Given their remarkable success and position in the sixth-largest metropolis, the Sharks should be a cornerstone of the league, the way the Giants and 49ers are for theirs, and here we are mentioning them in the same breath as the Nashville Predators, hockey's answer to a question no one asked.

The very same principle also applies to the Golden State Warriors, while I have you on the line.

[Gothamite]

The Sharks are an elite team. More so then the Rangers, actually. The problem is that the Sharks just aren't a ratings magnet. Sure a Predators-Sharks game may be great, but will your average sports fan in Toledo want to watch it? Probably not. Who are the San Jose Sharks and Nashville Predators to him?

Petty, most likely, but I wonder if the San Francisco Sharks would do a little more for the hearts and minds of a nation than the San Jose Sharks do. I mean, either way, they'd still be teal-clad choke artists whose west coast location makes NBC games a bit of a logistical snarl, but at least San Francisco is considered a great American city on par with New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, or Boston. San Jose is an office park where people make search engines, for all anyone cares.

Makes a lot of sense to me.

[Don]

The Sharks are an elite team. More so then the Rangers, actually. The problem is that the Sharks just aren't a ratings magnet. Sure a Predators-Sharks game may be great, but will your average sports fan in Toledo want to watch it? Probably not. Who are the San Jose Sharks and Nashville Predators to him?

Petty, most likely, but I wonder if the San Francisco Sharks would do a little more for the hearts and minds of a nation than the San Jose Sharks do. I mean, either way, they'd still be teal-clad choke artists whose west coast location makes NBC games a bit of a logistical snarl, but at least San Francisco is considered a great American city on par with New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, or Boston. San Jose is an office park where people make search engines, for all anyone cares. Given their remarkable success and position in the sixth-largest metropolis, the Sharks should be a cornerstone of the league, the way the Giants and 49ers are for theirs, and here we are mentioning them in the same breath as the Nashville Predators, hockey's answer to a question no one asked.

The very same principle also applies to the Golden State Warriors, while I have you on the line.

They dont like to relocate teams, remember?

[NEW.ERA]

Well I`m sure if they had a worthy building in San Francisco it wouldn`t be such a bad idea to have both the Sharks and Warriors in San Fran.

[crashcarson15]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/25/nhl-on-nbc-game-of-the-week-2011-schedule/

18 of the 24 American teams had a shot at an NBC game last season:

For those of you keeping track (and I know you will) the teams break down this way for the maximum number of times they could appear on NBC?s Game of the Week.

Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and N.Y. Rangers ? 5 times

Detroit and Minnesota ? 4 times

Washington, Buffalo, and New Jersey ? 3 times

Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles , and Tampa Bay ? 2 times

Atlanta, Florida, N.Y. Islanders, Columbus, and St. Louis ? 1 time

While not all of these teams will get the chance to appear on NBC, this makes for an incredible cross-section of teams across the United States. While everyone will have New Year?s Day circled on their calendar for the Winter Classic, February 20th becomes a must-see date for fans across the country as well.

The appearance of Columbus on there would have been a late-season Columbus @ New Jersey game, which after the Devils' start, wasn't happening. It didn't help that the game fell on the same day as Rangers/Flyers if I recall correctly. The CBJ weren't getting on unless they were gonna win the Presidents Trophy.

[sportsfan0518]

There is still one thing I am confused about. why did Bettman not split the deal with Comcast and ESPN? Look at this:

NFL: NBC, CBS, FOX, NFL Network

MLB: FOX, TBS

NBA: ABC, ESPN, TNT

NASCAR: FOX, TNT, ESPN, ABC, SPEED

All of these sports leagues have different broadcasting companies splitting time in covering their respective sport. Why can't the NHL do that with Comcast and ESPN? That way everybody is happy.

[rams80]

Because there isn't enough interest to justify splitting up the NHL's package. Or trying to figure out an equitable way to do so.

[IceCap]

Well I`m sure if they had a worthy building in San Francisco it wouldn`t be such a bad idea to have both the Sharks and Warriors in San Fran.

Would they have to move though? San Jose, like Oakland, is considered part of the San Francisco "market."

[NJTank]

Versus and NBC once they expand to cover all games in the postseason will be the best coverage possible and it wont play second fiddle to NBA like it would on ESPN.

[ninersdd]

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/25/nhl-on-nbc-game-of-the-week-2011-schedule/

18 of the 24 American teams had a shot at an NBC game last season:

For those of you keeping track (and I know you will) the teams break down this way for the maximum number of times they could appear on NBC?s Game of the Week.

Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and N.Y. Rangers ? 5 times

Detroit and Minnesota ? 4 times

Washington, Buffalo, and New Jersey ? 3 times

Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles , and Tampa Bay ? 2 times

Atlanta, Florida, N.Y. Islanders, Columbus, and St. Louis ? 1 time

While not all of these teams will get the chance to appear on NBC, this makes for an incredible cross-section of teams across the United States. While everyone will have New Year?s Day circled on their calendar for the Winter Classic, February 20th becomes a must-see date for fans across the country as well.

The appearance of Columbus on there would have been a late-season Columbus @ New Jersey game, which after the Devils' start, wasn't happening. It didn't help that the

game fell on the same day as Rangers/Flyers if I recall correctly. The CBJ weren't getting on unless they were gonna win the Presidents Trophy.

Safe to say the games that get flexed are virtual decoys anyway. We all know what NBC is gonna pick. In 2009, when the Sharks and Devils had 37 wins apiece in mid-February and was a possibility, NBC passed it over for you guessed it, New York-Philly.

[The_Admiral]

There is still one thing I am confused about. why did Bettman not split the deal with Comcast and ESPN? Look at this:

NFL: NBC, CBS, FOX, NFL Network

MLB: FOX, TBS

NBA: ABC, ESPN, TNT

NASCAR: FOX, TNT, ESPN, ABC, SPEED

All of these sports leagues have different broadcasting companies splitting time in covering their respective sport. Why can't the NHL do that with Comcast and ESPN? That way everybody is happy.

Because ESPN didn't want to pay much of anything for NHL games.

[The_Admiral]

Well I`m sure if they had a worthy building in San Francisco it wouldn`t be such a bad idea to have both the Sharks and Warriors in San Fran.

I know the Warriors ultimately want to trade in Oakland for San Francisco, but I don't know if they'd be able to bring the Sharks with them. Pretty sure the whole point of building in San Jose and not around SF/Daly City where they were was proximity to middle-class white folks, the same way the Panthers left Miami for Broward County, only people actually turn out for Sharks games. Still, as well as it's worked heretofore, the Shark Tank is kinda cheap and old, and a new arena closer to downtown could be enough of a destination and revenue-generator that it'll be a better option. Hard to say.

[Mac the Knife]

the way the Giants and 49ers are for theirs

Um... hate to break it to you, but the Giants and 49'ers aren't exactly big wheels in their respective leagues.

The Giants, as you may recall, were nearly relocated at least twice before their new ballpark was built. And the 49'ers? They'll be in Santa Clara in four years time, in part because the city's voters didn't want their money being spent to replace Windlestick.

[The_Admiral]

Beg to differ. Even if the 49ers wind up in Santa Clara County, they're still one of the most important teams in the league, owing to the dynasty they had and all. Ask people to name NFL teams from memory, and the Niners are always going to be at the top of the list, even if they're top-of-mind because they spiraled all the way down to Mike Singletary motivating players by taking his pants off. We're at the point where practically every major league team has made a relocation threat, so it's hard to hold those against the Giants, who are still the team of Mays and Bonds and the rival of the Dodgers. I mean, even the Yankees threatened to move to Jersey once.

Man, Candlestick Park sucks, huh.