NHL NETWORK OFF AT&T U-VERSE IN CARRIAGE DISPUTE

[gregg75]

Looks like somebody needs to form some kind of 3rd party thing to resolve all these
carriage disputes that now seem to be almost weekly.

Can't say as I blame AT&T. To me Hockey is like Golf, I can live without it. Why make all
subscribers pay for it when only a limited few are actually watching it? GO AT&T.

Why make all subscribers pay for any of the sports stuff? Most sports should be in the sports
package and the sports viewers should be the ones paying the bill IMO.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/09/nhl-network-might-be-pulled-from-att-u-verse/

 

[Poledo]

I didn't even notice, I deleted NHL network from my on screen guide the day it was added. Same with Golf, Tennis, NFL, Spots Time Ohio (I live in BFE Florida damnit!)... not to mention other narrow programmers like Oprah (OWN), etc...

I just paid my $190/month UVerse bill. Thank you AT&T... Please don't add these expensive channels targeted toward a narrow audience without making them a la cart. I can't afford to pay any more and I've never watched a hockey game in my life.

Now if UVerse would just listen and finally add the Mobile Alabama affiliate of the SEC network in HD so I don't have to use my rooftop antenna to watch the best college football teams in the country (for FREE from OTA TV!).... I would like to be able to use my DVR to pause and replay the SEC games... but nope... that's the one local they don't carry in HD.

</rant>

 

[mjlarochelle]

This doesn't surprise me. Hockey is a niche market in the United States, with much of its popularity confined to local markets such as Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, and New York. There are some other markets where the NHL does alright.

Unfortunately NHL commissioner Gary Bettman seems to have long had a dream of the NHL being as popular as the NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA, or NCAA football and basketball nationwide. He has never grasped the fact that hockey's primary nation is Canada, and it will always be, at best, highly popular in some northern U.S. markets and almost nonexistent in other markets. Hockey isn't, and never will be, America's national pastime.

 

[JeeperOne]

What (Besides NOTHING) does NHL Network have to offer that Versus/NBC Sports Network & the regional RSOs who televise NHL games don't already offer anyway?

Anyone have a clue?

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[landtuna]

Hockey is a niche market in the United States, with much of its popularity confined to local markets such as Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, and New York. There are some other markets where the NHL does alright.

Niche sports would be bowling, rugby, swimming, badminton and the like. Hockey is much, much larger than that. Even here in the desert SW there are an overflow number of kids who want to play on ice but there are not enough rinks. As a result we have huge numbers of kids playing roller hockey. Phoenix has had a resident hockey team since the 60's (when the metro area was much, much smaller) and has supported both minor and major league teams. (The current fiasco has more to do with mismanagement of the team than performance on the ice.)

While hockey may never approach the numbers that baseball, football and basketball have it is definitely not a niche.

Unfortunately NHL commissioner Gary Bettman seems to have long had a dream of the NHL being as popular as the NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA, or NCAA football and basketball nationwide. He has never grasped the fact that hockey's primary nation is Canada, and it will always be, at best, highly popular in some northern U.S. markets and almost nonexistent in other markets. Hockey isn't, and never will be, America's national pastime.

Expanding the NHL's exposure is Bettman's number one priority - or should be. Nothing wrong with consistently trying to increase the popularity of your sport. Look at the number of years NASCAR was in existence before it caught on nationally (about 40 years if you were wondering).

I doubt Bettman believes hockey will overtake the Big Three sports in the USA. If for no other reason kids here can't go to their local frozen pond and begin skating as they can visit the basketball court or baseball diamond at their local school. The limited number of rinks and the relative high expense of playing hockey compared with baseball or basketball means virtually no lower-economic class participation.

I assume your point had something to do with the NHL Network although I don't know what point you were trying to make.

 

[gregg75]

Now you failed to GRASP his point, but you've got everything but the kitchen sink in yours!

 

[landtuna]

That will teach me to respond to a post late at night while watching my local football team play a nail-biter. ;D

Re-reading both posts in the clarity of the morn tells me the original post had two points:

1. NHL is a niche sport and will never be as popular as the USA's "big three".
2. Bettman is somehow off his rocker to be pushing the NHL to become more popular.

I agree #1 is half right (hockey will not surpass the "big three" but I disagree that hockey is a niche sport.

#2 is totally wrong. Bettman is doing absolutely the correct thing in pushing his sport. Whether or not he is doing it correctly is another subject. Personally, I have never been fond of Bettman and believe there is someone out there who would be a better administrator.

Now.....onto that second cup of coffee. ;D

 

[gregg75]

I hear you. I've done the same thing. Nice to see you're almost as normal as everybody else (about your errors) and even willing to sometimes admit it.

CHEERS ....... as Pat Cook often says.