Proof that nobody cares about hockey

[PTBoardOp94]

I'm a little surprised NBC doesn't put more prime-time sports on CNBC, which typically draws very poor ratings at night.

They probably would, if they had more sports to broadcast. They barely have enough rights to keep NBCSN running.

 

[FredLeonard]

Another story ignored by the US that the CBC is on top of.

Boring is in the brain of the beholder.

 

[Nate Wesley]

Last night's Bruins - Rangers game was televised on...CNBC. And here we have a matchup where both teams are from top 10 TV markets and they broadcast the game on a news channel.

I take it that you aren't familiar with CNBC's latest 'CNBC Prime' effort nor the recent use of several NBC properties to televise all Stanley Cup Playoff games (a la CBS/Turner for the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament).

I'm down with bashing hockey, it's just that your effort was as as pathetic as the Florida Panthers.

 

[brian4]

Now if we only had a hockey arena that wasn't 30 miles away (over an hour's drive through rush-hour Phoenix traffic for most games) from where 90% of the sport's local fans live... ;D

You said it! I wonder what attendance would be if their building had been on the site of Tempe Marketplace as was first planned? Well, that and don't trade away the on-ice talent after every season.

To bring Valley of the Sun business to the National board...

I live about 5 minutes from Jobing.com Arena/Westgate where the Phoenix Coyotes play. Would the attendance be bigger if they played in the East Valley? Probably. The arena (and University of Phoenix Stadium) should've been built downtown, not in the suburbs. Especially since Phoenix is so spread out and public transportation isn't that convenient.

Lastly, "if you win, the fans will come." Take a look at my hometown: Detroit. I almost guarantee 90% of Red Wings fans don't live in Motown, and Joe Louis Arena is in downtown. Yet the Wings don't have a problem selling out.

 

[umfan]

To say that 'nobody cares about hockey' is a misnomer.

It is really a regional sport and several large markets have a great number of passionate fans.

They have a decent TV contract, for hockey, but it's never going to be MLB or the NFL.

I wish more of the playoffs were on OTA television, but you take what you can get.

 

[mgsports]

Another problem is when the NHL gets to Conference Finals NBC won't have two Different Studio Crews at each Game to solve the NBC Shows one of the Conference Finals Games on NBC not NBCSP and somebody like ESPN shows the other.,

Another problem is all NBA Finals Games shown on ABC not ESPN and NBA Draft also shown on NBATV and TBS Baseball Games shown in CBS.

 

[landtuna]

Would the attendance be bigger if they played in the East Valley? Probably. The arena (and University of Phoenix Stadium) should've been built downtown, not in the suburbs. Especially since Phoenix is so spread out and public transportation isn't that convenient.

As far as the fan population goes almost anywhere in the metro area would have been a better choice than the west side. Not only is that location far in distance but also far in time. With a big percentage of games during the week eastsiders are at the mercy of outbound rush hour on I-10 (the Valley's worst freeway) traffic to get to the arena. From my house in South Tempe it takes well over an hour to get there that time of night. A bunch of us tried telling the club when the west side location was first mentioned but to no avail.

I am not intimately familiar with the Detroit area but assume three conditions:
1. They have a long hockey tradition and, like Green Bay in the NFL, value their season tickets and hold on to them as there is great demand.
2. There are probably more public transportation options available getting to the Joe even if it is only a bus from the local watering hole. There is no practical way to get to the Glendale Arena from the east side via public transit. It is noted that the Cards draw very well in their building but it should be pointed out that they play mostly Sunday home games when rush hour is not an issue - and they play only a fraction of the home games than do the Coyotes.
3. And yes, The Wings have a winning tradition but more importantly they have a personnel tradition. That team, unlike our Coyotes, hasn't sold off their stars after every season so there is much more of a fan base. Unless we get some stability and a reasonable winning record we will never have what the Wings enjoy.

None of this indicates a problem with the game of hockey. It is entirely a problem of mismanagement by the owners and executives of the club.

 

[arnoldevns]

The premise of this thread is wrong.
Many people care about NHL games. Trying to prove otherwise by pointing out that two national networks were running the games seems illogical to me.
CNBC has run plenty of Olympic sports. They had 1.3 million viewers for that NHL game, far better ratings than they usually get. NBCSN had 1.7 million for their game, also far better than usual ratings for that network.

Seems more like NBC has found the NHL is a ratings goldmine for some of their ratings-challenged channels. Kudos to them!

 

[Brother]

...and they have maybe an eighth of the population of the United States, if we're generous. The NHL left Atlanta, a top-ten market, for Winnipeg, a market that makes Green Bay look big.

The Winnipeg population was 663,617 at the 2011 Canadian Census, with a metropolitan area population of 730,018.
The Green Bay population was 104,057 at the 2010 U.S. Census, with a metropolitan area population of 306,241.

The NHL decided they could get increased fan support, corporate support, and TV ratings with a Canadian market less than 15% of the size of a top-10 U.S. market, so they approved the Thrashers-to-Jets sale/move. Population is not necessarily indicative of team support; otherwise, Las Vegas and Austin would be bustling with multiple major league teams and Green Bay would be seen as a less-exciting Little Rock.

 

[landtuna]

...and they have maybe an eighth of the population of the United States, if we're generous.

Canada's population is roughly one-tenth of the USA but that doesn't begin to define their support for their national sport. A half-century ago an American kid (like me) would have been drilled in baseball. That scenario still exists in Canada and most kids grow up either playing hockey or at least becoming a spectator at a very early age.

The NHL left Atlanta, a top-ten market, for Winnipeg, a market that makes Green Bay look big.

Atlanta top-ten in what? In population it is the 40th largest city in the USA. It is a Southern city one-third the size of Phoenix with virtually no hockey history save what a very few displaced New Yorkers brought with them. It has had two failed hockey franchises (the first being the Flames who now reside in Calgary). Although Phoenix is also a Sunbelt city it has a great many more residents who once lived in hockey country (Midwest and Northeast).

All told, the NHL is a bigger deal than MLS or the WNBA, but I don't want to hear that Canada makes them a major league on par with baseball, basketball, or football.

There is nothing, no other sports programs, in Canada that come anywhere close to the popularity of hockey unless it is curling which seems to be a quasi sport like bowling.

That Phoenix is excited about hockey but is cursed by shitty arena placement is interesting, though; with the Quebec scare, has there been any talk about a new one, or moving into wherever the Suns play assuming they don't already?

Phoenix is not "excited" about hockey. There is a core following but it is not a majority and the local media has not done anything to popularize it. In fact, the only news we get is negative (team is being sold, Glendale is closing the arena, etc.). The placement of the arena is just another in a long line is mismanagement decisions. We had a perfectly good arena downtown that could have sufficed for a number of years but the city of Phoenix declined to repair its ice equipment. The Coyotes would have filled it virtually every game and it was accessible from every corner of the metro area. The city of Glendale decided to build the arena and that determined its location in a cow pasture in the far west Valley. It is also worth noting that the west Valley is largely Hispanic and that population has virtually no exposure to hockey nor does it have anywhere near the financial resources to build hockey programs from the ground up. The west side has but one rink and that is located in the far north of the west side. All the others are on the east side of the Valley (or in the case of Tower, on the east side of Phoenix).

The Suns play in a downtown arena but it has limited seating for hockey (one end cannot see their goal) and doesn't have an ice surface.

That's funny, because I once read a soccer fan's comment that had that exact complaint about MLS' old countdown clock, that an opposing team couldn't get one last push before the clock ran out. I suspect they would say if you were blowing the whistle the instant the clock said you should, if you weren't acting the way you did and waited for the current play to end before blowing the whistle, you were doing it wrong.

Americans have never liked the method of officiating according to FIFA rules and especially did not like the fact that the one referee kept an invisible clock.

 

[bpatrick]

Atlanta is the fifth-largest TV market, if I'm not mistaken,
and the NHL has tried and failed twice there. I live in Carolina
Hurricanes country, and they're a big social event, especially
among high-school kids on the eastern end of the county, about
35 miles from Raleigh.

In his book about the history of televised sports, "In Its Own Image,"
Benjamin Rader points to three reasons hockey has never been a
consistent national draw: (1) the game is not indigenous to the United
States; (2) infrequent scoring; (3) inability to follow the puck. He points
out that at one point in the '70s the NHL tried a red puck but the paint
kept chipping off.

As for soccer, I got my first exposure to organized youth leagues while
living in the Dallas area in the late '70s and thought those kids would make
soccer a major spectator sport when they were grown; they didn't. And IMO,
the best chance for soccer to catch on in this country was that U.S.-China
women's game with Mia Hamm and Brandi Chastain (taking off her jersey, but
let's not get into that). When, after 90 minutes of a scoreless game, it had to
be decided on penalty kicks, I suspect a lot of people felt they'd wasted part of
an afternoon. I also thought David Beckham might put soccer on the map in this
country the way Tiger Woods attracted new golf fans, but that didn't come to pass
either.

BTW, I'm waiting for Tiger and Sergio Garcia to have a face-to-face reminiscent
of what you see on wrestling interviews (only Tiger and Sergio would be in each
other's faces for real).

 

[landtuna]

USAToday is reporting that an agreement has been reached between the NHL and a group of investors to purchase the Phoenix Coyotes. Talks with the City of Glendale, which owns the Glendale Arena, will begin Tuesday.

 

[landtuna]

Atlanta is the fifth-largest TV market, if I'm not mistaken,
and the NHL has tried and failed twice there. I live in Carolina
Hurricanes country, and they're a big social event, especially
among high-school kids on the eastern end of the county, about
35 miles from Raleigh.

The population of Atlanta is not conducive to the sport of hockey and that won't change until the current youth take up the sport and carry it into adulthood. That is not likely to happen within our lifetimes as football remains the overwhelming favorite presently. Also, hockey is an expensive sport. Outside the major metro areas there isn't enough financial support for ice rinks, and parents are stretched to provide all the necessary equipment. Much cheaper for basketball and soccer.

In his book about the history of televised sports, "In Its Own Image,"
Benjamin Rader points to three reasons hockey has never been a
consistent national draw: (1) the game is not indigenous to the United
States; (2) infrequent scoring; (3) inability to follow the puck. He points
out that at one point in the '70s the NHL tried a red puck but the paint
kept chipping off.

Hockey is not necessarily a TV-friendly sport. It is fast and takes the average viewer a bit of time to be able to anticipate the play. Several years ago Fox tried putting electronic "tails" on the puck to help follow its path but it was very distracting to veteran viewers and was discontinued. Peter Puck tried an animated version back in the 70's but that didn't gain many viewers either. Watching a hockey game in person is a whole different experience than on TV. For that reason it will probably never become as popular as the slower sports.

As for soccer, I got my first exposure to organized youth leagues while
living in the Dallas area in the late '70s and thought those kids would make
soccer a major spectator sport when they were grown; they didn't. And IMO,
the best chance for soccer to catch on in this country was that U.S.-China
women's game with Mia Hamm and Brandi Chastain (taking off her jersey, but
let's not get into that). When, after 90 minutes of a scoreless game, it had to
be decided on penalty kicks, I suspect a lot of people felt they'd wasted part of
an afternoon. I also thought David Beckham might put soccer on the map in this
country the way Tiger Woods attracted new golf fans, but that didn't come to pass
either.

Back in the 80's I was a soccer official, league administrator and coach. I also raised three boys, all of whom played soccer for years each. I knew many kids on the various teams and several who played in college but I don't know of one single former player that follows soccer today. I used to play as well but except for attending one World Cup in '94 and watching one WC game on TV year before last I do not follow soccer either.

Soccer seems to be a game that is great to play but not so hot to watch.

 

[Morgan Wick]

...and they have maybe an eighth of the population of the United States, if we're generous. The NHL left Atlanta, a top-ten market, for Winnipeg, a market that makes Green Bay look big.

The Winnipeg population was 663,617 at the 2011 Canadian Census, with a metropolitan area population of 730,018.
The Green Bay population was 104,057 at the 2010 U.S. Census, with a metropolitan area population of 306,241.

I'm going off of this: http://www.tvb.ca/page_files/pdf/InfoCentre/TVBasics.pdf specifically page 14. Keep in mind, the Green Bay market includes places like Appleton, so it's actually not as tiny as you might think.

The NHL decided they could get increased fan support, corporate support, and TV ratings with a Canadian market less than 15% of the size of a top-10 U.S. market, so they approved the Thrashers-to-Jets sale/move. Population is not necessarily indicative of team support; otherwise, Las Vegas and Austin would be bustling with multiple major league teams and Green Bay would be seen as a less-exciting Little Rock.

Sorry, Las Vegas and Austin are pretty small markets, so no, they couldn't support multiple major league teams. Vegas probably should have one based on population size, but depth of support has nothing to do with why they don't. And the fact that Atlanta couldn't even muster close to the level of fan support of a market 15% of the size is what's so damning on the state of the NHL. It's a regional sport that doesn't yet have a national following stateside.

...and they have maybe an eighth of the population of the United States, if we're generous.

Canada's population is roughly one-tenth of the USA but that doesn't begin to define their support for their national sport. A half-century ago an American kid (like me) would have been drilled in baseball. That scenario still exists in Canada and most kids grow up either playing hockey or at least becoming a spectator at a very early age.

All told, the NHL is a bigger deal than MLS or the WNBA, but I don't want to hear that Canada makes them a major league on par with baseball, basketball, or football.

There is nothing, no other sports programs, in Canada that come anywhere close to the popularity of hockey unless it is curling which seems to be a quasi sport like bowling.

So what? By number of people, it still isn't remotely as popular a sport as the Big 3. If you assume the entire population of Canada is watching the Stanley Cup Final, it might barely start to approach the numbers for the World Series or NBA Finals, but that seems unlikely. If it's getting Super Bowl-esque numbers in Canada that might put it a skosh above the LCS or conference finals. I get that hockey is a big deal in Canada, almost as big there as soccer in Europe, but it's still dwarfed by the sheer size of the United States. Calling hockey a major sport because of how big a deal it is in Canada is like calling soccer a major sport because of how huge it is in the Hispanic community and in select markets.

 

[landtuna]

It's [the NHL] a regional sport that doesn't yet have a national following stateside.

Wrong. Hockey does have a national following. In the Northeast you have three NHL teams and dozens of collegiate programs. On down the Atlantic coast you have WashDC, Carolina and two NHL teams in FL. Across the upper Midwest you have MN, Detroit, Chicago and, again, dozens of college teams. Dallas has a team. CO. AZ. MO. CA (3 teams). Both my local universities have hockey programs and close to a dozen high schools as well. There are multiple collegiate hockey leagues in addition to many minor leagues. There is more hockey in the USA than you can possibly imagine.

By number of people, it still isn't remotely as popular a sport as the Big 3.

That depends. Are you counting attendance in person or total viewing fans (TV, radio)? Attendance figures according to Ask.com have MLB first by a huge margin. Following baseball are the NHL then a virtual tie between the NFL and NBA. If you count pseudo sports like NASCAR (or the much wider auto racing in all genres) then racing is tops by a huge margin.

So, the so-called "Big 3" really isn't the big 3 at all.

If you assume the entire population of Canada is watching the Stanley Cup Final, it might barely start to approach the numbers for the World Series or NBA Finals, but that seems unlikely.

Canada has approximately 35M people. The most recent WS drew about half that number for the final game. Extending and extrapolating both numbers and your math doesn't work.

Calling hockey a major sport because of how big a deal it is in Canada is like calling soccer a major sport because of how huge it is in the Hispanic community and in select markets.

Hockey is a major sport because it is huge in North America - both Canada and the USA. Soccer is also a major sport (although not as large in the professional ranks) because it is big in both the USA and Mexico. Examples of minor sports in the USA would be lacrosse, field hockey, swimming/diving, badminton and volleyball.

 

[brian4]

...(3) inability to follow the puck. He points out that at one point in the '70s the NHL tried a red puck but the paint kept chipping off.

Several years ago Fox tried putting electronic "tails" on the puck to help follow its path but it was very distracting to veteran viewers and was discontinued.

I liked how Fox put the electronic "tails" on the puck. It was cool, especially during a slapshot.

 

[visaman]

Nothing is more boring than watching people... play poker on TV. :

I don't know about that. Did you ever get to see NBC's Poker After Dark?

"I'm Leeann Tweeden." Yes, you certainly are my darling!

 

[Morgan Wick]

...(3) inability to follow the puck. He points out that at one point in the '70s the NHL tried a red puck but the paint kept chipping off.

Several years ago Fox tried putting electronic "tails" on the puck to help follow its path but it was very distracting to veteran viewers and was discontinued.

I liked how Fox put the electronic "tails" on the puck. It was cool, especially during a slapshot.

You might be the only person on Earth who liked the glow puck.

 

[Brother]

I liked how Fox put the electronic "tails" on the puck. It was cool, especially during a slapshot.

You might be the only person on Earth who liked the glow puck.

I really liked the glow puck, too. It did make the action easier to follow along the boards on the near side of the cameras.

Sure, Fox may have gone overboard with the red comet tail on slapshots, but the complaints about the comet tail went overboard as well, so it all evened out. Hey, Fox was just doing what they could to bring more eyeballs to the U.S. television coverage, and that's what this thread is (sort of) about. It was memorable, if nothing else.

 

[landtuna]

With the advent of HDTV following the puck is a moot point.