• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

"The NHL On NBC"

J

Joseph_Gallant

Guest
A year late (thanks to the lockout that cancelled the entire 2004/2005 season), the first telecasts of NHL games on NBC under the new contract took place today (January 14th).

There were three regional telecasts. Being near Boston, the game in our area was between the Boston Bruins and the Dallas Stars (based on what play-by-play man Chris Cuthburt said during the overtime period, the viewers of the other two regional telecasts had been switched to Boston for the end of the game).

Based on the game I saw and the between-periods segments (which were likely seen network-wide), here are my thoughts.

If you were looking for NBC to re-invent the wheel as regards coverage of hockey on television, you didn't get it. In the game at Boston, the play-by-play of Chris Cuthbert (former #2 play-by-play man at "Hockey Night In Canada" and now at TSN) was solid, and the analysis of Peter McNab (a former Boston Bruins' player who is also an analyst on Colorado Avalanche telecasts) was also solid.

You could tell Cuthbert's Canadian background for he often pronounced the word "against" as "a-GAINst", emphasizing he "A". I think a couple of times, he pronounced "again" as "A-Gain", but also used the American pronounciation of the word.

Working as rinkside reporter (or "Inside The Glass" as NBC calls it, referring to the reporter's position at ice level in-between the two benches) during the Boston/Dallas game was Cammi Grannato who wasn't bad (By the way, her husband is former NHL star Ray Ferraro, who was part of the between-periods studio show).

Between periods, intermission host Bill Clement, Ferraro, and guest analyst Mark Messier were seated at a desk next to the skating rink outside NBC's New York studios at 30 Rockefeller Plaza. Although the rink is smaller than the 200-feet-by-85-feet rink used in hockey, Clement, Ferraro and Messier during the second intermission demonstrated how Pittsburgh rookie Sidney Crosby scored one of the biggest goals of his still-young pro career (next Saturday, January 21st, Crosby and his Penguins will face Philadelphia in what will be NBC's lead regional telecast).

During the first intermission, Clement, Ferraro and Messier ended their betwen-periods segment by going to the rink, where a New York youth hockey team was practicing for an upcoming youth hockey tournament in Quebec City (the youth hockey team wore New York Rangers' jerseys and uniforms; but it's my understanding that at the Quebec City youth hockey tournament each year, participating youth hockey teams based in NHL cities will often wear jerseys of their city's local NHL team while participating in the tournament. For years, the Boston entry has worn Boston Bruins' jerseys at that tourney).

Based on Week One, the use of the Rink At 30 Rock seemed more like a gimmick.

Although Dallas is one of the best teams in the NHL at the moment, given that Boston is a major disapointment (expected before the season to run away from the rest of their and have a real chance at winning the Stanley Cup, the Bruins are instead in last place in their division), the game was probably only broadcast in New England (although WVIT-30 Hartford showed the New York Rangers/Detroit Red Wings game) and Texas.

My own verdict: NBC's coverage (at least of the game carried in Boston) was solid, but not spectacular. I'd suspect the "A" team (who was in Detroit today) was even better.

I'm interested in reading responses from people who watched one of NBC's two other regional telecasts and for general comments.
 
> You could tell Cuthbert's Canadian background for he often
> pronounced the word "against" as "a-GAINst", emphasizing he
> "A". I think a couple of times, he pronounced "again" as
> "A-Gain", but also used the American pronounciation of the
> word.
>

Before being hired by CBC, then due to budget cuts, losing him to TSN, Cuthbert anchored ESPN's "look in" coverage of the CFL, where CBC footage was used, except for two ESPN cameras which showed other shots when Canadian TV graphics were used. Cuthbert weathered that hideous, hideous experiement well.

If regional pronounciations are the biggest notation to Cuthberts calling, its a tribute indeed. Hes one of the top two hockey play by play men on TV, the other being Mike Emerick.

The only problem...at least to me here in Tampa is that NBC will stick with the same eight or so teams, passing by the majority of the teams, including the defending Stanley Cup Champion Tampa Bay Lightning, tenatively scheduled for a token regional appearance against Philadelphia later in the season.

The northeastern bias continues.
 
The "A" broadcast team of the Rangers-Red Wings game was Mike Emerick and Bill Clement.<P ID="signature">______________
<a href=http://www.triborough.org/blog/>Random Observations on Life, the Universe and Television</a></P>
 
Of possible interest to some is the fact that in the Philadelphia market, at least during the second period, one could watch Colorado/Philadelphia on the WCAU standard feed, and Rangers/Detroit on the WCAU digital feed.

Did anyone else who wasn't getting Rangers/Detroit experience something similar? I added "during the second period" onlt because during the first period the digital WCAU was showing the same thing as regular WCAU (Colorado/Philadelphia), but not in high-definition.

Also of note was that it looks as if the Center Ice PPV package devoted channels to each of NBC's regional match-ups. Why the NHL can do this with their split national coverage, but Fox can't do it with their split national coverage of baseball, is beyond me.
 
> The northeastern bias continues.

There is a very good reason for it.
These teams have loyal followings in major markets, while the rest of the NHL you wonder why the hell they even have a team.
<P ID="signature">______________
<a href=http://www.triborough.org/blog/>Random Observations on Life, the Universe and Television</a></P>
 
> If you were looking for NBC to re-invent the wheel as
> regards coverage of hockey on television, you didn't get it.
> In the game at Boston, the play-by-play of Chris Cuthbert
> (former #2 play-by-play man at "Hockey Night In Canada" and
> now at TSN) was solid, and the analysis of Peter McNab (a
> former Boston Bruins' player who is also an analyst on
> Colorado Avalanche telecasts) was also solid.

i flipped to it a couple times just to see what was up, but
the boston-dallas game wasn't available in hd. that's unacceptable
these days.
 
Hi everyone:

> > The northeastern bias continues.
>
> There is a very good reason for it.
> These teams have loyal followings in major markets, while
> the rest of the NHL you wonder why the hell they even have a
> team.

Well if THAT was the case, then just HOW is it that the Avs manage to sell out Pepsi Center EACH & EVERY GAME then, huh?

You tell me...

While it's true the teams in the NE do have loyal followings, I think THE BIGGER problem is THE FACT that ALL FOUR of the networks, most notably ABC/ESPN (though they try to keep things somewhat balanced by showcasing some western teams, usually on ESPN) and (perhaps THE WORST offender of all) FOX all tend to have a bias IN ALL THE MAJOR SPORTS (Not just hockey and ESPECIALLY in Baseball) that's in favor of the teams in the NE part of America.

If it isn't the bias towards teams in the NE, it's the bias towards long-standing once-dynasties like the L.A. Lakers (even when they're having an awful year) that get the extra exposure while teams who are playing better than them (like the Denver Nuggets) gets very little (if any) exposure at all.

Until THAT is addressed and resolved by the networks, I'm afraid we're only going to see more and more of it. :(

Just my opinion :(

Cheers for now :)

Pat<P ID="signature">______________
patspodcast03a.jpg

http://patspodcast.blogspot.com/
Radio? Uhh.....What's THAT?? :)</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Podcaster Pat on 01/15/06 05:41 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> Well if THAT was the case, then just HOW is it that the Avs
> manage to sell out Pepsi Center EACH & EVERY GAME then, huh?

And the Avs were on one of the NBC games yesterday, and will be again this coming week.

I think he's referring to non-traditional markets like Atlanta, Florida and Carolina, where NHL interest is lukewarm.
 
> I think he's referring to non-traditional markets like
> Atlanta, Florida and Carolina, where NHL interest is lukewarm.

Yes, exactly.
It should be noted that this is Atlanta's second hockey team. The first team the Atlanta Flames, originally of the WHA, from 1972-1980. They then moved to someplace where they care about hockey - Calgary.<P ID="signature">______________
<a href=http://www.triborough.org/blog/>Random Observations on Life, the Universe and Television</a></P>
 
It's basic - that's where the Nielsen audiences are, the big N.E. cities for hockey. (L.A.'s hockey fans, what few they are, are usually at the game and don't care to watch teams from outside the area. Fans in "hockey areas" (i.e. the north) will watch other teams but would rather watch those more familiar to them. In short a Detroit-Rangers game will draw reasonably well in the northeast, where big audiences are, and a Nashville-Tampa Bay game less so (not that those teams aren't good, but in the regular season, games are fairly meaningless).
 
Atlanta in the WHA?

Not according to http://www.geocities.com/braniff73/WHA.html .

ixnay

> Yes, exactly.
> It should be noted that this is Atlanta's second hockey
> team. The first team the Atlanta Flames, originally of the
> WHA, from 1972-1980. They then moved to someplace where they
> care about hockey - Calgary.
>

The WHA's NY team, the Raiders, became the Jersey Knights a few weeks into the 1973-74 season when they moved to the 5000 seat Cherry Hill arena. I saw a couple of Knights games. Fans could go to their seats through the same tunnel the visiting team used to reach their bench. Even signed up for a subscription to the Knights fan newspaper The Knightly. I only received two issues.

ixnay
 
Re: Atlanta in the WHA?

> Not according to http://www.geocities.com/braniff73/WHA.html
> .
>
> ixnay
>
> > Yes, exactly.
> > It should be noted that this is Atlanta's second hockey
> > team. The first team the Atlanta Flames, originally of the
>
> > WHA, from 1972-1980. They then moved to someplace where
> they
> > care about hockey - Calgary.
> >
The Atlanta/Calgary Flames were always NHL-They came in with the New York Islanders in 1972-73..In the Organizational stage of the WHA, There was a Calgary Broncos Franchise with was bought out by Cleveland entenprenuer Nick Mileti and renamed the Cleveland Crusaders before the team ever played a game in Calgary. The Miami Screaming Eagles (1972) moved to Philadelphia as the Blazers, then became the Vancouver Blazers. From 1975-77 The Franchise was known as the Calgary Cowboys. If they had hung around longer they might have been candidates for the NHL-WHA Merger. The Atlanta Flames would have had to find another place to move..More Info than anyone needs to know probably..The WHA was a fun league to follow. As with other leagues in their early stages, a lot of franchise movement.
 
I have to say NHL on NBC looks really good. Great broadcasters and being outside the NBC studies. Its hockey why not be next to the ice talking about hockey and highlights. Well overall it I like the product they have, they sure know how to do hockey no doubt about it. No stupid glow like FOX had.

Being in SC their are three NBC stations on the cable system. Charleston, SC's NBC 2, Wilmington's, NC's NBC 6, and Cloumbia, SC's WIS NBC 10. But NBC 2 Charleston was the only one that stared from the start with the highlights into the NY and DET game. NBC 6 was still showing local NCAA basketball but followed into the NY and DET game. While WIS didn't even show it as they showed a local NCAA game starting at 2pm. Surprising a NBC station wouldn't go with showing NBC Sports.

Now a question I am just wondering about, wasn't NBC the first to broadcast the NHL?
 
Re: Atlanta in the WHA?

> > Not according to
> http://www.geocities.com/braniff73/WHA.html
> > .
> >
> > ixnay
> >
> > > Yes, exactly.
> > > It should be noted that this is Atlanta's second hockey
> > > team. The first team the Atlanta Flames, originally of
> the
> >
> > > WHA, from 1972-1980. They then moved to someplace where
> > they
> > > care about hockey - Calgary.
> > >
> The Atlanta/Calgary Flames were always NHL-They came in
> with the New York Islanders in 1972-73..In the
> Organizational stage of the WHA, There was a Calgary Broncos
> Franchise with was bought out by Cleveland entenprenuer Nick
> Mileti and renamed the Cleveland Crusaders before the team
> ever played a game in Calgary. The Miami Screaming Eagles
> (1972) moved to Philadelphia as the Blazers, then became the
> Vancouver Blazers. From 1975-77 The Franchise was known as
> the Calgary Cowboys. If they had hung around longer they
> might have been candidates for the NHL-WHA Merger. The
> Atlanta Flames would have had to find another place to
> move..More Info than anyone needs to know probably..The WHA
> was a fun league to follow. As with other leagues in their
> early stages, a lot of franchise movement.
>
One plan was for the Oilers to play home games in both Calgary and Edmonton.
That idea was abolished before the first exhibition game was played.<P ID="signature">______________

Canada TV and College Radio</P>
 
What??? No Peter Puck?????

> Between periods, intermission host Bill Clement, Ferraro,
> and guest analyst Mark Messier were seated at a desk next to
> the skating rink outside NBC's New York studios at 30
> Rockefeller Plaza. Although the rink is smaller than the
> 200-feet-by-85-feet rink used in hockey, Clement, Ferraro
> and Messier during the second intermission demonstrated how
> Pittsburgh rookie Sidney Crosby scored one of the biggest
> goals of his still-young pro career (next Saturday, January
> 21st, Crosby and his Penguins will face Philadelphia in what
> will be NBC's lead regional telecast).
>

You mean no Peter Puck? No Showdown either? Like the last time the Peacock had the NHL (when I was in middle school)? Sorry, I couldn't resist...

ixnay
 
> Now a question I am just wondering about, wasn't NBC the
> first to broadcast the NHL?
>

no, that honor belongs to cbs, which starting doing regular season games in the 1957 portion of the 1956-57 season. bud palmer and fred cusick called those games for cbs. these involved only the four u.s. based teams (boston, chicago, detroit and new york) as toronto and montreal were tied into hockey night in canada.

nbc though, was the first u.s. network to televise the stanley cup final and the first network anywhere (including canada) to do it in color with game 1 of the 1966 final between montreal and detroit. jim simpson and bill cullen on the call for that.

tb
 
> Surprising a NBC station wouldn't go with showing NBC Sports.

At least your not living in Arkansas where NBC stations don't show certain NBC primetime programming.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom