*2013-14 NHL TV Ratings*

[ScottyBowman]

saturday night in LA......How many people do you think are staying in watching TV?

The majority of people don't go out and stay at home. I bet at 80% of people are inside watching tv.

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

TOP METERED MARKETS FOR Stanley Cup Final Game 2

1 New York 10.5/21
2 Los Angeles 8.9/21
3 Buffalo 8.1/17
4 Boston 6.9/14
5 Minneapolis 6.4/14
6 West Palm Beach 5.8/11
7 Providence 5.6/11
8 Pittsburgh 5.5/11
9 Las Vegas 5.3/10
T10. Chicago 4.9/10
T10. San Diego 4.9/12
T10. St. Louis 4.9/9

http://nbcsportsgrouppressbox.com/2...wership-milestones-for-championship-saturday/

Red Sox were on Fox during the same time period. Wonder how they did.

 

[masa2009]

The fact that the NY local rating took such a tumble from the Belmont is a bit disappointing. It barely progressed from Game 1. I expected at least a 12.
I guess the Saturday night/going out thing may have hurt NY since it progressed less than LA where it was a bit earlier.

 

[MayDay]

Even the NY Times is taking notice:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/s...s.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias:r&_r=1

Buffalo was the highest-rated market in the regular season for NBC and NBCSN’s national games and, with Sabres games, generated the second-highest local cable rating in the N.H.L. (Pittsburgh had the highest.)

The Sabres, with 52 points in the regular season, were nowhere near making the playoffs. But in Rounds 2 and 3 and Game 1 of the Stanley Cup finals on NBC and NBCSN, Buffalo had a 3.1 local rating, which ranked sixth, ahead of markets with playoff teams like New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Denver, Detroit and Los Angeles.

For Game 1 of the finals, Buffalo’s 8.5 rating ranked second; for Game 2, Buffalo ranked third, with an 8.1 rating. (That game generated a 10.5 rating in the New York market, the highest in history for an N.H.L. game on NBC or NBCSN.) And for Game 7 of the Western Conference finals, between the Kings and the Blackhawks, Buffalo had a 7.3 rating, second to Chicago’s.

 

[KBA4life]

I actually remember the ratings in SD not being correlated to the Kings or Ducks playing necessarily. It might be like other cities with lots of transplants, so Chicago, Detroit, Boston, etc. could be behind some of it.

I believe that the Kings and Ducks TV carriers (fox west), aren't even available on a basic package in SD. I think.

 

[Fenway]

Well NBC is in the soup now. Game 4 will be strong in LA but they have lost New York unless Rangers can win a couple of games.

After what I saw tonight I have to assume this ends on Wednesday.

Last sweep was in 1998.

 

[frivolousz21]

The LA numbers are amazing.

I mean amazing.

Overall they are great.

It's essentially Summer in the United States where it's "warm to hot" almost everywhere everyday. Summer spectator sport viewing is Baseball or special event stuff.

But baseball is huge. Way beyond what the national numbers show. Baseball is where most sports fans go after winter when their winter teams are done.

This year I saw lots of cards fans say they needed time to get into baseball after the blues choked. But still were done with hockey.

I love hockey but I won't watch until it's elimination time. I can't do it. Without the emotional investment I don't get gratification from it.

I am honestly surprised anyone can when their team is out.

They play so many games it's not like football.

 

[Nicky Santoro]

i'm expecting very low rating for gm3, so don't be shocked boys and girls when u see a low #. i will not make exact prediction, but it will not be good. it was on cable, series was not close and game was never close. oh well, it's 3-0 now.. too damn bad. we had some great thing and we blew it. This NYR/LA series had CLASSIC written all over it, and look where it is now?? DAMN!

and the sad thing is, unless there's a deal with NBC in case of a sweep, does the SC deciding game really have a chance to be on cable??? if yes, that sucks.

 

[MayDay]

The Stanley Cup is going to be awarded on cable (for the first time ever?)

It was bound to happen at some point, ever since they changed to broadcast schedule to put Games 1&2 on network TV and Games 3&4 on cable.

The NHL has been lucky in the past several years to have good Finals series, but sooner or later there was bound to be a sweep, which means a major pro championship would be won on cable TV.

 

[Fenway]

@NBCSportsPR · 3m
New York delivered its 2nd-best NHL rating ever on @NBCSN last night for SCF Gm3 w 8.0 rating, trailing only Gm6 vs Mon this yr in ECF (8.5)

L.A. scored its 2nd-best NHL rating ever last night on @NBCSN w 6.4 rating trailing only Gm 4 of '12 SCF, a potential Cup-clinching gm (6.6)

Top 5 markets for last night’s Stanley Cup Final Game 3: New York, 8.0; Los Angeles, 6.4; Buffalo, 4.7; Philadelphia, 4.1; Boston, 3.7.

 

[Nicky Santoro]

It didn't do that bad afterall, but each city is way down from game 2.. but still not bad. and look who's in the top 5? PHILLY.. they never were in top 10, but now are in top 5. way to go, PHILLY.

I am not even sure if we will break 4M viewers for this game, but i hope so.

 

[Fenway]

I can't remember the last time it was awarded on cable - I know ESPN had the final game of Dallas/Buffalo in 1999. There may have been another time before the lost season as well.

The Stanley Cup is going to be awarded on cable (for the first time ever?)

It was bound to happen at some point, ever since they changed to broadcast schedule to put Games 1&2 on network TV and Games 3&4 on cable.

The NHL has been lucky in the past several years to have good Finals series, but sooner or later there was bound to be a sweep, which means a major pro championship would be won on cable TV.

 

[Fenway]

Following are the Top 10 local markets for Game 3:

Rank Market HH Rtg
1 New York 8.0
2 Los Angeles 6.4
3 Buffalo 4.7
4 Philadelphia 4.1
5 Boston 3.7
6 Las Vegas 3.4
7 Pittsburgh 3.2
8 Hartford & New Haven 3.1
9 Providence 2.7
10 San Diego 2.6

 

[MayDay]

I can't remember the last time it was awarded on cable - I know ESPN had the final game of Dallas/Buffalo in 1999.

No kidding?

Strange that I so vividly remember watching that game but apparently don't recall what channel it was on.

Although to be honest, it is very possible that I actually watched that game on CBC (since I was in Buffalo back then and often watched the playoffs on CBC, which offered much better overall coverage at that time).

 

[Fenway]

No kidding?

Strange that I so vividly remember watching that game but apparently don't recall what channel it was on.

Although to be honest, it is very possible that I actually watched that game on CBC (since I was in Buffalo back then and often watched the playoffs on CBC, which offered much better overall coverage at that time).

My memory is still working

Here is a complete list of what network covered the games

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stanley_Cup_Finals_broadcasters

 

[Fugu]

Following are the Top 10 local markets for Game 3:

Rank Market HH Rtg
1 New York 8.0
2 Los Angeles 6.4
3 Buffalo 4.7
4 Philadelphia 4.1
5 Boston 3.7
6 Las Vegas 3.4
7 Pittsburgh 3.2
8 Hartford & New Haven 3.1
9 Providence 2.7
10 San Diego 2.6

So Philly rebounds, relatively speaking, Pittsburgh is down (Vegas is higher...), and San Diego is still in the top ten.

 

[Nicky Santoro]

Steve Lepore ‏@stevelepore 31s
Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final drew 2.89M viewers. Not bad, better than NJ/LA, you'd like it to be better, but 3-0 series.




2.89M.. for a Gm 3 SC final?? OUCH.. couldn't even hit 3M?? and now that's it's 3-0, i guess the dream of ever seeing a 10M final is put to rest. UNLESS of course NYR come back slowly, get back in it and make it to gm7. now how awesome would that be for the game of hockey, huh?

LET'S GO RANGERS!!

 

[Reality Check]

No kidding?

Strange that I so vividly remember watching that game but apparently don't recall what channel it was on.

Although to be honest, it is very possible that I actually watched that game on CBC (since I was in Buffalo back then and often watched the playoffs on CBC, which offered much better overall coverage at that time).

The '97 and '98 cups were presented on ESPN as well. Of course, both of those series were sweeps.

 

[Soundwave]

Steve Lepore ‏@stevelepore 31s
Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final drew 2.89M viewers. Not bad, better than NJ/LA, you'd like it to be better, but 3-0 series.




2.89M.. for a Gm 3 SC final?? OUCH.. couldn't even hit 3M?? and now that's it's 3-0, i guess the dream of ever seeing a 10M final is put to rest. UNLESS of course NYR come back slowly, get back in it and make it to gm7. now how awesome would that be for the game of hockey, huh?

LET'S GO RANGERS!!

Yeah that's not good. Though I hope it maybe opens the NHL's eyes that just having two big markets in a Final isn't necessarily the be all, end all. Keep things in perspective at least.

 

[King_Stannis]

Even the NY Times is taking notice:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/s...s.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias:r&_r=1

I'm sorry but Detroit needs to strip that "Hockeytown" moniker off their ice and give it to Buffalo. When you have the worst team in the league BY FAR and have only been in the playoffs a couple of times in the last several years and you still are that dedicated to the game you deserve it.

 

[DanZ]

I'm sorry but Detroit needs to strip that "Hockeytown" moniker off their ice and give it to Buffalo. When you have the worst team in the league BY FAR and have only been in the playoffs a couple of times in the last several years and you still are that dedicated to the game you deserve it.

It's a marketing tactic that they created, so no, they don't have to do anything

 

[46zone]

Yeah that's not good. Though I hope it maybe opens the NHL's eyes that just having two big markets in a Final isn't necessarily the be all, end all. Keep things in perspective at least.

It's "not good" because the game was over in the second period. Having two big markets in the final is good for the NHL, it's not good when the series is lopsided. Game two did very well and game one did alright. If New York can somehow push this to a game six, which doesn't look likely, I think we'll see a rating that equals or maybe even tops last year's game six between CHI/BOS.

 

[MayDay]

It's "not good" because the game was over in the second period. Having two big markets in the final is good for the NHL, it's not good when the series is lopsided. Game two did very well and game one did alright. If New York can somehow push this to a game six, which doesn't look likely, I think we'll see a rating that equals or maybe even tops last year's game six between CHI/BOS.

Obviously matchup isn't everything when it comes to ratings. Quality of series is a big factor too.

I think NBC's order of preference would be something like:

1) Big American markets + good long series (eg. Chicago-Boston 2013)
2) Small or Canadian markets + good long series (eg. Carolina-Edmonton 2006)
3) Big American markets + lopsided series (eg. Detroit-Philly 1997)
4) Small or Canadian markets + lopsided series (eg. Anaheim-Ottawa 2007)

 

[Tough Guy]

How are game 3 ratings "not good".

Aren't they among the best ever for the NHL on cable? LA is a brutal hockey market and NY isn't much better. You can't compare the numbers to last year with Chicago-Boston.

 

[jkrdevil]

The Stanley Cup is going to be awarded on cable (for the first time ever?)

It was bound to happen at some point, ever since they changed to broadcast schedule to put Games 1&2 on network TV and Games 3&4 on cable.

The NHL has been lucky in the past several years to have good Finals series, but sooner or later there was bound to be a sweep, which means a major pro championship would be won on cable TV.

1999. In fact 1995 was the only year from 1981 to 1999 that the Cup clinching game was on broadcast television.