ESPN Dumps NHL

[Zoo]

**** there goes hockey for me...

 

[Sotnos]

But too many of their local feeds are lame/amateurish and without energy/buzz/emotion...

This has nothing to do with local broadcasts, no one is losing those that I know of.

Arena ad revenue will also drop with the ESPN deal

Somewhat, but how much really? Many teams only got on ESPN one or two times a season, and I'd assume that was taken into account when doing their ad deals.

 

[Levitate]

I wish. If you want ugly, imagine what happens if they hold out until Sept 2007.

um, if they hold out that long then there will be no NHL.

 

[SkateLikeTheWind]

IF ESPN is out of the equation all together, it really wouldn't matter if another station picked the NHL. ESPN is a publicity machine here in the U.S. It has two major sports channels and you can kiss goodbye any type of major exposure in hopes of bringing in new fans.

 

[x-bob]

Is this officia? It's not on the ESPN site. I think it would be there if it's official.

 

[Jarqui]

Yes,this is the post I was looking for...IMO CBC should negotiate a way to link with an American Network and allow for the American Network to fund/pick up on CBC broadcasting of the NHL...FULL TIME...CBC is unsurpassed and by pooling their strength/experience with an American Network...they could assemble a unique and traditional package together. I'm ignorant to the legal ramifications/red tape of CBC going on American TV...doing All American broadcasts...but I think it could work...(wouldn't the FTA be of assistance?)
If Americans were able to watch something like what we see on Saturday Nights in Canada(and throughout the playoffs) they would tune in.But too many of their local feeds are lame/amateurish and without energy/buzz/emotion...

I agree. Maybe subcontract the CBC to do the camerawork and production in the States of the US games. ESPN sucked in comparison to the job that the CBC does and I'm certain that had something to do with their ratings. Many ESPN cameramen can't follow the play. I sometimes find the ESPN telecasts a real turnoff when I'm traveling in the States. I shudder to imagine what the novice hockey viewer in the US has to deal with. In that respect, ESPN have been part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

 

[SkateLikeTheWind]

I agree. Maybe subcontract the CBC to do the camerawork and production in the States of the US games. ESPN sucked in comparison to the job that the CBC does and I'm certain that had something to do with their ratings. Many ESPN cameramen can't follow the play. I sometimes find the ESPN telecasts a real turnoff when I'm traveling in the States. I shudder to imagine what the novice hockey viewer in the US has to deal with. In that respect, ESPN have been part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

Would you spend the money making a decent broadcast of the games if hardly no one watches them? ESPN is a business, not a non-profit hockey televising venture.

 

[Hasbro]

Would you spend the money making a decent broadcast of the games if hardly no one watches them? ESPN is a business, not a non-profit hockey televising venture.

Have you seen some of the sports they do broadcast?

 

[Jarqui]

Would you spend the money making a decent broadcast of the games if hardly no one watches them? ESPN is a business, not a non-profit hockey televising venture.

CBC does and I believe that is part of the reason people have continued to watch. Obviously, they have the Canadian market. Maybe they test market it in the US. But I have felt for years that the lousy broadcasts in the US have held hockey growth back some. I've seen hockey broadcasts in many of the US NHL cities. Generally, they are not nearly as good at it.

 

[Steve L*]

Would you spend the money making a decent broadcast of the games if hardly no one watches them? ESPN is a business, not a non-profit hockey televising venture.

Of course, you can argue noone watches the games because their coverage is so bad.

Imagine owning resteraunt, making bad food so hardly anyone comes to eat. Do you not bother making an effort and make do or try to improve the food in hope of attracting more customers?

 

[SkateLikeTheWind]

Have you seen some of the sports they do broadcast?

Yeah, and its pretty sad. But when cheerleading draws more viewers than hockey, I would say the NHL has a bigger problem than ESPN does.

 

[Dr Love]

Of course, you can argue noone watches the games because their coverage is so bad.

Imagine owning resteraunt, making bad food so hardly anyone comes to eat. Do you not bother making an effort and make do or try to improve the food in hope of attracting more customers?

Which is a foolish argument. The coverage sucks in every sport.

Hockey got bad ratings with FOX, it got bad ratings with ESPN, and it'll get bad ratings from the next place it goes.

 

[blitzkriegs]

Smart move by ESPN.

This makes Bettman a lock as the worst thing to ever happen to this sport. Twelve months ago they should have been working on a cba because they new what was at stake. All I can say is that this better be worth it.

Really? Because w/o Bettman you wouldn't have had the FOX, ESPN, ABC contracts to begin with.

Part of the fault in this whole thing is with the owners. ESPN/ABC went with the big markets. However, most of the big markets during this time were bad teams. CHI? ANA? LA? NYR? BOS? PIT?

 

[Everest]

CBC does and I believe that is part of the reason people have continued to watch. Obviously, they have the Canadian market. Maybe they test market it in the US. But I have felt for years that the lousy broadcasts in the US have held hockey growth back some. I've seen hockey broadcasts in many of the US NHL cities. Generally, they are not nearly as good at it.

It is worth noting...and IMO vital knowledge...to respect the fact that hockey IS the most difficult sport in the world to televise.
Nothing is as fast/chaotic and involved..and even the best at it acknowledge the need for improvement.
It could be a very good thing if ESPN has bocked...because anybody who picks up the torch will have to set the tone with some significant advances/innovation in how they track the action.

 

[SkateLikeTheWind]

Which is a foolish argument. The coverage sucks in every sport.

Hockey got bad ratings with FOX, it got bad ratings with ESPN, and it'll get bad ratings from the next place it goes.

Exactly. The majority of people watching the games watch because they love the sport. Not because it's a marvelous broadcast.

 

[Steve L*]

Which is a foolish argument. The coverage sucks in every sport.

Hockey got bad ratings with FOX, it got bad ratings with ESPN, and it'll get bad ratings from the next place it goes.

Ive yet to see Fox or ESPN do good coverage so no wonder it gets bad ratings.

 

[Dr Love]

Ive yet to see Fox or ESPN do good coverage so no wonder it gets bad ratings.

It couldn't possibly be the product and not the coverage?

 

[GKJ]

Really? Because w/o Bettman you wouldn't have had the FOX, ESPN, ABC contracts to begin with.

Part of the fault in this whole thing is with the owners. ESPN/ABC went with the big markets. However, most of the big markets during this time were bad teams. CHI? ANA? LA? NYR? BOS? PIT?

Because EVERYONE wants to watch the Nashville Predators play the Florida Panthers

 

[blitzkriegs]

Coincidence?

ESPN drops NHL on the Friday of Memorial Day holiday weekend. With the NHL/PA scheduled to continue meetings next week.

Because it is a league contract, ESPN/NHL may have agreed to do it TODAY to let this rest on the minds of the PA side over the next three days. You never know.

 

[SkateLikeTheWind]

Ive yet to see Fox or ESPN do good coverage so no wonder it gets bad ratings.

I'm interested in exactly what a good broadcast means to you?

At this point, a video feed with sound would be good for me.

 

[Roger's Pancreas*]

All I can say is - what? The NHL has been trying to get a new CBA for about 5 years, this is common knowledge. Who are you referring to when you say they?

This better be worth it? What it this?

Anyways, to answer the question in this thread I think this does nothing but stall the process. One less deadline for BG to use.

"They" are the two figure heads in charge of negotiations, "this" is everyday I have to wake up and find out that the nhl is one inch closer to closing shop.

 

[GKJ]

Coincidence?

ESPN drops NHL on the Friday of Memorial Day holiday weekend. With the NHL/PA scheduled to continue meetings next week.

Because it is a league contract, ESPN/NHL may have agreed to do it TODAY to let this rest on the minds of the PA side over the next three days. You never know.

Again, also not out of the question. ESPN said they were the ones who were going to wait until July 1. We still have 4 more days until the clock strikes June.

 

[Steve L*]

It couldn't possibly be the product and not the coverage?

Its both, HNIC can draw people into watching hockey and will increase the amount of viewers, ESPN wont because their coverage is terrible.

 

[blitzkriegs]

Because EVERYONE wants to watch the Nashville Predators play the Florida Panthers

No. But who wants to watch the 10th place Ducks vs. the 10th place Blackhawks?

Or the 12th place NYR vs. 10th Bruins?

Somehow I think a Knicks vs. Bulls game 3 years ago (when both teams were terrible) would draw way less than the Heat vs. Cavs. Get it?

Too many of the relied upon markets during those saturday telecasts were just terrible teams. Sorry. People just don't have interest in watching that. Especially on a saturday @ 3pm EST in the Spring.

 

[Dr Love]

At this point, a video feed with sound would be good for me.

Screw the sound. A video feed would be more than fine at this point.