Canceling season a marketing ploy?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PantherBlood6*

Guest
Just pure speculation on my part -- but I was talking about this with a buddy of mine earlier this evening.

Could this whole circus-act be some sort of a marketing ploy by the NHL AND the NHLPA? It seems kind of bizarre what is going on right now. Canceling the season gives the NHL a TON of media attention (although negative) -- because it's the first season to EVER be completely lost over a labor dispute in a major sport. But if you turn around and un-cancel the 2004-2005 season -- all that attention suddenly becomes positive.

Think about it for a second -- If the NHL and NHLPA announce a deal before the deadline given by Bettman -- they would get some attention but not NEARLY the coverage they are getting right now (at least in most US markets...). the players look like heroes instead of the criminals they are portrayed as now -- NHL legends like Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux and Steve Yzerman saving the sport from imminent disaster -- combine that with rule changes and a new economic system that should provide parity, the NHL could really market the sport as a new, rebuilt league with the sports eye as a whole fully focused on the NHL.

Maybe I'm nuts...but alot of things going on right now don't seem to add up. Be gentle...... :help:
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
Ok, I don't believe this one bit, but I had an interesting thought.


The NHL season got more press last week than they had all lockout, by far. Every sports channel, radio network, and newspaper had them on the front page.

Sunday is the 25th anniversary of the Miracle on Ice.

Wayne and Mario are riding to the rescue.

Sounds pretty dramatic ;)


Can't you imagine Wayne Gretzky announcing that he brokered a deal to uncancel the season on the anniversary of the greatest hockey game ever played?

Again, I don't believe any of this, just a thought :)
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
TKF37 said:
Canceling the season gives the NHL a TON of media attention (although negative) -- because it's the first season to EVER be completely lost over a labor dispute in a major sport. But if you turn around and un-cancel the 2004-2005 season -- all that attention suddenly becomes positive.
No, it doesn't. If they uncancel the season, it won't be as big of a postitive impact as the cancellation was a negative impact. It opens floodgates for all kinds of criticism for a sport that gets bashed enough in the mainstream media. It's not a marketing ploy, the NHL isn't that dumb and their PR people aren't that dumb (well, they ARE but not in context of what we're discussing).
 

Motown Beatdown

Need a slump buster
Mar 5, 2002
8,572
0
Indianapolis
Visit site
Pissing off your fan base is not a smart marketing ploy. If for some reason they reach a deal it will get maybe on day worth of air time and then it will go back to being pretty much ignored by the mass media. Until the fix the game the game will be ignored. Until they bring in the casual fans it will be ignored. Until TV rating go it will be ignored.
 

Vapour Trail

Registered User
TKF37 said:
Just pure speculation on my part -- but I was talking about this with a buddy of mine earlier this evening.

Could this whole circus-act be some sort of a marketing ploy by the NHL AND the NHLPA? It seems kind of bizarre what is going on right now. Canceling the season gives the NHL a TON of media attention (although negative) -- because it's the first season to EVER be completely lost over a labor dispute in a major sport. But if you turn around and un-cancel the 2004-2005 season -- all that attention suddenly becomes positive.

Think about it for a second -- If the NHL and NHLPA announce a deal before the deadline given by Bettman -- they would get some attention but not NEARLY the coverage they are getting right now (at least in most US markets...). the players look like heroes instead of the criminals they are portrayed as now -- NHL legends like Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux and Steve Yzerman saving the sport from imminent disaster -- combine that with rule changes and a new economic system that should provide parity, the NHL could really market the sport as a new, rebuilt league with the sports eye as a whole fully focused on the NHL.

Maybe I'm nuts...but alot of things going on right now don't seem to add up. Be gentle...... :help:

I've wondered the same thing myself...

ESPN has not given two ***** about hockey or the lockout for the past several months. But Wednesday, they devoted a ton of time on Sportscenter and even did a sappy piece about "what we're losing", complete with video montage and all. Would things have gotten so much attention with a last minute deal? I don't think so.
 

Nordik_19

Registered User
Dec 18, 2002
403
4
Québec
Visit site
Great theory ! I think this is the best way for the players to come out as heroes ! I don't know about you guys but i'm no pro-PA and now Bettman is saying that the door is still open for a deal to save the season and what will the players do ? Save the season and be heroes ? Or sign in the UHL and be moron ? :dunno:
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
Vapour Trail said:
I've wondered the same thing myself...

ESPN has not given two ***** about hockey or the lockout for the past several months. But Wednesday, they devoted a ton of time on Sportscenter and even did a sappy piece about "what we're losing", complete with video montage and all. Would things have gotten so much attention with a last minute deal? I don't think so.
Yes, they would have. Why do people feel the need to blame ESPN for the popularity failures of the 8th most popular sport that gets ratings that of the WNBA and Arena Football? Why can't we accept that hockey is not a top sport in America, and get on with it?
 

HF2002

Registered User
Aug 20, 2003
2,924
80
Ottawa
Visit site
DownFromNJ said:
Can't you imagine Wayne Gretzky announcing that he brokered a deal to uncancel the season on the anniversary of the greatest hockey game ever played?
The anniversary of the greatest game ever played is September 15th, while some might say Sept 28th.
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
Yes, they would have. Why do people feel the need to blame ESPN for the popularity failures of the 8th most popular sport that gets ratings that of the WNBA and Arena Football? Why can't we accept that hockey is not a top sport in America, and get on with it?

AFL stars work forklifts during the offseason to pay the bills. I don't know much about the WNBA.

Look, my cousin is a softball pitcher. She is very, very good. She is good enough to turn pro. She isn't going to turn pro. Want to know why? Because she can't make any money doing it. She can make more money being a school teacher in Iowa. Why? Because no one watches these sports which are supposed to be more popular than hockey. It's all B.S.
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
DownFromNJ said:
AFL stars work forklifts during the offseason to pay the bills. I don't know much about the WNBA.

Look, my cousin is a softball pitcher. She is very, very good. She is good enough to turn pro. She isn't going to turn pro. Want to know why? Because she can't make any money doing it. She can make more money being a school teacher in Iowa. Why? Because no one watches these sports which are supposed to be more popular than hockey. It's all B.S.
The opening day of Arena Football last year got better ratings than the NHL All Star game. Ratings are what set the TV contracts. Yeah, AFL players have real jobs in the offseason, but their sport gets ratings that are on par with the NHL, and they have a national TV contract.
 

HF2002

Registered User
Aug 20, 2003
2,924
80
Ottawa
Visit site
DownFromNJ said:
You claimed the anniversary of the greatest game ever played is this Sunday. Many of us would disagree. Those Septemeber dates I posted took place in 1972 and 1987.

I know that this is the Business Board, but too many people have forgotten that we're supposed to be arguing about on-ice debates. I just thought I'd interject that...OH WHAT'S THE POINT?!

(sob...sob..) I'm sorry, I think I'm beginning to crack..(sob..sob..) I can't take this anymore!
 

jratelle19

Registered User
Jul 3, 2004
358
9
New York
I really don't see the cancellation as a marketing ploy. :shakehead

However, I wouldn't put it past Bettman to have used it as a negotiating ploy, to let the PA know that the owners mean business.

With players like Linden, Iginla and Pronger stepping forward to try to help make a deal, the NHL had to know that there was a difference of opinion amongst NHLPAers. Cancelling the season might have been a message to them, saying: "Stop drinking the Goodenow kool-aid. We're not bluffing. We mean what we say and we definitely, as you can now see, are prepared to cancel the season."
 

DownFromNJ

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
2,536
2
The opening day of Arena Football last year got better ratings than the NHL All Star game. Ratings are what set the TV contracts. Yeah, AFL players have real jobs in the offseason, but their sport gets ratings that are on par with the NHL, and they have a national TV contract.

Why? Because Jon Bon Jovi spent half his winter hiping up that pathetic sports league prior to it's opening day. That doesn't mean that its a big sport. It means people are dumb enough to watch it. People will watch anything. But lets see how Fear Factor's ratings are in 5 years.
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
DownFromNJ said:
Why? Because Jon Bon Jovi spent half his winter hiping up that pathetic sports league prior to it's opening day.
That would be a valid point but they had a deal with NBC the year before. And like the NHL, they didn't pay for the rights.
 

Egil

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
8,838
1
Visit site
The AFL doesn't bring in 2.1 Billion in revenues, unlike the NHL. The AFL doesn't have the SUPERB demographics tha the NHL has (which are probably unrivaled by ANYTHING else on TV). The NHL normally has HIGHER attendance, at the SAME ticket prices to the NBA, despite a NHL/NBA rink having a capacity of about 1000 seats less for the NHL than the NBA.

The RAW TV rating number is a POOR choice to compare between sports.
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
Egil said:
The RAW TV rating number is a POOR choice to compare between sports.
Not when you're talking about TV contracts. My original point is why are we blaming ESPN for hockey's shortcomings? What more do you want them to do? This is not a top 5 sport in America, never has been.
 

Vapour Trail

Registered User
Dr Love said:
Not when you're talking about TV contracts. My original point is why are we blaming ESPN for hockey's shortcomings? What more do you want them to do? This is not a top 5 sport in America, never has been.

I never blamed ESPN for hockey's shortcomings. My point was that they were nowhere to be found when the negotiations were ongoing, but were all over the story when the NHL cancelled. Sure, it's the first league to cancel a season. But if "nobody cares", why spend so much time covering the cancellation and do a hokey piece about how much we've lost? If the general public doesn't care all that much (and I'm not necessarily disagreeing), then mention the cancellation, do a little commentary, and move on to talking about baseball and basketball.
 

Dr Love

Registered User
Mar 22, 2002
20,360
0
Location, Location!
Vapour Trail said:
I never blamed ESPN for hockey's shortcomings.
I wasn't saying you in specific were, but it's constant topic here.

Vapour Trail said:
My point was that they were nowhere to be found when the negotiations were ongoing, but were all over the story when the NHL cancelled. Sure, it's the first league to cancel a season. But if "nobody cares", why spend so much time covering the cancellation and do a hokey piece about how much we've lost? If the general public doesn't care all that much (and I'm not necessarily disagreeing), then mention the cancellation, do a little commentary, and move on to talking about baseball and basketball.
People care, but people care more about other sports. We all pretty much want hockey to be a top sport here in the US. But the reality is that hockey isn't anywhere close to it, and all the coverage in the world isn't going to change that. So rather than ***** about ESPN when other programming is on instead of a Sharks/Islanders game, why can't we just enjoy hockey for what it is?
 

Vapour Trail

Registered User
Dr Love said:
I wasn't saying you in specific were, but it's constant topic here.


People care, but people care more about other sports. We all pretty much want hockey to be a top sport here in the US. But the reality is that hockey isn't anywhere close to it, and all the coverage in the world isn't going to change that. So rather than ***** about ESPN when other programming is on instead of a Sharks/Islanders game, why can't we just enjoy hockey for what it is?

Fair enough... I'd agree with that!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->