Fox, Turner interested in NHL U.S. TV Rights...

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
I hope this happens soon. And I hope it is over 500 million, so it can become the primary source revenue.
 

ElGuapo

^Plethora of piñatas
Nov 30, 2010
4,132
1,407
Nomad
I'd rather them stay away from Fox. They have the worst sports coverage among networks and cable channels that currently produce sports shows. Crappy looking studios, crappy music, crappy video feeds, crappy graphics, most mistakes, etc. I'd stay with NBC/Versus and see if you can get on another cable channel as well.
 

ElGuapo

^Plethora of piñatas
Nov 30, 2010
4,132
1,407
Nomad
I don't think people ignore it. They just felt like ESPN never made the league a priority. That was certainly the case by the end of the prior deal when NHL2night was cancelled and most games were shifted to ESPN2 with little promotion muscle behind them.

FWIW Fox probably spent more time promoting the league and more effort than anyone else. They worked awfully hard at it and spent the money to prove it. Unfortunately they were constantly derided because of the FoxTrax puck. Fox has probably been the leagues best US tv partner even if Disney bid more for the rights. Just seems like Fox cared and worked harder than the other networks.

Fox was still new to sports and trying to prove themselves and gain traction. Them having hockey wouldn't be as a big a deal for them now and frankly Fox sucks at sports.
 

don28

Postal Gunslinger
Dec 31, 2009
199
0
Lebanon, TN
I'd rather them stay away from Fox. They have the worst sports coverage among networks and cable channels that currently produce sports shows. Crappy looking studios, crappy music, crappy video feeds, crappy graphics, most mistakes, etc. I'd stay with NBC/Versus and see if you can get on another cable channel as well.

This^ I thought I was the only one who felt this way.
 

PlagerBros*

Guest
I don't think people ignore it. They just felt like ESPN never made the league a priority. That was certainly the case by the end of the prior deal when NHL2night was cancelled and most games were shifted to ESPN2 with little promotion muscle behind them.

FWIW Fox probably spent more time promoting the league and more effort than anyone else. They worked awfully hard at it and spent the money to prove it. Unfortunately they were constantly derided because of the FoxTrax puck. Fox has probably been the leagues best US tv partner even if Disney bid more for the rights. Just seems like Fox cared and worked harder than the other networks.

You are doing exactly what I said...ignoring what ESPN did for the NHL. The NHL would not have been so big in the 90's without ESPN making it one of their top priorities.
 

Spy

resU deretsigeR
Aug 4, 2008
1,040
0
Montreal
So I was looking around for some details on the TV deal with versus and came across this picture:

ept_sports_nhl_experts-785414452-1296658708.jpg


Have you ever seen Bettman this happy? :lol:
 

Ruckus007

where to?
May 27, 2003
8,023
23
Huntington, WV
I don't even know what channel TruTV is on.

A similar problem is how available TruTV HD is, which is apparently not very. I have Time Warner here and found out I don't get the HD feed. How a network could think of putting NCAA tournament games on a non-HD channel in this day in age is beyond me but apparently they are making it temporarily available throughout the tournament (see here).

Anyway, I don't know how many households get TruTV HD but if Turner is serious about an NHL bid and putting games on that network, that number better get a lot higher in a hurry.
 

IceAce

Strait Trippin'
Jun 9, 2010
5,166
10
Philadelphia
I'd rather them stay away from Fox. They have the worst sports coverage among networks and cable channels that currently produce sports shows. Crappy looking studios, crappy music, crappy video feeds, crappy graphics, most mistakes, etc. I'd stay with NBC/Versus and see if you can get on another cable channel as well.

Don't they basically have that with the NHL Network showing 3-4 games per week?
 

Mwd711

Registered User
Jan 20, 2006
624
0
Fox was still new to sports and trying to prove themselves and gain traction. Them having hockey wouldn't be as a big a deal for them now and frankly Fox sucks at sports.

You're right that at the beginning of the deal, Fox was new to sports. But even after they got MLB rights, they still put on a strong promotional effort behind the league. The amount of league sponsorships was much higher at that time (not necessarily in dollars but in the number of sponsors) and that can be largely attributed to Fox's efforts.

As far as Fox's coverage, that's your opinion. I can't say that I love Fox's antics but they are popular. What you can't argue is that Fox Sports is successful as a whole. They have the number 1 NFL pre-game show and their NASCAR ratings have always outperformed the races on NBC and ABC. Also when comparing the nationally aired NFL games (4:00 game of doubleheader) between Fox and CBS, Fox wins that in ratings as they did during the overall season for regional coverage. They have been the top NFL rights holder for 16 years straight, so someone must like their coverage. And let's face it, the NHL has struggled to ever reach the ratings that they had on Fox. There's plenty of reasons that we can be debate about why that is, but the league has never been able to duplicate it.

You are doing exactly what I said...ignoring what ESPN did for the NHL. The NHL would not have been so big in the 90's without ESPN making it one of their top priorities.

I'm not ignoring ESPN's NHL coverage. But I, like many people, don't think that ESPN ever made the NHL a top priority. The exception was when they launched ESPN2. ESPN used the NHL, NASCAR and college sports to build the network. It was extremely successful for everyone involved. But at ESPN itself, NHL was always in the shadows of the other sports. The addition of the NBA was the final nail in the coffin.

Obviously, being on ESPN helped gain the league recognition but I think the deal with Fox had more importance since it was the first major NHL broadcast tv deal in the US in decades. The previous NHL on ABC deal was actually a time buy by ESPN so Fox was the first to pay for broadcast rights. Going back to the early 90's it's easy to forget that ESPN was not the force that it is today. Back then, most sports weren't considered legitimate unless they were televised on broadcast television. Cable was still growing and broadcast television dominated the television landscape. Sure, ESPN was important, but being on broadcast tv, was the holy grail. That's where the money and viewership was at the time. Since then, broadcast tv has eroded, and now all the money is in cable which is why ESPN and Turner have been so aggressive the last few years. Just a few years ago it would've been unthinkable for March Madness, the BCS, major golf and tennis championships and MLB championship series coverage to be on cable, yet here we are. The tv landscape has changed radically in the last 20 years.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->