Franchise in the most Trouble?

[ej_pens]

Last season Sabre games on MSG averaged more than a 5.0 and it's expected to be closer to 7.0 this year. The opener on Versus had a 9.5 in Buffalo..

It would be interesting to see where the Buffalo News got those numbers. It could be estimates generated by MSG, not really applicable to what was in the Wild's press release about their ratings and what was supplied by Nielson.

 

[MLH]

It would be interesting to see where the Buffalo News got those numbers. It could be estimates generated by MSG, not really applicable to what was in the Wild's press release about their ratings and what was supplied by Nielson.

They're Nielsen numbers. Pergament frequently reports the Nielsen ratings for Sabres and Bills games. The playoffs ranged from 25-35, regular season games average 5ishm, and big games like the opener or Leafs will be around 7-10. Buffalo normally draws a 1-3 rating for nationally televised games depending on who is playing.

I think I read somewhere that Buffalo's local average was higher than every American team's regular season high with the exception of Detroit, Philly, and Pittsburgh (Crosby's first game).

 

[ej_pens]

They're Nielsen numbers. Pergament frequently reports the Nielsen ratings for Sabres and Bills games. The playoffs ranged from 25-35, regular season games average 5ishm, and big games like the opener or Leafs will be around 7-10. Buffalo normally draws a 1-3 rating for nationally televised games depending on who is playing.

I think I read somewhere that Buffalo's local average was higher than every American team's regular season high with the exception of Detroit, Philly, and Pittsburgh (Crosby's first game).

Except that if they were that high and they were Nielson numbers, why weren't they included on the press release as one of the top 5?

 

[MLH]

Except that if they were that high and they were Nielson numbers, why weren't they included on the press release as one of the top 5?

MSG may not be considered a "regional sports network" for Buffalo since it's based in NY City. The press release could just be wrong. I don't know, but Buffalo has the highest local TV ratings of any American team. Minnesota's playoff games are barely higher than Buffalo's regular season average and Minnesota is a decent NHL TV market.

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

The press release could just be wrong.

I saw that Wild press release quite a while back, and I too have questioned its accuracy, or at least its completeness. Colorado's regional TV ratings have been pretty consistent from year to year, and have been higher on average than several of the of the ratings mentioned in their release. It's possible that Colorado got lost in the shuffle because of the switch from FSN-Rocky Mountain to Altitude. Last season was our first on Altitude, and I haven't seen an average published by the new network. But to illustrate the type of ratings we see here in the Denver market, in the previous season (their final one on FSN-Rocky Mountain), the Avs drew an average 4.4 rating.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%7E76%7E2598540,00.html?search=filter

The average rating for regular-season Avalanche games on FSN last season was 4.4

Edit: I see that the article is no longer available on the Post's online site. Not sure if they archive these anywhere.

 

[Metallian*]

How do you figure? You obviously didn't look at Tampa's attendance numbers.

prior to the Cup they were averaging 79% in 2002, 75% (14.9k) the year before


this year and last the numbers have been through the roof but its not like its consistant at all. if there was no cup win to spike some interest i dout they'd be over 90% these days.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

prior to the Cup they were averaging 79% in 2002, 75% (14.9k) the year before


this year and last the numbers have been through the roof but its not like its consistant at all. if there was no cup win to spike some interest i dout they'd be over 90% these days.

The Devils haven't been at 90% even after 3 Cups and Anaheim still didn't average 15,000 after almost winning the Cup in '03. Meanwhile, Tampa averaged 90.2% in 2004 on their way to the Cup and drew 103.8% of capacity last season (3rd best in the league on a percentage basis); Buffalo drew just 91.2% of capacity last season.

If you go back and look at nearly every team that hit a prolonged slump, you'll see attendance numbers drop. Just because Tampa is a "non-traditional market" doesn't mean that it can't (or won't) support hockey. Every team that's jumped into a new market has had problems with attendance early on (including San Jose, Phoenix, and Ottawa even considering their 10,500 seat home for the first few years). The Sharks and Senators needed some W's to get fans to show up, the 'Yotes are getting there.

The Bolts and Canes have gotten W's now, and a banner to boot. I predict the fans will continue to show up even if the team starts to struggle.

 

[Metallian*]

the canes got wins all year last year and fans didnt go out

get real

 

[skullman80]

the canes got wins all year last year and fans didnt go out

get real

The sooner you realize that attendance isn't the end all of everything, the better off everyone in this thread will be.

 

[Transported Upstater]

How exactly is this thread any different from the eight quadrillion relocation threads?

 

[Metallian*]

The sooner you realize that attendance isn't the end all of everything, the better off everyone in this thread will be.

obviously it isnt. its not even the most important.


but why bother arguing when you guys are just going to make excuses for every team in the league and say everyones in good shape?

"they have bad attendance"
"they've only been around a decade, they're still new so it doesnt count"

theres no sense at all

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I'm going to declare a moratorium on further relocation threads. If there's real, legitimate talk about a team moving, fine - but we've done enough speculating and finger pointing. It's time to move on.