NY Post Larry Brooks: ESPN blocks NHL Ads

[jBuds]

What a joke.... unreal. The highlights on Sportscenter piss me off as well...

 

[Higgy4]

"world wide leader in sports" HA!

Unless poker is a sport now. I swear if I see another world series of poker championship i'm going to scream. Here in NY 1050 espn radio which claims to be the "home of the Rangers" hardly ever does games anymore, its always the Knicks or just random football talk. How can you program an entire day around football and basketball,especially when all the shows talk about the same stuff , I say F ESPN.

There is a radio station like that here in Toledo. They call themselves "Toledo's Home for Red Wings hockey". But they only play the games if the Jim Tressel Show, Detroit Tigers, Toledo MudHens, Bowling Green Basketball, High School Football or High School Basketball is not playing that night. I swear this is no joke...Toledo's HOME for Detroit Red Wings hockey broadcast about 8 full games last year. I am not kidding.

 

[arinkrat*]

They did promote hockey. It got a lot more attention on Sportscenter and their other programming than it does now.

When ESPN pays a rights fee, they have every intention of making a profit. They know they need to make at least a certain amount of money, and they'll advertise and have Sportscenter segments as much as they have to, in order to get the ratings they need to make money.

Comcast knew they probably would not profit from this deal, they wanted to use the NHL, along with the NFL and MLB (who they failed to make deals with) to make a new sports network. They're not doing real well right now. They don't have the ability to promote a sport that ESPN does.

ESPN did a poor job of promoting the NHL. They cancelled NHL2Night and before they cancelled it, it wasn't shown in a consistent time slot. ESPN also steadily reduced the number of NHL games they televised and didn't do a good job of promoting the games they were televising.

 

[Whalerfan11]

They would love the sport if it made money. They don't hate it for the sake of hating it, they hate it because it doesn't make enough sense (read: $$$) in the USA. Even if they saw the potential, they would invest in the NHL... ESPN and Mr. Bettman have conflicting views on where the potential will lead.

I think this is one of the smartest ESPN posts ever. Sure ESPN doesn't show enough hockey. But some people seem to think it's just ESPN deciding one day to start hating the sport. That's not the case. There are many producers,editors,talent that would love to talk more about hockey but the reality is it just doesn't get ratings so it doesn't make sense.

 

[Jazz]

I think this is one of the smartest ESPN posts ever. Sure ESPN doesn't show enough hockey. But some people seem to think it's just ESPN deciding one day to start hating the sport. That's not the case. There are many producers,editors,talent that would love to talk more about hockey but the reality is it just doesn't get ratings so it doesn't make sense.

For the most part you are right, but Stan Shapiro (and I can't remember his exact position, but it was head-something at ESPN) openly confessed to being a hockey-hater. I never heard any quote, but Ray Ferarro, who is daily on local radio here confirmed this.

Luckily (for hockey at least) Shapiro is no longer with ESPN.

 

[Clarence Beeks]

Is there anything other sports property for V/S to go after? Is anything up soon?
If V/S were to get another sport, then it's availabitly will increase even further.

I think that's the key. If Versus can wrestle away something else that has a lot of drawing power it will go a long way toward breaking up ESPN's monopoly. Plain and simple, ESPN doesn't have a real competitor. They control a vast majority of the sports airwaves (both radio and tv), and instead of letting the sports make the news, ESPN decides what the news is. Right now it's whatever ESPN says, goes; and that needs to change.

 

[puck57]

For the most part you are right, but Stan Shapiro (and I can't remember his exact position, but it was head-something at ESPN) openly confessed to being a hockey-hater. I never heard any quote, but Ray Ferarro, who is daily on local radio here confirmed this.

Luckily (for hockey at least) Shapiro is no longer with ESPN.

It was Mark Shapiro- and he was in charge of programing- he was the one who had all those made for movies that they had on ESPN- like the one on Bobby Knight, etc. He wanted to have more "entertainment" on the network. He is no longer there but during his tenure you could really see the quality and quantity of hockey coverage really take a plunge.

 

[EbencoyE]

This is ESPN's M.O, they heavily promote sports they carry (poker, spelling bee's, womens college sports, etc) and ignore sports they don't (NHL, boxing, others).

This is part of their bargaining power. You make a deal with ESPN, your sport gets exposure, your sport gets promoted and advertised. You get a long segment on Sportscenter and a half hour show on ESPN2.

I hope the NHL goes back to ESPN when this deal with OLN/VS is over. They need the exposure and access to a larger audience more than they need the cash.

Even back when NHL had the deal with ESPN they didn't get anything from it. ESPN just has something against the sport. And they've brainwashed everyone into thinking hockey isn't a legit sport.

The year before the lockout, ESPN announced it was going to be the last year of NHL2Night, and the NHL was barely getting any coverage at all even then. No marketing what-so-ever. Maybe it was because they knew the lockout was coming and they thought hockey was basically just going to die.

Personally, I prefer Versus. Atleast Versus treats hockey with respect and us fans get plenty of air time of the sport. (Especially during the playoffs.) The only downpart with Versus is that they can only show 1 game at a time whereas ESPN could show 2.

Sure, hockey might not get as much mainstream media attention. But I don't care about what anyone else thinks as long as I still have the ability to watch and follow hockey. If the NHL didn't have a TV deal at all (like indoor soccer, or the NLL before this season) then I would probably stop following hockey. For now, though, I'm fine.

 

[puck57]

I think this is one of the smartest ESPN posts ever. Sure ESPN doesn't show enough hockey. But some people seem to think it's just ESPN deciding one day to start hating the sport. That's not the case. There are many producers,editors,talent that would love to talk more about hockey but the reality is it just doesn't get ratings so it doesn't make sense.

Sure hockey does not get the ratings of football and it never will. We all know ESPN is in it to make money. My main beef has been if ESPN even put in 1/8th or 1/16th the effort to even talk about hockey or halfway promote it probably would not bother me. It is that cavalier attitude that football is the only sport that "matters" so we are the football network 24/7. I don't think there are "a lot of producers, etc." that would want to talk hockey- if so you would hear more especially on the radio where there is so much time to fill up. I am not asking for the moon- just 1/16th the respect you show football. Example- Dan Patrick has a 3 hour radio show for 5 days a week- he use to talk with Clement like once a week- fine- since the lockout you have not heard him even mention hockey except when you had the gambling fiasco last season. Why not even 1 or 2 days a week for one 20 minute segment devote to some aspect of hockey- no- too much to ask.

 

[jkrdevil]

Even back when NHL had the deal with ESPN they didn't get anything from it. ESPN just has something against the sport. And they've brainwashed everyone into thinking hockey isn't a legit sport.

The year before the lockout, ESPN announced it was going to be the last year of NHL2Night, and the NHL was barely getting any coverage at all even then. No marketing what-so-ever. Maybe it was because they knew the lockout was coming and they thought hockey was basically just going to die.

The Worse part of all of that about ESPN is that Disney then actually owned a team in the league then. It would have been their best interest to try to promote hockey as much as possible as it would have helped 2 ends of their buisness.

 

[Whalerfan11]

Sure hockey does not get the ratings of football and it never will. We all know ESPN is in it to make money. My main beef has been if ESPN even put in 1/8th or 1/16th the effort to even talk about hockey or halfway promote it probably would not bother me. It is that cavalier attitude that football is the only sport that "matters" so we are the football network 24/7. I don't think there are "a lot of producers, etc." that would want to talk hockey- if so you would hear more especially on the radio where there is so much time to fill up. I am not asking for the moon- just 1/16th the respect you show football. Example- Dan Patrick has a 3 hour radio show for 5 days a week- he use to talk with Clement like once a week- fine- since the lockout you have not heard him even mention hockey except when you had the gambling fiasco last season. Why not even 1 or 2 days a week for one 20 minute segment devote to some aspect of hockey- no- too much to ask.

I work here at ESPN as a video editor. I know alot of people around me that still love the sport. Maybe they aren't the big decision makers but some are producers and some are highlight supervisors and they came from NHL 2nite and have a hockey background. I ask for hockey highlights whenever they are cutting them. The problem is Sportscenter may only get 2 games into the show. We still have Barry Melrose and John Buccigross. Melrose only job is being the 'hockey guy' and Buccigross anchors SC but still writes a hockey column and slips hockey into SC whenever he can.

I understand that ESPN turned sour on hockey and it pisses me off too. I wish I got here when we cared more about the sport. But there are still alot of people here who love the sport and during big meetings the question "when are we going to cover hockey better?" always gets brought up. I think the coverage of hockey on ESPN will get much better within the next few years. The lockout really hurt the NHL. It gave the average fan a whole year to forget about hockey. It's going to take a long time to get some of those casual fans back.

 

[geezette]

Honestly, ESPN provides me with the info I want on ESPNews. Yesterday was an interview with Sid, all the scores, trades if they happen. A blurb with Barry and Mr. Hradeck. Other than that, with at least a game on Center Ice every night, who watches them that much anway?

 

[puck57]

I work here at ESPN as a video editor. I know alot of people around me that still love the sport. Maybe they aren't the big decision makers but some are producers and some are highlight supervisors and they came from NHL 2nite and have a hockey background. I ask for hockey highlights whenever they are cutting them. The problem is Sportscenter may only get 2 games into the show. We still have Barry Melrose and John Buccigross. Melrose only job is being the 'hockey guy' and Buccigross anchors SC but still writes a hockey column and slips hockey into SC whenever he can.

I understand that ESPN turned sour on hockey and it pisses me off too. I wish I got here when we cared more about the sport. But there are still alot of people here who love the sport and during big meetings the question "when are we going to cover hockey better?" always gets brought up. I think the coverage of hockey on ESPN will get much better within the next few years. The lockout really hurt the NHL. It gave the average fan a whole year to forget about hockey. It's going to take a long time to get some of those casual fans back.

Hum- since you are closer to the situation- a few comments. Why does SC only "get 2 games into the show"- because they are too busy covering primarily football to make time or room for hockey. Of course the lockout really hurt hockey- but would ESPN treat football the same way if they lost a season and then came back the next season- no- they would be welcoming them with open arms and having numerous lead ups to when the season would start, etc. etc. My point being is the lockout is a convenient excuse so to speak for completely dropping even talking about the sport and in fact many times making fun of it on ESPN. How easy is it going to be to get the average fan back when ESPN for the most part treats it as a non-sport, non-interest- certainly won't help in my book.

 

[rekrul]

I work here at ESPN as a video editor. I know alot of people around me that still love the sport. Maybe they aren't the big decision makers but some are producers and some are highlight supervisors and they came from NHL 2nite and have a hockey background. I ask for hockey highlights whenever they are cutting them. The problem is Sportscenter may only get 2 games into the show. We still have Barry Melrose and John Buccigross. Melrose only job is being the 'hockey guy' and Buccigross anchors SC but still writes a hockey column and slips hockey into SC whenever he can.

I understand that ESPN turned sour on hockey and it pisses me off too. I wish I got here when we cared more about the sport. But there are still alot of people here who love the sport and during big meetings the question "when are we going to cover hockey better?" always gets brought up. I think the coverage of hockey on ESPN will get much better within the next few years. The lockout really hurt the NHL. It gave the average fan a whole year to forget about hockey. It's going to take a long time to get some of those casual fans back.

what Irks me though is the reason I started this thread, how the heck is hockey going to be able to premote its self if the major cable network refuses to air the NHL premotion Ads? Thats bush league and don't tell me they "promote only popular money makers". No one gives a fig about the WNBA, maybe a little to the Womens COllege games. Any of their cheap to produce poker, Dog jumping, Darts or what ever they do now gets PLENTY of premotion along with the stupid a smith show, which I have read No one watches either.

ESPN puts way to much into premoting what is cheap to put on the air, but no one makes a big deal about those ratings. But with the NHL its not ever mentioned any more about the skill or exciting play or big game. No its about how many people watched the event. Yet they don't want anyone who might be watching bowling to god forbid see an NHL ad? what are they scared of.........

 

[puck57]

what Irks me though is the reason I started this thread, how the heck is hockey going to be able to premote its self if the major cable network refuses to air the NHL premotion Ads? Thats bush league and don't tell me they "promote only popular money makers". No one gives a fig about the WNBA, maybe a little to the Womens COllege games. Any of their cheap to produce poker, Dog jumping, Darts or what ever they do now gets PLENTY of premotion along with the stupid a smith show, which I have read No one watches either.

ESPN puts way to much into premoting what is cheap to put on the air, but no one makes a big deal about those ratings. But with the NHL its not ever mentioned any more about the skill or exciting play or big game. No its about how many people watched the event. Yet they don't want anyone who might be watching bowling to god forbid see an NHL ad? what are they scared of.........

Exactly.

 

[Darth Bangkok]

I work here at ESPN as a video editor. I know alot of people around me that still love the sport. Maybe they aren't the big decision makers but some are producers and some are highlight supervisors and they came from NHL 2nite and have a hockey background. I ask for hockey highlights whenever they are cutting them. The problem is Sportscenter may only get 2 games into the show. We still have Barry Melrose and John Buccigross. Melrose only job is being the 'hockey guy' and Buccigross anchors SC but still writes a hockey column and slips hockey into SC whenever he can.

I understand that ESPN turned sour on hockey and it pisses me off too. I wish I got here when we cared more about the sport. But there are still alot of people here who love the sport and during big meetings the question "when are we going to cover hockey better?" always gets brought up. I think the coverage of hockey on ESPN will get much better within the next few years. The lockout really hurt the NHL. It gave the average fan a whole year to forget about hockey. It's going to take a long time to get some of those casual fans back.

Maybe if I knew hockey highlights were coming up on sportscenter, I might watch it a while and even sit through a few nauseating commercials. But who wants to watch some guy rushing through the hightlights trying to shout over music? The biggest annoyance is the rotating sports. Am I supposed to see the highlights two games at a time and sit through basketball and football and even baseball stories in between? This is like watching ESPN , except there is only one hand. or maybe like this

 

[Higgy4]

I am going to have to respectfully disagree on a few things here.

First off, I dont watch ESPN much anymore. I dont like NBA Basketball and I dont follow College Basketball as much as many others do. Those 2 sports DOMINATE the ESPN airwaves this time of year.

I also agree that near the end of their deal, ESPN jumped ship on the NHL. But lets be honest....they were jumping a sunken ship. Not a sinking ship...they jumped one that was already sunk.

But from the early 90's until 2003 or so, ESPN was the ONLY place to get really good hockey coverage in the United States. They covered just about every game in in the playoffs during those years. Many nights you could get 2-3 regular season games. NHL2Night was on for quite a few years, and you were BOMBARDED with promotional commercials and ads for the sport.

They did what they could for a long time to try and keep the NHL in the ratings game. But its a business, and the NHL is not good business for television companies.

I dont care for ESPN anymore...much like the rest of you. But they did a very good job for over a decade trying to keep that sport in the "Big 4" of professional sports.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

 

[Randall Graves*]

I'm sorry but the NHL was still a doormatt at that network even when they were paying for it. IMO the NHL gains nothing by moving back to them besides a few extra minutes on SC. I believe in Versus and their treatment of the sport -- growth does not happen overnight. I also believe they will land another big sport as this thing moves forward.

If you want to watch a real sports highlight show minus all of the BS fluff and egomaniacs tune into the Final Score on FSN -- they are doing it the right way.

Why can't the NHL be on ESPN and VS?

ESPN broadcasts a double header a week or an exclusive telecast, versus broadcasts a doubleheader or whatever..everyone wins.

 

[Zoo]

As much as you hate seeing poker and what ever gimic sport they have on. This is only network outside of North America where us folks can see the NHL again. So I would welcome the NHL on ESPN with big arms after there deal with VS.

Pissed off fan from downunder, with no hockey for 2 more years

 

[xeric716x]

ESPN is weak.

 

[ranold26]

Tom Mees likely has turned over in his grave.

 

[puck57]

I am going to have to respectfully disagree on a few things here.

First off, I dont watch ESPN much anymore. I dont like NBA Basketball and I dont follow College Basketball as much as many others do. Those 2 sports DOMINATE the ESPN airwaves this time of year.

I also agree that near the end of their deal, ESPN jumped ship on the NHL. But lets be honest....they were jumping a sunken ship. Not a sinking ship...they jumped one that was already sunk.

But from the early 90's until 2003 or so, ESPN was the ONLY place to get really good hockey coverage in the United States. They covered just about every game in in the playoffs during those years. Many nights you could get 2-3 regular season games. NHL2Night was on for quite a few years, and you were BOMBARDED with promotional commercials and ads for the sport.

They did what they could for a long time to try and keep the NHL in the ratings game. But its a business, and the NHL is not good business for television companies.

I dont care for ESPN anymore...much like the rest of you. But they did a very good job for over a decade trying to keep that sport in the "Big 4" of professional sports.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

In your opinion, the NHL was "already sunk". You have it right when you said "they did what they could" and not a whole lot more. ESPN would not know how to appreciate or treat hockey with respect if it hit them with a 2x4.

 

[Jazz]

As much as you hate seeing poker and what ever gimic sport they have on. This is only network outside of North America where us folks can see the NHL again. So I would welcome the NHL on ESPN with big arms after there deal with VS.

Pissed off fan from downunder, with no hockey for 2 more years

This can't be underestimated as well....

Many countries, (like New Zealand here) have domestic hockey, but only NHL would ever make it on TV (on ESPN International).

Showing games overseas does not generate much direct revenue for the NHL, but it does feed it's fans.

 

[Jazz]

I work here at ESPN as a video editor. I know alot of people around me that still love the sport. Maybe they aren't the big decision makers but some are producers and some are highlight supervisors and they came from NHL 2nite and have a hockey background. I ask for hockey highlights whenever they are cutting them. The problem is Sportscenter may only get 2 games into the show. We still have Barry Melrose and John Buccigross. Melrose only job is being the 'hockey guy' and Buccigross anchors SC but still writes a hockey column and slips hockey into SC whenever he can.

I understand that ESPN turned sour on hockey and it pisses me off too. I wish I got here when we cared more about the sport. But there are still alot of people here who love the sport and during big meetings the question "when are we going to cover hockey better?" always gets brought up. I think the coverage of hockey on ESPN will get much better within the next few years. The lockout really hurt the NHL. It gave the average fan a whole year to forget about hockey. It's going to take a long time to get some of those casual fans back.

Thanks for the insight. I am VERY curious as to what some of the responses were during the meetings to the above question.....

 

[OG6ix]

The Worse part of all of that about ESPN is that Disney then actually owned a team in the league then. It would have been their best interest to try to promote hockey as much as possible as it would have helped 2 ends of their buisness.

NOT IF HOCKEY CAN'T DRAW!!!

Then ESPN can't pay bills... it's the truth...

edit: the poster bashing the WNBA (which I'm not a fan of) really can't say "No one cares about the WNBA" when sometimes they get very comparable ratings to the NHL.