sawchuk1971
Registered User
- Jun 16, 2011
- 1,493
- 508
Will Bettman ever get a US TV contact that pays like the NFL, the NBA? MLB?
- Thread starter sawchuk1971
- Start date
Lt Dan
F*** your ice cream!
No Way.
The NFL is far and away the biggest draw
These are ratings I pulled from here
An Oversupply Of TV Sports Led To Low Ratings
NFL -20 million per game
College FB 9.6 mil per game
MLB playoffs: 9.72M per game
NBA playoffs: 7.45M per game
Stanley Cup Finals - 2.03M
The demand simply is not there
sawchuk1971
Registered User
- Jun 16, 2011
- 1,493
- 508
well the NHL is always gonna struggle with being the only sport league that depends on gate revenue.....
if thats the case, why the NHL decided to expand in the southern US knowing it will never receive the same type of media
exposure compared to the NFL?
the NHL, imho, should've stuck to 21 franchises and put more emphasis on canadian markets instead trying to compete with the NFL, etc...
Lt Dan
F*** your ice cream!
this reply really implies that you are very unrealistic and just want to argue about the past.
Back on topic- Bettman or any other commissioner is not a magician and even if they in theory were able to get NFL money in a contract, the ratings would not support the investment the network made.
No. Going into the next deals the only sport that will match or exceed their current deal will be the nfl.
Lt Dan
F*** your ice cream!
I don't even think they will get the same deal with sports viewership and carriage fees both declining
No chance.
nba contract for tv rights was $24 Billion over 9 years.
NHL $5.232 Billion Canadian over 12 years and another $200 mill annually from nbc.
Nba averages $2.66 billion per year.
nhl gets roughly $330 mill per from Rogers and $200 mill from nbc for around $550 mill usd.
that is over $2 billion annually.
nba contract for tv rights was $24 Billion over 9 years.
NHL $5.232 Billion Canadian over 12 years and another $200 mill annually from nbc.
Nba averages $2.66 billion per year.
nhl gets roughly $330 mill per from Rogers and $200 mill from nbc for around $550 mill usd.
that is over $2 billion annually.
Doctor No
Registered User
Progress is being made. It literally takes generations in order to have the lure of a "local team" as part of one's heritage.
You've set a very weird benchmark for success. If entertainment options made their decisions based on whether they could match the NFL, not a lot of things would happen.
Highly unlikely to obtain such a media contract. There was a window in the 90s in which NBA interest was waning a little in the US, and it looked like NHL had a chance to fill the gap. But, that passed......
Right now, I think it a great question what kind of media contract any league would get when all they have to offer is the antiseptic feel of games in empty arenas.... It's bad luck to the NHL to have to negotiate a new contract in the midst of a COVID world.
NFL and NBA are in better shape... theirs were signed, sealed and delivered before the present situation came to be..
Right now, I think it a great question what kind of media contract any league would get when all they have to offer is the antiseptic feel of games in empty arenas.... It's bad luck to the NHL to have to negotiate a new contract in the midst of a COVID world.
NFL and NBA are in better shape... theirs were signed, sealed and delivered before the present situation came to be..
NHL needs a transcendent talent that is popular mainstream in the US and worldwide and is promoted and marketed all over the place (a la LeBron), they really haven’t had that star since Gretzky and Lemieux. I think the NHL needs to improve how they market and promote their stars belong hockey circle and then maybe they can make more money overall like in TV deals. Till then they lag far behind the other sports.
sawchuk1971
Registered User
- Jun 16, 2011
- 1,493
- 508
when you say "the nhl needs how to market and promote their stars", do you mean a connor mcdavid might do progressive commericials like baker mayfield?
The real problem is that the game itself doesn't lend itself to flashy marketing like NFL and NBA do. Just think.....
Guys like Brady have an obvious effect on the result every game.
Guys like LeBron or even Steph Curry have the ball in their hands all the time.
These are things that US fans can connect with.
Hockey? Not so much. McDavid is probably the most talented player in the league right now. How many times in year does he take over a game? Not many, really.
How many times, when there is a one-goal separation between two teams at the end of the game, is it obvious who is going to score and tie the game? Almost never, because the players play 30 sec shifts.
It can't be helped. It's a great game. It just doesn't lend itself to the kind of interactions that US fans connect with.
Guys like Brady have an obvious effect on the result every game.
Guys like LeBron or even Steph Curry have the ball in their hands all the time.
These are things that US fans can connect with.
Hockey? Not so much. McDavid is probably the most talented player in the league right now. How many times in year does he take over a game? Not many, really.
How many times, when there is a one-goal separation between two teams at the end of the game, is it obvious who is going to score and tie the game? Almost never, because the players play 30 sec shifts.
It can't be helped. It's a great game. It just doesn't lend itself to the kind of interactions that US fans connect with.
Yes, whenever NHL players in national ads outside NHL games/programming. Seems post lockout NHL players aren’t as known mainstream wise that players were in the 90s. Not being on ESPN is a big reason why, but I believe lockout and Dead Puck Era killed a lot of mainstream potential NHL had in mid 90s
Lt Dan
F*** your ice cream!
this plus scaling back fighting. American fans love it
I disagree, I think the conservative nature of the sport and players is why they aren’t highly marketed as opposed to the game itself. McDavid and MacKinnon could definitely be marketed based on their talent, problem is they are larger than life personalities beyond their skills. Gretzky and Lemieux benefitted from the fact they played in the high scoring 80s and their gaudy numbers were easy to market. Going to harder to market McDavid and MacKinnon unless they start putting 1980s point totals as well winning Cups to overcome lack of personality.
Barclay Donaldson
Registered User
Because they need to be in those American markets in order to get bigger TV contracts. The biggest reason they expanded past 6 to begin with was because they had TV contracts at stake. NBC and none of the prospective groups that will be around when the bidding is up again care about Ottawa or Winnipeg. It's why Québec City was left in the cold. Having sustainably and increasingly more popular teams in places like San José, Dallas, St. Louis, and Seattle does more for the league than Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary, and Edmonton. Most steps they have taken since Bettman has taken over has been to increase their media attention and viability in the United States. Comparing the league's financial health when Bettman took over to know is incredible. Save for two dumpster fires, which were slowly being fixed before Covid, in Arizona and Miami, he hasn't made many steps which destabilized the league.
The NHL isn't trying to be the NFL. Bettman and anyone else with a brain knows its not achievable. NFL's likely has the best TV deal in the world. The NHL is just trying to be increasingly and sustainably more profitable.
I think we're on the same page. Gretzky averaged 2.5 pts/gm for several years in a row. If you went to the game or tuned in to watch, you could be assured he would do something. Just like LeBron, MJ, or she NFL QB.
McDavid averages half of that. His single point in a game might come in the first five minutes. After that, he might not do anything. It's the nature of hockey. How do you market that?
Last edited:
mouser
Business of Hockey
No. At the same time that shouldn’t be the barometer to judge how well the NHL does on their next US TV contract.
Ted Hoffman
The other Rick Zombo
- Dec 15, 2002
- 29,209
- 8,616
I'm calling bullshit on this. I've been assured by a handful of people around here that the next NHL deal will be a minimum $600 million per year, likely more.
Jokerit 16
Registered User
I think next TV-deal should be at least 600-900 million per year!
NBC, FOX and some tech company will be best choice for the league. Fox is losing everything to ESPN and they need programming.
NBC, FOX and some tech company will be best choice for the league. Fox is losing everything to ESPN and they need programming.
I agree with you. NHL will get a huge rage of a new tv deal. I hope they will find a partners which are promoting the game national wide in USA.
What are the best options for new partners? Any thoughs?
AD Skinner
Registered User
The nhl's TV money would be even further behind the NFL if they hadn't expanded south. The reason they are able to stay in the conversation is that the league has become a national entity instead of a regional one
While the NHL will never be as popular in the US as the other 3 major sports,it doesnt take much for people to become hooked to this game...With more exposure there will be even more fans on the bandwagon
WingsMJN2965
Registered User
- Oct 13, 2017
- 18,106
- 17,699
Why is this a thread... Fourth most popular sport gets the 4th most lucrative deal. It's not rocket science.
Also, all three of the others have gotten significant increases in their TV rights since the NHL signed their last deal.
Also, all three of the others have gotten significant increases in their TV rights since the NHL signed their last deal.
