Your Ideas for TV Marketability in the NHL

[Hoek]

No. I take it you don't like my ideas?

I'm fine with the status quo to be honest. The main reason I'm throwing these radical ideas out there is because if the league is going to change they might as well go for it instead of beating around the bush. Whatever happens we'll end up getting used to it. My suggestions are just stuff I'd get used to a lot quicker, personally.

 

[HckyFght*]

The good thing about the Fox puck was you could tell where it was coming up the near boards...but even then it was unnecessary...

As for sweaters, yes, it's terrific to shell out the bucks and get one of those authentic handmade jobs, but how about a replica in cotton, so you could actually wear it in wintertime without a whole suit of clothes on underneath? Just a thought.
-HckyFght

 

[futurcorerock]

Hey Hoek, are you a FOX exec?

Honestly, he's on to something.

Fox made a joke of the game when they had it, but some of their ideas, made in moderation would have worked wonders for the "americanized" version of the game.

 

[Sotnos]

P.S. Having announcers instruct viewers on the fundamentals of the game like they do in all three other sports is not "insulting to fans" as Canadian broadcasters tell us all the time, but actually helps fans.

I don't know if I'd take it that far, it doesn't need to be that simplistic. Our local sports station was kind enough to get permission to show the Canadian broadcasts of the ECF and SCF during the summer, and compared to the ESPN broadcast, the analysis was much more in depth and much more frequent. I personally love when they show a replay and highlight some of the "little things" that you might not notice during the play. This is much easier to do in football with all the stoppages, but if they'd incorporate more actual play analysis instead of idle chit chat, I'd find broadcasts more interesting.

And for cripes sakes! In the States, get some freakin Americans doing the games!

Why? Does 90% of the audience know the difference or care? Unless they're bringing in a prominent face in US Hockey (which would consist of...Jeremy Roenick and...?) I don't see why this is an issue.

 

[LordHelmet]

1) More players (current and ex) in the booth. Hockey players are smart, they can complete a sentence without saying "ya know what I'm sayin'.." and they're very down to earth.. That's unique in the sports world..

2) I like the idea of adding some 'noticeability' to the puck. No colors or flashy crap, just make it "blacker" for lack of a better word..

3) Showing the mph after shots is good..

4) Hooking up to the goal light is good..

5) More X & O analysis by the announcers. Recognize patterns in what the teams are doing, and do a quick replay of each occurence of that - especially if one of these things results in a goal. Are the D-men swapping sides when posession is gained on the PP? Is particular wing crashing the crease on offensive faceoffs? Is a coach trying really hard to match a particular D-man against the other team's top line?

6) Have a heads-up-display showing which players are on the ice for each team. A small box in each of the bottom corners showing each players jersey number & name would suffice. As players are subbed on & off, the name tiles flip over and show who's coming out.

 

[Marshall]

This is apparently in the works. The NHL ran a test with a Goalie Cam with MAF and the Baby Penguins. The camera is below his chin. I don't know if they can broadcast this during live play, but it's still pretty cool.

Link

That is sweet.

 

[ti-vite]

6) Have a heads-up-display showing which players are on the ice for each team. A small box in each of the bottom corners showing each players jersey number & name would suffice. As players are subbed on & off, the name tiles flip over and show who's coming out.

That would be good, might as well have the number of minutes they have played beside the neame also. Would make good commentary.

'Oh, here comes Aucoin for his 45th minute of ice time...he should be getting tired soon'

Really good ideas in the replies above.

I really like the sound of hockey. Need to put microphones on certain players and coachs. If you put a camera on the goalie, might as well put a microphone.

'McCabe!!! Clear the crease you $%$%?#" oaf!'

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

MSG has for some years broadcasted the NYR games in HD.

John Moag, head of the sports investment banking firm, Moag and Company in his June 2004 NHL report touched on this issue.

He believes that HDTV will likely enhance the watchability of hockey. Several other commentators have said the same thing pointing out with wider shots and increased screen resolution hockey will be more easily understood by people who have not grown up with the game as well as making it easier to follow the puck. Moag also recommends that the NHL needs to bring more of the "rink experience" into the television milieu.

The quaility is so much better. The game is best when it is played with speed. To do away with all the clutching and grabbing there will be a parade of players to the box, slwoing the game down even more and the game will have less flow. They, NHL, missed a huge opportunity to crack down on this in the shorten season that should have been played. people were going to be P.O.'d anyhow.

Some of the best games on TV were from the old Maple Leafs Gardens. Their ice level camera angles gave you the feel of the speed of the game, pre-trap of course. The high wire camera that they use in football I think would be excellent for hockey. Everyone knows the best seats are at the end arena. You watch the play develope. Could you just see the camera following the play from above and behind!

One of the best things to do though requires very little change to the game.
get rid of BETTMAN!

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

Kind of like keeping track of Pedro's pitch count!

That would be good, might as well have the number of minutes they have played beside the neame also. Would make good commentary.

'Oh, here comes Aucoin for his 45th minute of ice time...he should be getting tired soon'

Really good ideas in the replies above.

I really like the sound of hockey. Need to put microphones on certain players and coachs. If you put a camera on the goalie, might as well put a microphone.

'McCabe!!! Clear the crease you $%$%?#" oaf!'

Once he goes over 100, the tide changes! That would be niffty. we could keep track of turnovers after 25 minutes of ice time, etc.

 

[MissTeeks]

1) More players (current and ex) in the booth. Hockey players are smart, they can complete a sentence without saying "ya know what I'm sayin'.." and they're very down to earth.. That's unique in the sports world...

And someone other than a goalie (Cough! Cough! CBC)

 

[HF2002]

And someone other than a goalie (Cough! Cough! CBC)

I think you meant to say goalies...

 

[Gary Buttman]

My favorite new camera is that suspended camera, the "SkyCam" or whatever. THey could use those. How about having a camera behind each zone, taped up right where the lower bowl's scoreboard is so people can see plays develop and see the whole zone? Or how bout where the guy who operates the lights behind the goal? And bring back rail-cam like they had at the olympics to capture the speed of the game. Cameras, people! Cameras!

 

[futurcorerock]

mmm.... wire cam... That's all I want for christmas is a chase camera.

Does anyone remember the ASG when the camera chased St Louis down the ice and he scored that goal against Turco in the skills comp? God... I about peed my pants with excitement, then remembered that it was just the skills.

Hope for the future, friends.

 

[sparkle twin]

5) More X & O analysis by the announcers. Recognize patterns in what the teams are doing, and do a quick replay of each occurence of that - especially if one of these things results in a goal. Are the D-men swapping sides when posession is gained on the PP? Is particular wing crashing the crease on offensive faceoffs? Is a coach trying really hard to match a particular D-man against the other team's top line?

6) Have a heads-up-display showing which players are on the ice for each team. A small box in each of the bottom corners showing each players jersey number & name would suffice. As players are subbed on & off, the name tiles flip over and show who's coming out.

5) I like that. In football during the replays sometimes they highlight or shadow a player to watch his moves that led to the play result, whether it was an interception or touchdown or sack. So, why not after a goal is scored, especially on the PP, shadow/highlight a player that may have tipped the shot or moved just the right way at just the right time to result in the goal. The current replays are ok, but sometimes the shot is so fast that even though they slow it down, it's still hard to see if it hit someone or a stick, or who it hit before going in.

6) They did this on ESPN a little bit last year. They would put under the score a dropdown box that said on the ice and it would have a player's name in it. But it was hard to read sometimes, and hard to notice where that player was. And it was usually only players like Shannahan or Forsberg and I didn't notice any regularity with this either. So anything to make it easier to see who was on the ice would be nice.

--------------
I like the idea of introducing the teams. In the NFL/College they introduce 22 players per side (11 starting offense, 11 starting defence, so 44 in all) so they could easily introduce each team's entire roster. Or if they got the lineup card ahead of time, they could just do the starting lineups, since the arena's announce them anyways it wouldn't be too much trouble to show just those 10 plus the 2 goalies.

They should put a camera on the linesmen or refferee. It would be neat to see them as they go in to separate 2 guys who are fighting. If they had a mic they would have to use the bleeper button a lot, but it would be cool. And you could really see if the off-side call was right or not. I also like the cameras on goalies or on random different players. And they should be mic'd up a lot, too. Just anything really, to make the viewer more involved in what's going on out on the ice. If you capture their attention, they're more likely to sit down and watch for a few minutes. Which before you know it, has turned into watching the entire game!

And I also like the idea of more mic's around the arena. Sometimes, you know the crowd is really loud, but you just can't hear it because the mic's aren't picking it up.

I guess we all have the same ideas....Cameras, cameras, and more cameras everywhere!

 

[Phanuthier*]

Make player available for autographs, meet the players ect. Make them more accessible.

Get the public to know the players, and the players to know the public.

 

[CoupeStanley]

Whats wrong with all those americans unable to see the puck?

My dad made a funny comments on this subject this week.

"In the 50th, I was living in a 200 people village, we were catching the HNIC very badly on my 10 inches black and white screen and I was able to follow the puck, whats wrong with them?"

 

[darth5]

I had trouble following the puck on TV until I had seen 3-4 games in person. It just takes some getting used to.

What percentage of NFL viewers have ever actually been to a game in person, or attend regularly? Not many, I'd wager. Why? because the NFL game is actually more enjoyable ON TV.

So I agree with posters who say we need to find a way to capture the NHL product in better dimensions on TV. We had a thread some time ago discussing how to electrically keep track of when the puck crosses the goal line, red line, blue line. Granted, there are some technical issues about not changing the properties/behaviour of the puck, temperature at which a sensor can function well, etc. But solving them would help the officials and viewing audience a lot.

 

[HF2002]

Whats wrong with all those americans unable to see the puck?

My dad made a funny comments on this subject this week.

"In the 50th, I was living in a 200 people village, we were catching the HNIC very badly on my 10 inches black and white screen and I was able to follow the puck, whats wrong with them?"

There's nothing wrong with them. With no background understanding in the game, it can be difficult to follow the puck or the play.

If you play hockey, or played it at any level, you understand what's happening and where the puck should be as you watch it on tv. There are times when I can't see the puck at all, but I know what's going on and how the whole play is developing. We can all pick up where the puck is, even if we lose sight of it for a few seconds, because we know where it should be. It's also easy to see it if it's completely out of place because we know it shouldn't be there. And, there are times when watching the games on tv where I look at the screen and wonder where the hell the puck is.

 

[WVP]

Has anyone heard any details on the new logo the NHL is supposed to introduce?

I heard it was going to blue, but that's all I have heard.

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

Not sure if it's true or not, but I heard the NHL is going to ask Mike Modano and other players who own those giant "farrah-fawcett-hair" type giant poodles (and I understand they are all the current rage by jet-setting NHLers) to join in a marketing program. The idea is to have these fantastic pooches become mascots for their owners' clubs. Imagine this...... The lights go out in Dallas, suddenly a spotlight shines on the player's gate and Anastasia-Priscilla (Modano's pampered pet), bounds onto the ice, resplendent with her bows and ribbons, to the delight of fans both in Reunion arena and across the nation via television.

Apparently, the main stumbling point is that several teams (notably the Dallas Stars) have more than one player who owns one of these fantastic animals, and apparently there can be considerable bickering over "who's baby is prettiest". The last thing the league will need when it finally resumes play is a national audience seeing teammates like Bill Guerin and Modano pulling each other's hair in a spat over their poodles. Hopefully a solution which will benefit everyone, including the pampered poodles can be reached.

 

[Matty]

I remember always wondering what was so great about the NBA until I went to see a game live. Live, the game was fantastic but on TV, I often got bored.

When it comes to the NHL though, I've always loved the game whether live or on TV.

So why the difference? Is basketball just a lousy TV product or is there something else?

Reality is IMO, I love watching hockey on TV because I love hockey. Period. I grew up on it, playing since I was young, and watching it since I was younger.

Now I'm not saying that improvements can't be made - they always can. But I think alot of the failure of NHL to reach a national American audience is simply that hockey is not an American past time (especially in the southern regions). Travel by car through American's many smaller towns and it will become painfully obvious just how much football is threaded into their society. That's why the NFL is successful - just like hockey in Canada. Basketball has been successful because it captured the imagination of the urban market. And baseball has always been an American tradition.

Can hockey ever really be successful in the southern regions of America? And I mean successful even when a team isn't winning? I have my doubts. At least, I doubt it'll ever really be successful but could possibly survive...

 

[futurcorerock]

I remember always wondering what was so great about the NBA until I went to see a game live. Live, the game was fantastic but on TV, I often got bored.

When it comes to the NHL though, I've always loved the game whether live or on TV.

So why the difference? Is basketball just a lousy TV product or is there something else?

Reality is IMO, I love watching hockey on TV because I love hockey. Period. I grew up on it, playing since I was young, and watching it since I was younger.

Now I'm not saying that improvements can't be made - they always can. But I think alot of the failure of NHL to reach a national American audience is simply that hockey is not an American past time (especially in the southern regions). Travel by car through American's many smaller towns and it will become painfully obvious just how much football is threaded into their society. That's why the NFL is successful - just like hockey in Canada. Basketball has been successful because it captured the imagination of the urban market. And baseball has always been an American tradition.

Can hockey ever really be successful in the southern regions of America? And I mean successful even when a team isn't winning? I have my doubts. At least, I doubt it'll ever really be successful but could possibly survive...

That's the same kind of futility that's permeated into many minds of the traditional markets and canadians. Futility. That same word can be used in the context you intoduced. WIth futility, the sport will never grow. Keep in mind the NASCAR comparison has came up before, and with that comparison it has been that NASCAR has been much the same as the NHL- a regional sport that is reacing out beyond its markets. One's winning, one's losing.

I think alone, the NASCAR sentiment is enough for hockey fans to expect that hockey can win in nontraditional markets.

Plus, the biggest jerk thing you could do amongst fans is tell a Hurricanes or Panthers fan that their team doesnt belong in the NHL. Terrible pairity.

 

[nyrmessier011]

Does anybody know how long the "nhl center ice" carrier on digital cable and satellite are under contract for? or if they just pay rights? I dont know much about the subject...can somebody please let me know the situation with that. With probably losing espn, the only chance i have to watch a lot of games is on that package--which i had last year and was awesome!!---details please

 

[Injektilo]

Now I'm not saying that improvements can't be made - they always can. But I think alot of the failure of NHL to reach a national American audience is simply that hockey is not an American past time (especially in the southern regions). Travel by car through American's many smaller towns and it will become painfully obvious just how much football is threaded into their society. That's why the NFL is successful - just like hockey in Canada. Basketball has been successful because it captured the imagination of the urban market. And baseball has always been an American tradition.

Can hockey ever really be successful in the southern regions of America? And I mean successful even when a team isn't winning? I have my doubts. At least, I doubt it'll ever really be successful but could possibly survive...

Sometimes i have that as well. I'm all for giving markets a chance, but at what point do you need to give up and admit it's just not going to work? How many dollars in advertising do you need to throw at certain areas before it becomes apparent that it's not working? Sports are very heavily engrained into cultures, hockey in Canada, Baseball/NFL in America, soccer in Brazil and England (and pretty much the rest of the world), cricket in India and Pakistan.... I think that counts for a lot, and I don't think you can just expect advertisments and fancy TV angles to sell a sport. Chances are it'll become popular for a bit, but once that wears off, if it has no cultural roots, it's not gonna stick. The NHL was quite popular in the early 90's, and now we're constantly reminded that the westminster dog show gets better ratings in the US.

Does hockey have the ability to become ingrained in a culture that's not familiar with it? Does any sport? I don't care how exciting rugby or cricket are, i doubt i'll ever care about it, it's just not something i'm familiar with. I might grow to follow football a little more closely, but that's not saying much considering how closely I follow it now. There's no way I'll ever remotely "care" about it.



I'm gonna transcribe something from the conclusion of Roy MacGregor and Ken Dryden's book "Home Game" that I think ties in with this.


"The average American fan (my note : to me, what this refers to is people who have no cultural background relating to the game) sees only the hockey game in front of him - the speed, the collisions - the full power of which never reaches him in his living room. He doesn't hear names with rich, complicated histories. He doesn't see ghosts of players past, games and teams past, a whole lifetime of them, cavorting across his TV screen with every second of the present. He has no childhood stories, no childhood heros to remember. He can see baseball's ghosts - for baseball is America's game. Football might make more sense, might come into fasion, might be better suited for television, but baseball has the history and the mythology. The mistress may be beautiful, but someone else lies under the American fan's skin. That is where the depth of passion lies.
Hockey is Canada's game. Nothing else is, nothing else will be."


Needless to say I disagree with the last couple sentances, but this was written in 1989, so things change.

I think the key word for me there was "mythology". You can't create that, no amount of advertising can.

 

[Injektilo]

there's another quote that I was actually thinking of from the book that I meant to include, but I couldn't find it... I'll keep looking.