46zone
Pass me the soft pretzels
That's the the easiest solution. Bigger markets = better ratings and more national media coverage.
Your opinions on how to jumpstart hockey in the U.S
- Thread starter Dominator13
- Start date
That's the the easiest solution. Bigger markets = better ratings and more national media coverage.
BigMac1212
I feel...alone.
How is it that Los Angeles is a key, but Phoenix, Miami, etc. aren't?
Winning a gold medal in the Olympics might give a boost, but it can quickly fade.
I understand that VS is not the most ideal distributor of hockey, but I think getting back on ESPN would be worse because it would get lumped in with every other sport, and if there are a few bad ratings in a row it gets relegated to ESPN 2 or 3 or 5 or Deportes. A better solution is getting better distribution of VS, a channel that seems to think it's a privilege to have hockey and doesn't actively treat it as a niche sport.
The rumours that ESPN wants hockey back I think are just hogwash. Mostly the execs pandering to Bucci so he doesn't get depressed. If ESPN wanted hockey back that means they think they could attract viewers with hockey content. If that were true, they'd have even a weekly half hour hockey segment. But they don't.
I understand what you mean, but I don't think interest in NCAA hockey would necessarily improve interest in professional hockey. If you look at football, many fans are pretty divisive about their interest.
Then again, it couldn't hurt.
Caeldan
Whippet Whisperer
- Jun 21, 2008
- 15,459
- 1,046
I think marketing the superstars is the wrong approach.
Look at the NBA... when they had Michael Jordan, it was at the height of its popularity. As soon as he retired, and there was no true 'next one' (yes kobe, shaq, king james, blah blah... they lack the charisma for wide appeal) - the sport died because people were Jordan/Bulls 'fans' and not fans of the game.
Same thing happened with the NHL once Gretzky and Lemieux declined and left the game.
You have to promote the game itself, and while you can give some airtime to the superstars you can't overpromote them to the point that they're bigger than the game - or else you lose those 'fans' once the player goes away.
I also don't think ESPN's the solution. From what I understand, VS on most cable companies is now on the same tier as ESPN - so all that needs to be done now is for people to realize that they need to turn on Vs to watch a hockey game. How do we do this? Have set nights of the weeks for games.
Why do you think football is so popular? Because every Sunday during the season you know you can sit down at X time, and there's a game on. Same with Monday night.
So the NHL needs to be able to set a TV schedule where fans of a team know that at least once a week on a certain night/time (with the exception of the occasional west coast tour) your team will be on TV.
Ottawa used to do it with a local channel, every Thursday on A-Channel was a hockey game. I don't know where to find historical ratings but I seem to recall coming across that it was the highest rated local programming of the week.
That's the sort of thing you need to do, these schedules where a team plays 8 games in 2 weeks, then 4 games over the next 2 weeks makes it hard to follow unless you're a true fan.
As far as it being a 'niche' sport, this is true... hockey has the highest cost of entry as far as playing (even for street hockey you need sticks plus nets) goes for the major sports. That's why soccer's universally more popular as it's the cheapest to play.
Look at the NBA... when they had Michael Jordan, it was at the height of its popularity. As soon as he retired, and there was no true 'next one' (yes kobe, shaq, king james, blah blah... they lack the charisma for wide appeal) - the sport died because people were Jordan/Bulls 'fans' and not fans of the game.
Same thing happened with the NHL once Gretzky and Lemieux declined and left the game.
You have to promote the game itself, and while you can give some airtime to the superstars you can't overpromote them to the point that they're bigger than the game - or else you lose those 'fans' once the player goes away.
I also don't think ESPN's the solution. From what I understand, VS on most cable companies is now on the same tier as ESPN - so all that needs to be done now is for people to realize that they need to turn on Vs to watch a hockey game. How do we do this? Have set nights of the weeks for games.
Why do you think football is so popular? Because every Sunday during the season you know you can sit down at X time, and there's a game on. Same with Monday night.
So the NHL needs to be able to set a TV schedule where fans of a team know that at least once a week on a certain night/time (with the exception of the occasional west coast tour) your team will be on TV.
Ottawa used to do it with a local channel, every Thursday on A-Channel was a hockey game. I don't know where to find historical ratings but I seem to recall coming across that it was the highest rated local programming of the week.
That's the sort of thing you need to do, these schedules where a team plays 8 games in 2 weeks, then 4 games over the next 2 weeks makes it hard to follow unless you're a true fan.
As far as it being a 'niche' sport, this is true... hockey has the highest cost of entry as far as playing (even for street hockey you need sticks plus nets) goes for the major sports. That's why soccer's universally more popular as it's the cheapest to play.
Gooch
Registered User
what is so good about vs? It pops in a hockey game 2 times a week on mon and tues night and after that you'd never know that network carried hockey or even real sports for that matter. There is no sports news show, and its all fishing and bull riding till next monday. It's pretty much like tuning into a center ice channel because with the garbage programming they have on it might as well be blacked out all day/week till the next hockey game comes back on.
Nobody watches vs, people in america watch ESPN. I don't care if Hockey is on ESPN15 it is still better than VS1
- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,612
- 11,584
People in America watch ESPN, but viewership for the other ESPNs drops off drastically.
Better for the NHL to be on Versus as one of its headliner sports rather than stuffed down between the World Series of Go Fish and Lawnmower Racing on "The Ocho."
Captain Awesome
Registered User
I agree with what most people say, the best thing you can do for hockey is think 20 years in advance by building some rinks a little at a time and breeding a culture for new generations. The hardest part is making it accessible financially. In places with cold climates I'm sure getting up a shinny game or something like that isn't too difficult, but in places like Phoenix and Dallas the best you can do is make hockey accessible to kids. It will take a long time, a really long time, but if after 20 or so years you aren't seeing improvement, then maybe it's just not the market for hockey.
Hockey is a niche sport, it's harder to get together and play than most sports. It doesn't just take a ball, ice rinks aren't at every school or as available as public parks, so you just have to promote the crap out of it and make sure you get kids growing up playing it.
Hockey is a niche sport, it's harder to get together and play than most sports. It doesn't just take a ball, ice rinks aren't at every school or as available as public parks, so you just have to promote the crap out of it and make sure you get kids growing up playing it.
- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,612
- 11,584
In Sunbelt area markets the NHL could promote youth roller hockey programs. Kids in Phoenix can (and do) play street hockey games year 'round. Roller hockey is not nearly as expensive as ice hockey as a starter sport, and if the NHL establishes a presence to support and organize it - possibly with coupons for ice rink time for participating local teams, tickets to NHL or minor hockey games locally, recognition at those events, etc. - it could do a lot to spark youth interest in the sport in "non-traditional" markets.
That's just it. And on top of that, it's a chicken-or-egg question. Do you put the NHL where hockey is popular, or use the NHL to make hockey popular?
The NHL has obviously chosen the latter to mixed levels of success, but on its own hockey wouldn't have grown in Dallas or San Jose without an NHL team. The NHL is doomed to grow slower than any other professional sport because of the rinks, equipment and cost required to play it. I don't think television visibility is going to jumpstart hockey's popularity in the US.
This is a good idea. I think some NHL teams already work with roller hockey leagues, but I'm not certain.
RingWraith
Registered User
How is it that Los Angeles is a key, but Phoenix, Miami, etc. aren't?
Huh? Los Angeles, regardless of its "traditionalness" as a hockey market, is still a city of 13 million people and the second largest media market on the continent. It's key.
BigMac1212
I feel...alone.
That's a blatent double standard! Phoenix is the 5th biggest city in the country.
I am SICK of this!
I, for one, think Phoenix actually more key than LA as a market. It's a growth market and it seems possible to actually support a sports franchise. Except for the Lakers and the Dodgers, LA seems unwilling to support the NFL and is a fairweather market for the NHL (I'm sorry Belanger25).That's a blatent double standard! Phoenix is the 5th biggest city in the country.
I am SICK of this!
Phoenix is growing at an incredible rate, and will eventually be a player in media shares. It's important the NHL succeed there.
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
Why, pray tell, is it important for the NHL to succeed in Arizona? Some residents might feel it is equally important to have a local soccer team succeed there, given the demographics.
A lot of the southwest cities, including Glendale/Phoenix, Las Vegas and L.A., do not have the typical demographic that supports the sport of hockey. They are or were "growing" due to a combination of factors including a lot of unchecked migration from south of the border.
In addition, real estate in some of those markets has been crashing hard.
See here for example:
Link:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Californias-median-home-price-apf-14121741.html
It's a similar situation in Nevada and Arizona btw.
But, "ice hockey," which none of the locals has ever played, is supposed to be a priority?
GHOST
RingWraith
Registered User
That's a blatent double standard! Phoenix is the 5th biggest city in the country.
I am SICK of this!
Actually it's not a blatant double standard. You're throwing out statistical rankings in a context where they mean very little. You cannot compare Phoenix to Los Angeles where the market potential is massively bigger. After NY, LA and Chicago there is a gigantic drop off in the significance of the size of American markets. Phoenix may reach as many people as say Philly, or Boston, or Detroit, but we are talking about a niche sport here. One where demographics completely alter the size of a "market". Hockey's marketability changes the way the NHL must approach its constituents. Despite being similar sized cities, the revenues Boston and Philly bring in have trumped Phoenix, Miami and Atlanta for years despite struggles in all cities. Dallas is a success story for sure, but that city has its quirks. The LA Kings despite being one of the worst performing franchises in the NHL for ages, still bring in large revenues. Just imagine what the Kings could do for the NHL if they experience a resurgeance on the scale of what has happened in Chicago.
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not advocating the relocation of the Coyotes, Thrashers and whoever. I believe these cities can support their teams. But they do need help. I'm just saying it like it is. The immediate revival of the largest traditional markets in the US (along with LA simply because it's a giant) is the key to getting the most kick for the NHL. The powerful media in the north east is going to pay far more attention to such cities. We still haven't seen the potential of New York yet.
BigMac1212
I feel...alone.
Sheesh! Phoenix is the 5th largest city in the US. Go look for yourself. A city that large should be able to hold a hockey team.
BigMac1212
I feel...alone.
It's still a doule standard. How can a 5th largest city in the country don't get the same equal standards as the 3rd?
RingWraith
Registered User
Because the 3rd largest city is triple the size of the 5th. As I said, there is a huge drop off before a number of large cities hold similar weight. And you're completely ignoring the aspect of hockey as a niche sport. This changes the size of a "market". You have to play cards with the hand you are given. And the NHL hasnt been given a hand where all cities are on the same level. Regardless of population.
RangerFan10
Registered User
It's all about television. Not many people have versus and a lot of the people that do have versus, ordered it because they're already fans.
The NBC timeslot - needs to be more consistant. Sometimes it's saturday, sometimes it's sunday, sometimes golf is on instead and there is no hockey. Think back to when Fox did it, they were on every week. Other than the glowing puck Fox did a good job with announcers and presentation as to where the casual fan could enjoy the game. NBC IMO does not do this.
Getting back on ESPN would be huge, but the nationally televised games on NBC need to be better too. And advertised more. I see more versus commercials than I've ever seen for NBC.
The NBC timeslot - needs to be more consistant. Sometimes it's saturday, sometimes it's sunday, sometimes golf is on instead and there is no hockey. Think back to when Fox did it, they were on every week. Other than the glowing puck Fox did a good job with announcers and presentation as to where the casual fan could enjoy the game. NBC IMO does not do this.
Getting back on ESPN would be huge, but the nationally televised games on NBC need to be better too. And advertised more. I see more versus commercials than I've ever seen for NBC.
- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,612
- 11,584
I'll tell you why it's important for the NHL to succeed in Arizona - because Arizona is a test case for the selling power of NHL hockey outside of traditional markets. It is a litmus test to see if the product will sell in a market that doesn't have a built-in fanbase against every other major professional sport in the country.
The league and the NHLPA want ice hockey to be a marketable commodity in non-traditional markets because it means increased revenues and increased salaries. "Preaching to the choir" by only putting franchises in traditional markets is not growth.
I expect some demographic data from you to support that assertion; otherwise, I will assume you are pulling that out of your hindquarters.
How the hell do you know - could you know - if nobody in Arizona has ever played ice hockey? Do you live here? My daughter's best friend's father played goal in minor league hockey and he's lived here all his life. Another of her friends plays goal for a mites team. One of my co-workers coaches mites hockey after work. And that's just three people off the top of my head within a block of my house.
Add that to the fact that there are roller hockey games going on all over virtually year round and I'd venture to guess that the ridiculous notion that Arizonans consider hockey to be more foreign than jai alai doesn't hold weight.
Last edited:
BigMac1212
I feel...alone.
zyllyx, we did support the Roadrunners before the Jets landed in Phoenix. And those Roadrunners are still in existance, at the US Aiways Center.
- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,612
- 11,584
I always thought that there ought to be a Hockey Night in America show on a given weeknight - perhaps on Tuesday night, considering that it's a weak night for network TV shows. Make it air every week during the hockey season in the same timeslot. Have it air on a network (ideally) or on ESPN. Have the CBC consult on production values, on-air talent, and so forth.
NBC's weekend hockey gets lost among all the other sports and the broadcasts - even with Doc calling the games - are not that great.
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
I did.
It's the 5th largest city in the US, if you don't include the metro areas of any US cities including Phoenix, which makes no sense. Glendale, where the Coyotes are located, doesn't even exist in your "5th largest city."
As the 5th largest city, Phoenix has a population of 1.5 million, not a metro area of just over 4.1 million residence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population
In terms of metro areas, however, Phoenix is listed as the 13th largest city in the US, behind such hockey "hotbeds" as Atlanta and Miami and several cities that do not have NHL teams.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
GHOST
