HFBoards - View Single Post

danno2530 · 07-20-2007, 04:39 PM

Some very, very good points brought up here. The fact is, do we overrate the Rangers' success in being a key to helping the league back into the mainstream? Yes. But the fact is, New York teams usually equal big ratings. And if you need an example of how the Rangers do for the good of the league...well, I present to you 1994.

The Rangers really took the country by storm that year. Now I'm sure alot of it had to do with the personality and name recognition of Mark Messier as well as the whole 1940 thing, but come on...you had Jeff Beukeboom in Sportscenter ads, you had the Rangers win 'Team of the Year' at the ESPY's....YES, A HOCKEY TEAM won Team of the Year on ESPN.

And then the lockout came and things were never the same. Oh sure, the league did ok for the first couple of seasons after the lockout....but it lasted until about 1997...about the same time the Rangers went into their abyss. Hmmm.

Also I think it's not just a coincidence that the reason the league is struggling has alot to do with the teams who have won the cup: Dallas, New Jersey, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Anaheim. Sorry, but those teams ain't gonna bring in ratings.

Now as important as the Rangers success is to the league, that goes for alot of other teams too. The league was pretty big when the Chicago Blackhawks were a good team as well when they had guys like Roenick. As much as we hate them, the Flyers need to be good as well. A team from Boston succeeding never hurt either so we need the Bruins back on track and of course, you always have to think about the city on that other coast with the Kings. There is a huge difference between Los Angeles and Anaheim just like there is with New York and New Jersey.

In the end though it could just be that alot of people have never really been exposed to hockey so they can't make a judgement on it. I have brought many people to their first game at MSG and I have never once heard them say anything but the fact that they had a great time.

Also, people seem to complain alot about the lack of hockey attention just here in New York...but have you ever noticed that whenever someone even mentions the word "Rangers" or "Islanders" or occasionally "Devils" on WFAN, there are immediately several calls that follow? That's not just a coincidence.

And if it winds up just being a niche sport, well, that isn't a completely bad thing. Attending the NHL Draft in Columbus last month, I think that made it an even better experience as it was like a big hockey fan convention. I'm not sure if it would have been the same for the NFL or NBA draft.

07-20-2007, 04:39 PM	#51
danno2530 Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Brooklyn, NY Country: Posts: 6,454 vCash: 500	Some very, very good points brought up here. The fact is, do we overrate the Rangers' success in being a key to helping the league back into the mainstream? Yes. But the fact is, New York teams usually equal big ratings. And if you need an example of how the Rangers do for the good of the league...well, I present to you 1994. The Rangers really took the country by storm that year. Now I'm sure alot of it had to do with the personality and name recognition of Mark Messier as well as the whole 1940 thing, but come on...you had Jeff Beukeboom in Sportscenter ads, you had the Rangers win 'Team of the Year' at the ESPY's....YES, A HOCKEY TEAM won Team of the Year on ESPN. And then the lockout came and things were never the same. Oh sure, the league did ok for the first couple of seasons after the lockout....but it lasted until about 1997...about the same time the Rangers went into their abyss. Hmmm. Also I think it's not just a coincidence that the reason the league is struggling has alot to do with the teams who have won the cup: Dallas, New Jersey, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Anaheim. Sorry, but those teams ain't gonna bring in ratings. Now as important as the Rangers success is to the league, that goes for alot of other teams too. The league was pretty big when the Chicago Blackhawks were a good team as well when they had guys like Roenick. As much as we hate them, the Flyers need to be good as well. A team from Boston succeeding never hurt either so we need the Bruins back on track and of course, you always have to think about the city on that other coast with the Kings. There is a huge difference between Los Angeles and Anaheim just like there is with New York and New Jersey. In the end though it could just be that alot of people have never really been exposed to hockey so they can't make a judgement on it. I have brought many people to their first game at MSG and I have never once heard them say anything but the fact that they had a great time. Also, people seem to complain alot about the lack of hockey attention just here in New York...but have you ever noticed that whenever someone even mentions the word "Rangers" or "Islanders" or occasionally "Devils" on WFAN, there are immediately several calls that follow? That's not just a coincidence. And if it winds up just being a niche sport, well, that isn't a completely bad thing. Attending the NHL Draft in Columbus last month, I think that made it an even better experience as it was like a big hockey fan convention. I'm not sure if it would have been the same for the NFL or NBA draft.