Im sure some of you are listening to this Don Lagreca hockey talk show on 1050. Some good stuff.
A caller recently pointed out, rightly so, that the Rangers are the best story currently going in NY Sports but get no media coverage. I expected Lagreca to brush this aside, and give some kind of leukwarm neutral response. But he was right on point. The majority of NY media knows nothing about hockey, and since they dont know it they either dont consider it newsworthy or are afraid to talk about something they dont know.
Why in the media capital of the world, that has a passionate hockey base, does nobody know anything about our sport?
True.. This has bothered me for some time. Why is the Knicks get the back page day after day for sucking, while we continue to be the only NY playing, and playing well.. What did we get this year 2 back pages? 1 for Mess, and 1 for Henke? Atleast give a lil more mention on the radio also. I know hockey isn't a hugely popular sport in the states, but do I need to hear about baseball and football all day long during their off seasons?What this team is doing this year is amazing. We are supposed to be at the bottom of the league, and look where we are. Thats not a story?
hockey is a hard sport for slow people to follow, which is why slow games like baseball (which is little more than an excuse to get taked in the early afternoon) and basketball (where any 2 year old can figure out the game after 5 minutes) are so popular
I also agree. And what kills me is that old cliche', "well there are only 18,200 hockey fans in Ny." What? I know 15 friends of mine that are huge rangers fans but dont go to every game, for example.. And isnt every game a sell out? Not only that, I seem to recall the attendance at the 94 cup parade was officially over 1 million in attendance.
Its the same old sorry arguement of certain sports writers or talk show hosts that didnt grow up with game just choosing to try and downplay it. There are alot of hockey fans in the Ny area and the media better wake up to this.
This is something ive learned to deal with because frankly hes right, nobody knows and they are too scared to cover it. You have to go to Canada to really feel "Home" with the beautiful sport.
In a way i kinda feel thankful that these narrow minded sports writers and media people (who call themselves well educated in the language of sports - but really arent) dont cover hockey because they dont deserve to.
I'd rather hang out and chat with you guys and my hockey buddys who have grown up and KNOW what the game is (a part of their life) than wait for a 10 second half assed review of the top story in hockey (95% of the time negative, ie Mcsorley, Bertuzzi, the lockout, etc...)
In a way its almost an underground cultureis no way main stream and loses its luster because so many people talk about it like its some sort of played out Barry Bonds sitcom or something.
Sometimes its nice to hear coverage about hockey from the media outlets you are not used to hearing it from, like Mike and Maddog and the back pages, but you know what?? - who appreciates it? Us the die hard fans, who basically cover it all ourselves.
I like that MSG has started airing more and more Hockey shows....especially Hockey Night in NY
BUT I DON'T NEED TO SEE FRIGGIN' HALLS OF HOME WITH BOOBY CLARKE'S UGLY MUG!!!
Hey, I've got an idea. How about using the Blueshirt's Inside Out dedicated weekly to the ranger farm system - you know, the players at Hartford, in juniors and in college...there has to be film on all of these kids.
This struck me as interesting because I know 1050 is owned by ESPN. Interesting because it seems to me that ESPN is doing everything possible to screw the National Hockey League this year. I listen and watch regularly and they are not paying a damn bit of attention to hockey this year. I have XM and listen to ESPN radio here in Minneapolis (because all radio here is brutal) and half of the time they don't even give hockey scores during the sports updates. Very little talk or coverage. On TV, SportsCenter is even worse -- hockey usually rates the third or fourth segment at best. Never once a lead story. The night Messier retired the story came 20 minutes into the show. The NHL may have gotten more money by going to OLN but they are sure taking it in the shorts from their spiteful former partners.
To tell you the honest truth, I'd rather not hear anyone talk about hockey in the media than listen to guys talk about hockey who haven't a clue what they are talking about. It pisses me off to no end when Mike and Chris try to talk hockey for 10 minutes. They dont have a clue.
As a previous person mentioned...Us, the fans, basically cover this sport ourselves.
The best part of Don's show tonight was when he called out broadcasters by names for being ******* and not talking any hockey whatsoever- Steven A Smith, Francessa, Cowherd, and a few more I can't remember. No passive ********, straight to the point.
I would also rather it talking hockey be left to the fans than hearing someone like Francessa or Russo try and talk about it (which they inevitably will come playoff time) when they obviously have no clue. Its painful. Dellapina is pretty good, but the rest of the tabloid writers are tough to take. Its even tough listening to Steve Somers talk hockey, although he's not knowledgeable about much in sports except baseball pre-1970.
I do sort of agree with the sentiment that the NHL regular season doesnt mean much, since over half the teams make the playoffs. But that holds true for the NBA as well, which gets media saturation.
And it is true that fans of other sports greatly outnumber fans of hockey. Of my friends who are big into sports, there are few I can talk hockey with while most know a good deal about baseball, football, etc. That is why I enjoy these boards. Im a baseball fan but never visit any baseball boards, because I can just talk about the Mets with my buddies anytime. But maybe that says more about who im hanging out with.
So I watch Sportsdesk after the rewind last night and it really should come as NO shock, but I couldnt believe how much Knicks coverage(about ten minutes) there was and this was the brunt of it - a team that is 15-42 talking about their strategy for their next game against the 25-32 Chicago Bulls.....
I mean, imagine if the 20-45 Rangers a few seasons, in early March, had about 10 minutes on sportsdesk talking about their next game against the Coyotes!?