HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Hockey on National TV next season?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-21-2004, 10:04 AM
  #1
Fire Sather
Play Like a Pug
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 19,694
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Hockey on National TV next season?

If theres hockey, is there any chance the NHL will actually go without a TV contract?

Fire Sather is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 11:31 AM
  #2
Tricolore#20
PK PK PK
 
Tricolore#20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,192
vCash: 500
I'm not sure, is that even possible? TV contract is a good source of revenue for all the teams, and without one, teams wouldn't have enough funds to pay the players.

Tricolore#20 is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 12:17 PM
  #3
Fire Sather
Play Like a Pug
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 19,694
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricolore#20
I'm not sure, is that even possible? TV contract is a good source of revenue for all the teams, and without one, teams wouldn't have enough funds to pay the players.
Yeah.. freakin poker and GOD DAMN PING PONG gets tv contracts. Hockey deserves ones.

Fire Sather is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 03:03 PM
  #4
MacDaddy TLC*
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leafin La Vida Loca
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Spike TV is interested from what I've heard. Good thing or bad thing?

MacDaddy TLC* is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 03:10 PM
  #5
Fire Sather
Play Like a Pug
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 19,694
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Any TV is fine with me..

Fire Sather is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 03:20 PM
  #6
Skydog
Registered User
 
Skydog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cincinnati
Country: United States
Posts: 876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDaddy Version 1.3
Spike TV is interested from what I've heard. Good thing or bad thing?

I think it is a good thing. They are a Viacom channel, which is owned by CBS. IMO CBS does a good job with its sports coverage.

Skydog is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 05:12 PM
  #7
MacDaddy TLC*
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leafin La Vida Loca
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
I always forget the Viacom-CBS relationship when it comes to SPIKE TV. This might be the best option for the NHL. Spike tries to appeal to the NHL target audience, so it could make for a natural relationship. I worry a little about how they would market the game though.

MacDaddy TLC* is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 05:46 PM
  #8
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacDaddy Version 1.3
I always forget the Viacom-CBS relationship when it comes to SPIKE TV. This might be the best option for the NHL. Spike tries to appeal to the NHL target audience, so it could make for a natural relationship. I worry a little about how they would market the game though.
SLAMBALL!!!!

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
03-21-2004, 06:24 PM
  #9
MacDaddy TLC*
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leafin La Vida Loca
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
SLAMBALL!!!!
maybe they market in a way that makes your avatar look like the poster child for NHL hockey. Love the Johnny Canuck!

MacDaddy TLC* is offline  
Old
03-26-2004, 02:08 PM
  #10
Timmy1973
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Orlando
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather
Yeah.. freakin poker and GOD DAMN PING PONG gets tv contracts. Hockey deserves ones.
The poker series on ESPN has very good ratings so they show it; I can't speak about ping pong. After the overexposed incidents with McSorley and now Bertuzzi, I can't see a major network picking up the NHL. If bowling beats hockey in the tv ratings, no major player is going to put down hundreds of millions to show a ratings loser.

Timmy1973 is offline  
Old
03-26-2004, 02:54 PM
  #11
discostu
Registered User
 
discostu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricolore#20
I'm not sure, is that even possible? TV contract is a good source of revenue for all the teams, and without one, teams wouldn't have enough funds to pay the players.
While the U.S. national television contract is a significant chunk of money, there's no way they would let the lack of one stop them from playing a season. I think the contract amounts to $3-4 million per team right now. It is a lot of money, but not enough to shut down the league.

Keep in mind, there's still all the local attendance revenue (the primary revenue source for most teams), the local television contracts, and the two Canadian national TV deals. The league can still operate without a major U.S. deal, however, they will need to adjust their spending to do so.

discostu is online now  
Old
03-26-2004, 03:35 PM
  #12
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
I think Spike TV would be a good thing. I would be happy if they decided to try something new with NHL broadcasts. Starting off by geeting rid of the same old announcers. Get some new blood in there, try covering the game a little differently, and most importantly PROMOTE THE SPORT!

 
Old
03-26-2004, 04:06 PM
  #13
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
I think Spike TV would be a good thing. I would be happy if they decided to try something new with NHL broadcasts. Starting off by geeting rid of the same old announcers. Get some new blood in there, try covering the game a little differently, and most importantly PROMOTE THE SPORT!
my thoughts exactly... plus spike would be perfect, marketing the sport to the next generation finally... and im sure if the need was there create a program showing the history of the game or even just teaching the finer points of the game so people can't use the excuse of not knowing what's going on anymore... oh yeah, and a few more commercials during OTHER shows wouldn't hurt either

garry1221 is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 01:12 AM
  #14
Tyrolean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Austria
Posts: 6,202
vCash: 500
I hate dumb statements about table tennis

It's not Ping Pong, it's table tennis and if you ever plaayed it at a competitive level, you know it's not an easy sport to master. so having a TV contract is legit.

Tyrolean is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 07:25 AM
  #15
The Kitner Boy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Posts: 441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather
Yeah.. freakin poker and GOD DAMN PING PONG gets tv contracts. Hockey deserves ones.

Hockey deserves a TV contract? It is some kind of birthright? Just because you think it is the best thing going, doesn't mean everyone else has to. These are businesses making decisions based on how much advertising they can sell during a broadcast. If no one is watching hockey on TV, why does the NHL deserve one? I am almost positive no one at ESPN is actively trying to prevent hockey from gaining popularity. They are trying to generate revenue.

The Kitner Boy is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 07:51 AM
  #16
1970
Registered User
 
1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: Poland
Posts: 2,420
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 1970
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanesFan10
I think it is a good thing. They are a Viacom channel, which is owned by CBS. IMO CBS does a good job with its sports coverage.
If NHL has a TV deal with CBS/Spike TV that will mean they will adverdise the game on MTV and FUSE TV which are GREAT THINGS for the game. And those 2 stations will be able to make some what decent commericals instead of the stupid "Get it" commericals they have now and the gay "Hockey factory" commerical on ESPN.

BTW, i don't think people should be worried with NHL being on Spike though. NBA used to be only shown on TBS and TNT and is turned out amazing for them, now their on every night. lol

1970 is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 08:12 AM
  #17
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,554
vCash: 450
The question is will CBS show nationally televised games? Will they be able to promote the game better? Will the NHLPA and the NHL help promote the game? Right now each team gets around 4 million per year from the TV deal. How low with the NHL settle for?

More important will Spike broadcast games In HD? I have yet to see a game in HD, but i hear it's awesome. (i wont see one till i have the money to get a new TV )

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 10:28 AM
  #18
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Let's not give CBS it's due yet. It is far from a lock that they even enter this. CBS has the NFL, NCAA football, NCAA basketball, and golf; all four of which are much, much bigger draws. Where are they going to squeeze the NHL in on the weekends? Six weeks in the end of January/February? Okay, so let's assume that Spike shows a few games a week. You still have national games on the weekends that CBS could only carry for a few weeks a year. The outlook isn't all that good.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 12:00 PM
  #19
rekrul
Registered User
 
rekrul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: bittersville,ca
Country: United States
Posts: 1,581
vCash: 500
From what I read in the globe and mail all indications are the new tv contract will be about 1/2 of the current one and ALL games will be on espn and espn2, no Network coverage including playoffs. I think its highly unlikely that CBS will jump in ( gawd to have jim nance do hockey BLEH! ) to give airtime to the NHL. Somewhere I also herd that NHL2night is getting cut as well in the new deal, its weird the NHL seems to be dropping its price AND getting less coverage what kind of nitwhits are running this sport anyway?

rekrul is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 03:38 PM
  #20
NJDevs430
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,901
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR. X
I am almost positive no one at ESPN is actively trying to prevent hockey from gaining popularity.
Not so sure.
Call it a conspiracy theory...but why did they show the Bertuzzi thing a billion times and then try to spout that violence is why hockey will never be popular?
Then they turn around to promote the alleged virtues of basketball with a gaggle of celebrities in the "I love this game" campaign.
If there are any sports fans in the US with a quarter saying, "OK...heads it's hockey, tails it's basketball" I think they're trying to influence the decision.
<(-:**
"Okay...best two out of three..."
Notice they never discuss hockey on Pardon the Indigestion, then when they do it's either hockey sucks and we shall not discuss it on out show or this is why hockey sucks, therefore we shall not discuss it on our show.
That, and the whole Gary Thorne thing leads me to beleive that they honestly don't want hockey to gain popularity in the US.
I bet if a Kermit Washington-type incident happened again, it wouldn't get as much air time on ESPN as Bertuzzi.

NJDevs430 is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 05:42 PM
  #21
garry1221
Registered User
 
garry1221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walled Lake, Mi
Posts: 2,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to garry1221
espn for whatever reason doesn't even try to help promote the sport at all, i see the ratings issue, but that doesn't excuse the lack of promotion, and as ppl have said, they avoid talking about it like the black plague, it's sickening the way they just blow past it like it's nothing, THAT'S another reason why it hasn't gained much popularity in the US .... how are people supposed to catch onto it if the biggest sports network in the nation does everything in it's power to not talk about it, hopefully next year... after the lockout (whichever comes first) will bring in a new tv contract w/ a new network and with someone who will actually TRY to help the sport grow... best option being viacom (cbs. spike tv, etc. )

Quote:
From what I read in the globe and mail all indications are the new tv contract will be about 1/2 of the current one and ALL games will be on espn and espn2, no Network coverage including playoffs. I think its highly unlikely that CBS will jump in ( gawd to have jim nance do hockey BLEH! ) to give airtime to the NHL. Somewhere I also herd that NHL2night is getting cut as well in the new deal, its weird the NHL seems to be dropping its price AND getting less coverage what kind of nitwhits are running this sport anyway?
i haven't read anything lately concerning tv contracts or who they might sign with but i just can't see the nhl re-signing w/ espn/abc for that low a price... especially when they hardly show games as it is, espn is cuttin nhl2night which is just one more reason i cna't see the league re-signing w/ espn

garry1221 is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 07:04 PM
  #22
Iceburgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 50
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs430
That, and the whole Gary Thorne thing leads me to beleive that they honestly don't want hockey to gain popularity in the US.
Gary Thorne thing?

Iceburgh is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 09:38 PM
  #23
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garry1221
espn for whatever reason doesn't even try to help promote the sport at all, i see the ratings issue, but that doesn't excuse the lack of promotion, and as ppl have said, they avoid talking about it like the black plague, it's sickening the way they just blow past it like it's nothing, THAT'S another reason why it hasn't gained much popularity in the US
Please. ESPN promotes the NHL. But no one watches. Can't fault ESPN for that.

Quote:
.... how are people supposed to catch onto it if the biggest sports network in the nation does everything in it's power to not talk about it, hopefully next year... after the lockout (whichever comes first) will bring in a new tv contract w/ a new network and with someone who will actually TRY to help the sport grow... best option being viacom (cbs. spike tv, etc. )
If more people cared, they would talk about it more. It's that simple. Face it, hockey is behind a good number of sports in America. It's considered "a big four" but in reality it's not even a top 7 sport in terms of ratings. It's behind pro football, college football, pro basketball, college basketball, baseball, golf, and NASCAR.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
04-08-2004, 09:38 PM
  #24
vbox81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 168
vCash: 500
Fox Anyone?

This may be difficult, given the Glow Puck past, but Fox may not be a bad choice. They have football, yes, but thats a Sunday sport. They rarely have anything worth a darn on Sat. afternoon/night and can show a National Game of the Week every Saturday as is done now. Also, they have cut their teeth on football and do edgy/youthful shows and lean towards a younger audience. Fox also has good experience with Nascar (the Southeast is starting to get hockey) and creates good weekly/daily shows for it and its fans.

I'm not so sure of their control over the Fox Sports Net (I know they either license the name or own only part of the channels), but if they influence the programming thats the national network partner. And when Roenick retires, put him on "The Best Damn Sportshow Period"! Also their is Fox Sports World and FSW Spanish....

Either way, it's clear that ABC wants nothing to do with hockey and ESPN seemingly puts more into Worlds Strongest Man/Woman competitions.

vbox81 is offline  
Old
04-09-2004, 03:16 PM
  #25
RI Canuck
Registered User
 
RI Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR. X
Hockey deserves a TV contract? It is some kind of birthright? Just because you think it is the best thing going, doesn't mean everyone else has to. These are businesses making decisions based on how much advertising they can sell during a broadcast. If no one is watching hockey on TV, why does the NHL deserve one? I am almost positive no one at ESPN is actively trying to prevent hockey from gaining popularity. They are trying to generate revenue.
If they are tryimg to generate revenue then they sure have a funny way of showing it. There is no coverage on Sportscenter, NHL2night barely exists, and they show the same 8 teams all the time. How can a fan of a team that is never on or covered supposed to find out about their team. It gets tiring watching the same teams every year on ESPN. Last year I was sick of all the Rangers games. This year it was the Red Wings. ESPN needs to realize not everyone follows the same 8 teams and they need to show good teams. Also, if they complain that there is not enough scoring in the NHL, then why do they show teams that trap constantly and keep the games low scoring?

RI Canuck is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.