EDIT-NHL Season on Deathbed

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by General Mike

interesting. I'm hopeful, but you know what happens when you get your hopes up.

I don't care if they get dashed again. I'm willing to put faith in just the possiblity of it happening. I don't care about anyone else but I really do miss hockey and badly want to see it back. And what better story than that the lawyers for each side couldn't get together, but that it had to be Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux riding to the rescue of the NHL yet again.

SI

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by bbor

Not to turn this into a "you never played"deal...but...you really have to play to understand.I've played both contact and non contact and it totally changes the game without hitting.

Of course...if you have played....well then i'm stupid and this is just your preference.

No, I never played. Like I said, I am one of those "new to the game" people who still enjoys the current game, but would like to see a more wide-open approach. I don't care if scoring skyrockets necessarily, I just want to see guys who have skills get scoring opportunities without getting mauled by goons who can't stick handle well enough to successfully defend the skill players.

[chrisj]

On the TSN SportsCentre update, they're talking about it like it's a done deal, and that they will announce the un-canceling of the season tomorrow.

[sterlingice]

From thefan 960 (Calgary): "The NHLPA confirmed that it has accepted an invitation from the NHL to meet Saturday in New York."

SI

[SunDancer]

No football, and the NBA is boring as heck, the NHL fills a passion. Though, racing is starting, so that helps.

I think that the NHL will work on getting the economic system in place, get the season up and running, and start to work to make some changes to the game in the off-season.

I know they want to make some rule changes.

[Ksyrup]

Well, even ESPN is reporting a deal in principle. This is great. I need something to bridge the gap to baseball season. There was not a thing on TV to watch tonight.

[Chubby]

There's an article and pic on the frontpage of ESPN.com

I saw this and said WTF? but it doesn't totally surprise me. I really hope this happens but I'm not going to get excited til it's official...

[RPI-Fan]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT

[RPI-Fan]

I was seriously upset on Wednesday when the season got cancelled. I was at work, and I had the TV's on the press conference. I just kept standing there, watching, thinking Bettman's cell phone would ring and Goodenow would offer $45mil and Bettman would accept.

It was pathetic.

But now I can rejoice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Maple Leafs]

The Hockey News is reporting a done deal, with announcement to come tomorrow.

Wow.

[Chubby]

Is ESPN now reporting that "the NHLPA is saying there is no deal and there aren't any talks tomorrow either.." or is some tool jerking us around?

[riz]

Atleast the NHLPA website is still saying talks are on:
http://www.nhlpa.com/Content/Feature.asp?contentId=3430

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Is ESPN now reporting that "the NHLPA is saying there is no deal and there aren't any talks tomorrow either.." or is some tool jerking us around?

some tool is jerking us around.

[Chubby]

the guy just posted that he basically misread and is a dumbass

tho i will still believe it when I see it

[sterlingice]

I can't believe how much fun it is for people to bash the NHL. Instead of being happy that games might be back on, the editorial at the bottom of the headline talks about how stupid this whole process is. Sure, it wasn't the smoothest thing, but, geez, hockey which was left for dead for months, possibly years, a couple of days ago might be back *and* taking some strides in the right direction. Could it have been done better? Yes. But shouldn't the angle be that what was perceived to be dead is alive again?

SI

[ISiddiqui]

THEY'RE JERKING US AROUND! Ehum... sorry. But come on... one more swing like this, and I think half of the people in Canada will perish from heart attacks .

[General Mike]

All I know is that on WFAN in NY, they've talked about hockey more in the last week than they have ever talked about it at any time I remember.

[Tekneek]

One reason the NHL has diminished amongst the masses in the US may have something to do with the poor quality of our national broadcasts. If you've had the opportunity to watch Hockey Night In Canada on CBC, or national games on TSN or Rogers Sportsnet, over the years you know how great a national broadcast of hockey could be. ESPN doesn't come close. With ESPN being part of the TSN ownership, I would have expected them to leverage some of that into improving their own hockey broadcasts. Unfortunately, nothing like that ever happened. ESPN kept plodding along with their poor show, all the while apparently wondering why the ratings sucked.

[Chief Rum]

Could you go into some details about the differences? What it is that's making those broadcasts great that ESPN isn't doing? That isn't a criticism of your post--I honestly don't know (being as I don't live in Canada).

It wouldn't surprise me if ESPN has dropped the ball on its hockey broadcasts, althouhg I do like the music (always gets me in the mood for hockey).

[SunDancer]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Could you go into some details about the differences? What it is that's making those broadcasts great that ESPN isn't doing? That isn't a criticism of your post--I honestly don't know (being as I don't live in Canada).

It wouldn't surprise me if ESPN has dropped the ball on its hockey broadcasts, althouhg I do like the music (always gets me in the mood for hockey).

Hockey Night is awesome. Thankfully, I live on the border, and I'll usually watch Canada's broadcast in the playoffs (unless someone, someone, I really like is not on, but on in the US). It's hard to explain. I just feel like I can feel the excitement of Canada's broadcast, like I am their. You can sense the passion and knowledge of the game through the broadcasters, the picture quality and graphics is very good.

[Tekneek]

Everyone knows hockey. Everyone has some insight. The analysis is done at a depth you never see on ESPN. They break things down, into details. At least one intermission segment is about some analysis of things that happened in the period. It isn't just highlights. It may be a particularly solid defensive play, and they go into detail about why it was such a good move. They isolate the way a goaltender moves, as a way to demonstrate why he is having such a good/bad game. For a country that already 'gets' the sport, their broadcasts go into way more detail explaining the ins and outs of the game than ever happens here (which, according to what you read, does not yet 'get' the game...so you should expect the opposite, right?).

There is no Gary Thorne who talks about what he ate before the game or will eat after the game. While some of the broadcasts with the Maple Leafs seem like they can have a bias, the majority of the commentary is actually objective. I always get the feeling that the ESPN crews get into the jocks of the 'stars' because they don't know enough about the game to appreciate what each player is doing on the ice. Everything is about the game. It is what the broadcast is about up there. Here, they put an emphasis on being 'entertaining' during the game, which is never going to help someone learn what the game is really about. Instead of bringing you into the game, the ESPN broadcast shows you a game with commentators who act as if you might have tuned in just to hear them. In Canada, they don't only talk to Roenick. They don't only praise Brodeur. It is a much more balanced broadcast.

When you watch Hockey Night In Canada, it is hockey from beginning to end. You come out of almost every broadcast knowing a little something more than you did before. It is such a good broadcast that I would often watch it even if I did not care for either of the teams. ESPN is so bad that I hardly watch it for hockey anymore...and when I do I am always disappointed that it seems to be about everything except what is actually happening on the ice. The worst part about the season was when the ESPN exclusivity started about halfway through the playoffs.

Instead of showing those stupid black-and-white 'model' shots of the players in the Cup Final, they should have talked about where they are from and what life was like there. They should have talked about the work it had taken some of those players to reach that point in their careers. You almost never see that sort of thing on ESPN. You are likely to see and hear talk about that during every broadcast in Canada.

I've rambled on about some of the things that make the broadcasts so more appealing. It really just boils down to a hockey broadcast being about hockey up there. They have real hockey guys involved. They put a real solid effort into it. They don't have ADD like every ESPN crew does when they manage to stay on the topic of the game and its players for the entire event. They never act like they think the broadcast is about them instead of the game.

One more thing...they usually show the anthems as well, and even when the players enter the ice before the anthem. This is great, especially during the playoffs. It really does seem like the CBC's Hockey Night In Canada is the next best thing to being there, and they show you more of it than anybody else does.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Tek, I'd be hard pressed to say that there's a broadcast of any sporting event in the U.S. that fits the criteria you described -- there isn't a single sports telecast I can think of that has "the game" as its sole focus. Not one, hell, not one that really comes all that close, off-hand I might say golf would be the closest (based on the pretty limited amount of golf I've watched in the past couple of years) and even that isn't all that no-frills anymore.

I guess what I'm getting at is that it seems unreasonable to single out ESPN's hockey coverage for criticism when they're really just doing the same thing every other sport -- from football to rodeo to college lacrosse -- on every other network in the whole country is doing. Bitch about them not innovating maybe, but only to the degree that you blast any other sport for the same thing.

[tucker rocky]

Reports to un-cancel this season?

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I guess what I'm getting at is that it seems unreasonable to single out ESPN's hockey coverage for criticism when they're really just doing the same thing every other sport -- from football to rodeo to college lacrosse -- on every other network in the whole country is doing. Bitch about them not innovating maybe, but only to the degree that you blast any other sport for the same thing.

Why should I not single them out? Who else is doing the bulk of the national broadcasts? If I am comparing national broadcasts, who do I call out instead?

If you are saying they should get a free ride because that is "norm for the industry", then that does nothing to address the problem. I still think that being more like those broadcasts would help the sport grow in ratings and otherwise. Shrugging their shoulders doesn't help. Anyone with NHL Center Ice is almost always going to watch a broadcast from Canada before they would tune in to an ESPN one.

EDIT... And that only hurts their ratings more. If an ESPN broadcast had the same feel as a TSN broadcast, I would watch their hockey broadcasts much more often. Also, I don't think a Canadian broadcaster would have ever put someone like Jeremy Roenick in the booth for an entire game with a microphone...let alone encourage him to give it a try. That was some of the best promotion for the mute feature that I have ever personally experienced.

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by tucker rocky

Reports to un-cancel this season?

ESPN: "NHL Deal Imminent"

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Why should I not single them out? Who else is doing the bulk of the national broadcasts?

I think we have experienced "a failure to communicate" here.

I'm not talking about the bulk of national broadcasts of hockey, I'm talking about national broadcasts of every sporting event in the country, of which hockey is but a small part.

Hockey isn't the only one guilty of the approach you're talking about, and isn't the only one that might not be maximizing their appeal because of it.

Then again, I think there's a very valid argument to be made that the sort of broadcast you're talking about would be an even less popular than the ones currently airing -- this is U.S. TV, and depth isn't exactly a route to success (be it sports, news, or anything else) -- the average person really doesn't care fuckall about the details, whether it's a player firing 1,000 pucks a day at a tin can while growing up on a farm in ColdAss, Minnesota or the details of the latest state budget proposal.

NOTE: my reply was written before your edit clarified

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Then again, I think there's a very valid argument to be made that the sort of broadcast you're talking about would be an even less popular than the ones currently airing -- this is U.S. TV, and depth isn't exactly a route to success (be it sports, news, or anything else) -- the average person really doesn't care fuckall about the details, whether it's a player firing 1,000 pucks a day at a tin can while growing up on a farm in ColdAss, Minnesota or the details of the latest state budget proposal.

So it is a cultural difference. I think that says a lot of negative things about most of the people here in the USA. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I can't see how that is a positive thing at all.

[Dr. Sak]

I was listening to my local ESPN radio station and Mark Madden was on talking about the new deal. Before you joke, yes this is the same Mark Madden that did WCW wrestling but he does know hockey. He has a show everyday on ESPNRadio 1250 in Pittsburgh from 4 to 7pm and has an in with Mario and the Pens. His understanding of the new deal was this...

45 million dollar soft cap. A 75% luxury tax from 45 to 48 million and a 100% luxury tax above 48 million. There would be linkage. Therefore in future years the cap would be linked to the overall revenue of the league. Something that the owners wanted but the players wanted nothing to do with. The NHL is also tinkering with the idea of playing this year's 25 game schedule with a slue of modified rules. That way if they work they can keep them for next season and if not they will just go back to the way it was. A little experiment I guess.

And a rumor on possible rule changes..
Shootouts
Touch up Offsides
No Red Line

Next year...Goalie equipment

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

So it is a cultural difference. I think that says a lot of negative things about most of the people here in the USA. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I can't see how that is a positive thing at all.

I don't know if I'd say it's positive (or neccessarily negative), but I think there's a definite cultural thing in play here, especially with regard to hockey.

Consider this:
"You have to keep in mind what percentage of Canadians actually do watch hockey," said John Shannon, vice-president of programming and executive producer of Leafs TV. "On a good night, Hockey Night In Canada will pull in two million viewers. That's out of 12 million total viewers, so that number (of hard-core hockey fans) is already lower.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...08/924117.html

That's about 17% (2m/12m) on "a good night".

By comparison, the last five NCAA Men's Basketball Finals on CBS have rated between 11.0 (last year) and 17.2 (UConn-Duke '99). Lakers v Pistons Game 1 pulled only a 9.8, the final Round of The Masters had a 7.3

We're talking about regular season hockey in Canada being equal to some of the highest profile sporting events in the U.S -- and that's a pretty significant indicator of a "cultural difference", at least when it comes to sport & television.

Now, just while I'm pulling numbers, here's something to consider:
That 17 rtg, about 2 million people on "a good night" is equal to about a 2.0 rating in the U.S. (1 rtg point = 1% of TV Households = 1,096,00 H'holds)
Or, the incredibly popular & successful "HNIC" has about half as many viewers as Law & Order re-runs on TNT or Sponge Bob on Nick.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That 17 rtg, about 2 million people on "a good night" is equal to about a 2.0 rating in the U.S. (1 rtg point = 1% of TV Households = 1,096,00 H'holds)
Or, the incredibly popular & successful "HNIC" has about half as many viewers as Law & Order re-runs on TNT or Sponge Bob on Nick.

I wonder if that is higher or lower than what ESPN claims to get with their current style of broadcast? It seems higher than what I recall them going on about, but that may just be my perception. One thing that is impossible to measure is how things might have changed if ESPN had made hockey the center of their NHL broadcasts all along, rather than having a personality-driven broadcast...

[scooter]

I used to live in Illinois and the only hockey I was able to watch was on ESPN. In '94 I moved out here to Seattle and our basic cable picks up the CBC broadcasts of Hockey Night in Canada. I moved out here in May/June right about the time Vancouver was making their run in the playoffs. Watching Canadian hockey was a new experience, and something special.

I will echo some of what Tekneek has said about their broadcasts. You really start to understand the passion and immersion of the sport in Canada. Even the commercials tend to have hockey themes. It really seems that for 6 hours on Saturday nights all of Canada tunes in to watch their national sport.

That being said, I think Jon has some good points as well. There seems to be something about American broadcasts of all sports that is "different". It's almost like they feel that they have to hype things for people to tune in to watch instead of just allowing the sport to shine on it's own merits. I get some of the same feelings watching English Premier League soccer (as opposed to an MLS broadcast). Once again here is a sport, a national sport, that the fans are passionately attached to. The broadcast highlights and compliments the action on the field.

I think some of this stems from the fact that the US doesn't really have a "national" sport like some other countries. Interest in sport in the US seems (to me at least) to be spread over multiple sports. Sure there are fans that are fanatical about their teams, but I just don't get the sense that we "use" sports in the same way other cultures do. By "use" I mean what we get out of them (and, for that matter, what we put into them). Some of that probably comes from how the US media covers sporting events and then broadcasts it on to us. Some of it probably has to do with cultural issues, but that is for another topic...

Sorry, I didn't mean to threadjack here, but this is a very interesting topic. Hopefully we can discuss it further elsewhere.

Back on topic: I hope they can find a way for there to be some hockey this year.

[Tekneek]

As far as making an agreement today, the rumors are pure madness. Given all the rumors of the "agreement", I almost totally expect this to be a non-story at the end of the day when the rumors turn out to be just that.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I wonder if that is higher or lower than what ESPN claims to get with their current style of broadcast? It seems higher than what I recall them going on about, but that may just be my perception. One thing that is impossible to measure is how things might have changed if ESPN had made hockey the center of their NHL broadcasts all along, rather than having a personality-driven broadcast...

Best number I could find anywhere (it's amazingly hard to find the simplest things sometimes) was a 0.2 cable rating, that's equal to about 144,000 viewers for NHL on ESPN.

But, I may have something that puts hockey in somewhat of a perspective ... depending upon whether you feel like there's a significant difference between ESPN's coverage vs ABC vs Fox, etc. I don't think there's anything particular better/worse about ESPN than ABC, so I think this kinda sorta answers the question

http://www.sportsfanmagazine.com/content/view/479/
"Game 7 of the Cup Finals was a TV success. It averaged a 4.2 rating with a 7 share. According to The Washington Post, that translates to 6.3 million viewers. Add in the Canadian numbers, and that’s over 11 million viewers ... "


Notice here that even with "only" a 4.2, there were more bodies watching in the U.S. on ABC than there were watching whoevertheheck had Game 7 in Canada. By body count, that's a 4.2 here producing more viewers than what appears to be about a 41 rtg (5m or so / 12 million possible) in Canada.

What becomes more apparent, when you look at that sort of disparity in size, is that you can't really do rating comparisons between the two countries with the same expectations. A 42 rtg (persons) for a show in the U.S. would put it ahead of the Beatles apperance on Ed Sullivan, and rank second only to the finale of M*A*S*H ... and we just don't watch sports that way here.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by scooter

... but I just don't get the sense that we "use" sports in the same way other cultures do.

Very well done Scooter, that's a much better way of saying what I was getting at, with a lot fewer words & numbers to do it -- We don't do hockey HNIC style because we don't do anything that way.

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

As far as making an agreement today, the rumors are pure madness. Given all the rumors of the "agreement", I almost totally expect this to be a non-story at the end of the day when the rumors turn out to be just that.

I hope you're wrong. ESPN is jumping on the "game on" bandwagon, which was started with rumors from E.J. Hradek, a reputable writer. Hradek is reporting the truth - they're very close to a deal, but the papers aren't signed, sealed, delivered.

I agree it's good to take a wait-and-see approach until we see the Bettman press conference... unfortunately, I don't have the restrating to do so.

[Tekneek]

Hradek has been wrong about other things during this lockout. Just because he is bearing news we all want to hear does not mean he is right this time.

I think I would like it to happen, but I'm not buying into the hype just to be disappointed.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Very well done Scooter, that's a much better way of saying what I was getting at, with a lot fewer words & numbers to do it -- We don't do hockey HNIC style because we don't do anything that way.

That's a shame. Maybe my opinion about sports is shaped strongly by the fact that my most favorite ones, hockey and soccer, are regarded as national games outside of this country and only fringe sports here.

[Maple Leafs]

The soap opera continues...

Apparently now there will be no press conference today. Rumor is the league came to the table today with essentially the same deal as before, with no concessions. It sounds like the players are royally pissed that they were invited back to New York for season-saving talks, with all the accompanying optimism, just to hear the same offer they turned down.

Still hope that they can make a deal, but also some chance that this could turn very nasty.

[Maple Leafs]

Howard Berger just broke in on the Fan 590 to say the player's will be addressing the media shortly, that negotiations are over, and that the season will stay cancelled.

These people are idiots. All of them.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

These people are idiots. All of them.

Agreed.

Yesterday and today just add to the legacy of idiocy over the last few months. They can't even properly cancel a season. F*cking morons.

[Tekneek]

It's over. I tried to not get sucked into the hype and optimism, but I ended up falling for some of it.

[RPI-Fan]

Apparantly some of the owners are actually having a problem with what's going.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

Apparantly some of the owners are actually having a problem with what's going.

As well they should. The NHL is a business. No self-respecting business should be run in this manner. It's a complete joke. They can't even go gracefully into that good night. This entire process has appeared bush league from the start. It's fucking shameful.

The season should remain cancelled.

Goodenow and Bettman should be fired. Immediately.

Talks should continue with a view toward getting everything sorted out as soon as possible for next year. I don't care if there is no incentive to do so until next fall. Shit didn't get done when there was an incentive. So that doesn't matter. Just get a deal done. Deal with in-game rules to enhance the game. And do whatever the hell you can to generate interest in the "new" NHL.

Fuckers. The lot of them.

[Dr. Sak]

Toronto and Philadelphia get no hockey this year because of fucking Nashville and Florida?

[Maple Leafs]

If it turns out that Bettman couldn't make a deal because of Nashville and Florida, he will have a a hockey fan rebellion on his hands. This is ridiculous. Who's running this league?

[Tekneek]

If it is true that ESPN and a "major advertiser" were threatening to bolt, I hope they do...right now.

[bronconick]

It's entirely possible that Nashville and Florida are in among the teams who are opposed to the deal, but the hardest of the hard-core owners have been William Wirtz of the Original 6 Blackhawks and Jeremy Jacobs of the Original 6 Bruins, with the Montreal front office a day or two ago saying that 42.5 million was "pushing it" for them.

[Draft Dodger]

I don't get it...how could E.J. Hradek be wrong???

(yeah, that was sarcasm)

[RPI-Fan]

I'm totally surprised... a legit source (wow, never thought I'd say that), told me they were good to go.

Eklund says "90% something gets done in the next two days".

[RPI-Fan]

From NHL.com...

Representatives of the NHL and NHLPA met today for several hours in New York in an effort to reach a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. The NHL is excpected to isssue a statement shortly, which will be posted on NHL.com and NHLCBANews.com.