Comments on: Am I the only one… http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/2005/09/29/am-i-the-only-one/ Rants about hockey (chiefly the Carolina Hurricanes) from an Adopted Southerner Tue, 02 Dec 2008 04:40:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: The Acid Queen http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/2005/09/29/am-i-the-only-one/#comment-29 The Acid Queen Sat, 01 Oct 2005 19:00:00 +0000 http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/?p=19#comment-29 Exactly, Bryant. A lot of people don't understand that this whole thing is a self-perpetuating cycle. The teams that get the ratings get them because they are shown over and over and over again--with no alternatives, the average viewer will just default to what's there and think that everything else isn't worth watching. And I'm sorry, but I find a Nashville-Columbus or Calgary-Edmonton matchup to be a LOT more exciting than Detroit-Colorado v.umpty-ump--and I suspect that any other hockey fan with half a lick of sense would, too. Exactly, Bryant.

A lot of people don’t understand that this whole thing is a self-perpetuating cycle. The teams that get the ratings get them because they are shown over and over and over again–with no alternatives, the average viewer will just default to what’s there and think that everything else isn’t worth watching. And I’m sorry, but I find a Nashville-Columbus or Calgary-Edmonton matchup to be a LOT more exciting than Detroit-Colorado v.umpty-ump–and I suspect that any other hockey fan with half a lick of sense would, too.

]]> By: Bryant http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/2005/09/29/am-i-the-only-one/#comment-28 Bryant Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:55:00 +0000 http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/?p=19#comment-28 You have it so right! I live five hours from Nashville so I don't make the trip much but if they were on TV a bit more I would probably be moved to visit more. It's hard to get excited enough to go through the trouble and expense by reading stories on the web site. So, it's not just about TV ratings; it's about ticket sales and marketing. You have it so right! I live five hours from Nashville so I don’t make the trip much but if they were on TV a bit more I would probably be moved to visit more. It’s hard to get excited enough to go through the trouble and expense by reading stories on the web site. So, it’s not just about TV ratings; it’s about ticket sales and marketing.

]]> By: The Acid Queen http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/2005/09/29/am-i-the-only-one/#comment-27 The Acid Queen Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:35:00 +0000 http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/?p=19#comment-27 See, I could buy that argument if the Lightning were getting umpty-ump games per season as defending Champs--but they're not. It's the same five teams getting most of the games, even though they ALL got showed up in the playoffs last season, and teams that are up and coming in the US and the Canadian teams (one of which has been a perennial playoff contender, even if they wind up choking at the hands of the Maple Leafs) are getting short shrift because they're not considered "marketable". If they're not marketable in the eyes of the NHL, then why do they exist at all? Variety is the spice of life and will wind up being the lifeblood of the NHL. To compare it to the NBA or MLB or the NFL (all of which are firmly entrenched here in the States) is kinda silly IMO, because the NHL is trying to survive and needs to market every last one of their teams rather than just a select handful with the biggest number of bandwagoners or (in the case of the PFlyers) the favor of Comcast. I think this could have been done better, and honestly? Nothing will change my mind on that. See, I could buy that argument if the Lightning were getting umpty-ump games per season as defending Champs–but they’re not. It’s the same five teams getting most of the games, even though they ALL got showed up in the playoffs last season, and teams that are up and coming in the US and the Canadian teams (one of which has been a perennial playoff contender, even if they wind up choking at the hands of the Maple Leafs) are getting short shrift because they’re not considered “marketable”. If they’re not marketable in the eyes of the NHL, then why do they exist at all?

Variety is the spice of life and will wind up being the lifeblood of the NHL. To compare it to the NBA or MLB or the NFL (all of which are firmly entrenched here in the States) is kinda silly IMO, because the NHL is trying to survive and needs to market every last one of their teams rather than just a select handful with the biggest number of bandwagoners or (in the case of the PFlyers) the favor of Comcast.

I think this could have been done better, and honestly? Nothing will change my mind on that.

]]> By: Stormbringer http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/2005/09/29/am-i-the-only-one/#comment-26 Stormbringer Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:14:00 +0000 http://acidqueen.projectremains.com/?p=19#comment-26 Well...I *would* agree with you, but I have to admit that I am in the party that says whatever it takes to get that eventual NHL Network. The very day I heard that Comcast landed the NHL, I resigned myself to the fact that no matter how many teams they actually give "respect" to, it will always be the Flyers lovefest, thanks greatly to their being owned by Comcast. I'm a little surprised that it will not also be a Capitals lovefest, considering how the Comcast Sports channel covers Washington/Baltimore sports. Normally, I would be as POed as you are, but if what I have heard about Comcast's CEO being as big a hockey fan as they come AND wanting to get the NHL in the spotlight is true, I say whatever it takes. And even if we ever get that NHL Network, don't expect the coverage to get any better...whenever I pass by the NFL Network, there always seems to be something about the Cowboys, Packers, or Patriots on there. NBA TV? Lakers (which is practically the only team I won't complain about on this list because, as I once told you, my brother likes'em), Bulls, and Celtics. And if the MLB had its own network/channel? I can guaran-damn-tee you that it would be nothing but a Yankees/Red Sox orgy twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. So, team-biasness may seem bad in the NHL, but most, if not all major sports are suffering from it too. Well…I *would* agree with you, but I have to admit that I am in the party that says whatever it takes to get that eventual NHL Network. The very day I heard that Comcast landed the NHL, I resigned myself to the fact that no matter how many teams they actually give “respect” to, it will always be the Flyers lovefest, thanks greatly to their being owned by Comcast. I’m a little surprised that it will not also be a Capitals lovefest, considering how the Comcast Sports channel covers Washington/Baltimore sports.

Normally, I would be as POed as you are, but if what I have heard about Comcast’s CEO being as big a hockey fan as they come AND wanting to get the NHL in the spotlight is true, I say whatever it takes.

And even if we ever get that NHL Network, don’t expect the coverage to get any better…whenever I pass by the NFL Network, there always seems to be something about the Cowboys, Packers, or Patriots on there. NBA TV? Lakers (which is practically the only team I won’t complain about on this list because, as I once told you, my brother likes’em), Bulls, and Celtics. And if the MLB had its own network/channel? I can guaran-damn-tee you that it would be nothing but a Yankees/Red Sox orgy twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.

So, team-biasness may seem bad in the NHL, but most, if not all major sports are suffering from it too.

]]>