Blackhawks on National TV
by mbulls on Aug 25, 2010 3:34 PM CDT
Email
Print
The NHL just recently released the National TV schedule for this year. On NBC there will be Philadelphia @ Chicago on January 23rd, Pittsburgh @ Chicago on February 20th, Chicago @ Washington on March 13th, Tampa Bay @ Chicago on April 3rd, and finally Detroit @ Chicago on April 10th.
On Versus there will be the season opener Chicago @ Colorado on October 7th, St. Louis @ Chicago on November 30th, Chicago @ Los Angeles on January 3rd, Minnesota @ Chicago on February 16th, Chicago @ Minnesota on February 28th, Chicago @ Tampa Bay on March 9th, San Jose @ Chicago on March 14th, Chicago @ Detroit on March 28th, Chicago @ Boston on March 29th, St. Louis @ Chicago on April 6th, and Chicago @ Detroit on April 8th.
This makes for a total of 16 games that will be broadcast nationally: 5 games on NBC and 11 on Versus. It's a bit of a shame that the Blackhawks' first home game isn't on this list but it's not all that surprising. That is quite a few games though with the highest profile ones probably being the rematch of the Stanley Cup Finals against Philadelphia, a rematch of the Western Conference Finals against San Jose and the three against the hated wings.
45 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
FYI NBC is a rolling schedule
NBC is a rolling schedule, they can change the games up to 13 days before the game or something like that.
And not one game against one of your best rivals? A stacked team? You would think they would want to showcase some intense and always entertaining hockey.
The Versus numbers are huge, but NBC is looking like the Sid and Ovie show again. I think the Puck Daddy story showed that they will be on every weekend on NBC.
I was surprised to see that the Wild are on the same number as you guys, and the Kings, a great young team, are on NBC twice!
I know Minny has a whole state of quasi Canadians that love hockey, but really?
Why does the national networks totally ignore the Canadian teams?
Looking at all of the TV schedules
I can’t see why there aren’t any games being shown in the U.S. I think it probably has something to do with CBC & TSN having the rights to show Canadian teams
Maybe, just once, someone will call me 'Sir' without adding, 'You're making a scene."
Of course.
Its just funny they would show LA and Minny, and not what is always a great game.
Do they really think people would not watch?
Canadians are hooked…we’ll watch any two teams play.
NBC isn't going to feature a Canadian team - it's a ratings thing
they try to feature at least one large market US team against another US team – also large market, or interesting to US viewers for some other reason
Preparing my psyche for the coming Capocalypse
Confusion will be my epitaph.
Toronto and Montreal are not interesting to US viewers?
I know what you’re saying and I know it’s true, I just don’t understand it. As VCD mentioned, I’d watch any two teams play, especially if the alternative is basketball.
39 years of pain vaporized by one OT goal. (1971 loss to Habs)
they're catering to what comes in numbers
and hardcore fans those are not. Unfortunately.
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 26, 2010 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions
and here inlies the problem with the NHL
They do not know how to market their product. It shouldn’t matter one damned bit that the teams are in Canada, especially the 2 part of the original 6. Bettman and his wonks don’t use the original 6 to their advantage in marketing.
They geographically spread across the US, though not effective in the minds of many, but they miserably failed in getting the US audience interested in the history with the Canadian teams. So when those teams are on, not enough folks tune in.
The Winter Classic was the perfect opportunity to showcase the original 6 for 3 straight seasons – starting with the Hawks & Wings in 2009 – and blew it. They’re NBA-like (any coincidence Bettman came from the NBA), with their Sidney and the ‘guins and Ovie & the Caps instead of promoting the teams and the cities. I figured a Leafs @ Blue Shirts in the old Yankee Stadium in 2010 followed by a Habs @ B’s in Fenway in 2011 would have vaulted the league by showcasing it’s original 6 in 3 straight WC’s, but no Gary blew it, again…
Just win the next game...!
This Heritage Classic just pisses me off too.
Putting the Habs in AGAIN ( I know they have a history, but jesus! ) against the Flames.
By that time it could very well be a game between two 8th or worse place teams.
The NHL could have showcased what is one of the best rivalries in the NHL to watch hockey…the Canucks and Flames.
We don’t like you guys…but that is recent.
There is some longstanding hatred with the Flamers, and it is real.
It would matter not a whit where those two teams are in the standings in the season. The hockey is always competitive and intense because of the rivalry.
I guess once our new stadium is done D/T, we can host one. I hear they asked for 2013. A Canucks /T.O Heritage Classic would break all their past records for watching in Canada, and would have enough cachet to draw American fans…
So, maybe they are just thinking ahead.
I can see why if I lived up there
This is a prime example of a league that does NOT HAVE THE BALLS to come up with a marketing plan to promote those teams North of the border.
INSTEAD of figuring out how to get all six of them into the flow of main stream league promotions, they fall-back to the heritage classic since it’s an easy thing. There was already one in 2003, so why not another….and another. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not ripping on it. I think it’s great up there. It should be, it probably is, but I ask the NHL, “what the fuck do we hear about it down here?!” I look at the HC as low-hanging fruit. It’s easy to pick so why not just do it. No risk, no reward.
My first thoughts on promotions would be for the Canadian teams to play the big name American teams. NHL would promote this, not just the networks and not just promote “a game” but a league. Just starting with Leafs @ Blue Shirts in a WC and Habs @ B’s in another WC. But that’s not where it ends, it where it starts.
For other headline games, not just WC’s, Canucks vs Blackhawks (last 2 playoff series is the promo). Oilers vs Wings (5 cups in the 80’s, vs 4 cups in the last 13 seasons). I guess I just don’t understand why the NHL is sitting on their hands with this. There has to be some good marketers out there to do this. If the NHL doesn’t tell everyone why Canucks vs Blackhawks is such a great fucking game, how on God’s green earth is the rest of the nation (other than diehards) going to know this?!?!
It’s why I’ve suggested in the last year or so a one Mr. John McDonough may be setting himself up for an NHL job after what he’s helped do here in ChiTown. Think of his resume on the business side. He took sports LOSINGEST (is that a word?) team in the CUBS (I admit it, I’m a diehard fan), that play in an old rickety ballpark with 2/3rds day games and is averaging over 95% of capacity the last 8 years when more than half the time, the team ain’t so good. Who the fuck thought of giving away Beanie Babies at a damned baseball game? John McDonough. Then he went to 1901 W. Madison St. and helped reform business operations that helped bring about one of the league’s most current dominant franchises.
If Bettman doesn’t get his head out of his ass and soon, the next labour disagreement could be a disaster w/o a TV deal.
Just win the next game...!
playing devil's advocate
why should O6 attract casual fans? They might not even know what’s so important about O6 teams that they should watch, really. Interest in the sport for casual viewers will stem from the fact that it’s “their” team or a “big” team playing. That’s the first thing they’d like to know when they tune in, and throwing a Canadian team in there automatically loses you half the viewership in the area.
Granted, those match-ups you suggested post-Red Wings/Hawks WC do make me salivate a little, but it’s hard to rely on just the hardcore fans all over the US to lift the ratings enough for an American/Canadian match-up. They’ll need the Philly market to tune in also.
And yes, it IS a ratings game. Consider this: the NHL’s contracts with its TV partners are about to expire. The only reason NBC and Versus carry hockey games is for ad revenues. The only reason ad partners will pay for spots during games is if they know enough people are watching. If the NHL chose to gamble with the O6 match-ups and ratings dipped significantly after the Hawks/Wings Winter Classic, they’ll have a hard time bargaining for more air time with NBC.
And ultimately, doesn’t more air time translating to more exposure to the casual fan do more for growing the market?
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 27, 2010 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions
By itself w/o a primer
you’re right the O6 just by itself won’t attract new fans. That’s where my gripe comes in about the league. They need to embrace the roots of the game while promoting the overall league. They just can’t throw this (O6) out there blindly, they do have to promote it. Just like Wrigley hosting the ‘09 WC, they hit a home run with that. They didn’t follow through. It’s about league self-promoting even before the networks.
If the league doesn’t promote its history and the allure of the league (another rant is getting rid of the conference and division names) it’s hard to sell the new fans and the new cities on why its so great to be an NHL city.
When it comes to Canada’s teams, say Edmonton, the league has to show the history of the great Oilers teams of the 80’s, 5 cups in 7 seasons…Gretzky, Kurri, Messier, Anderson, Coffey, Fuhr… Not saying it’s easy but I just don’t see the NHL promoting this.
On the conf & div names, it’s like dumbing down things like people can’t figure out anything other than geography. And when is that so great. For years in MLB, Cincinnati and Atlanta were in the NL West while the Cubs and Cards were in the NL East….nice.
Just win the next game...!
The thing is, if I remember correctly, that the ad revenue and viewership on Versus and NBC has been off the charts. Way more than the other major sports.
I just think they insult the intelligence of the American hockey fan by thinking they have to have either Ovie or Sid in a game.
You get the guys originally with the team in their area.
But this is a great enough game, (especially for those that bitched about not being able to follow because the the puck is so small) even more so on HD.
A Bills fan may be a fan of the Bills, but if he is a fan at all, he will watch the Bears play the Packers if it is on TV. Will it get more viewers in Chitown?
Of course. But lets give hockey fans the ability to watch the game in all the markets…not just their own.
yes, the ad revenue and viewership have been off the charts
but is that due to the fact that hockey fans outside those market areas have been watching the game, OR because viewership has been in a particularly strong TV market?
I don’t think we’re on the same page with how big the hardcore hockey fanbase (for the sake of this discussion, defined as those who would watch games regardless of who’s playing) is. Yes, you and I will watch teams besides ours if NBC has them on Sundays, but how many of us would? I don’t even know if you count, because if you’re in Canada you don’t matter to NBC. Is that enough to make a dent in TV ratings land?
At this point, unless the NHL has definitive ratings that prove significant interest and viewership exists on a national level (even WITHOUT showing large-market teams— maybe this can be done by looking at the ratings of, say, a Chicago/Detroit game outside those two cities, I don’t know), then choosing a smaller market team is a gamble that I don’t believe the NHL should make. Like I said, TV negotiations are around the corner— they have to put their best foot forward, maybe get more years in so they have more time to experiment with what to show and how to market it, etc.
At this point anyway, hardcore hockey fans will do pretty much anything (ie, watch grainy online feeds, get Center Ice or GameCenter Live) just to see the games. The trick is giving casual fans an incentive to watch, and turn them into hardcore fans like that. Best way to do it is cast the net where you can get the most fish.
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 27, 2010 8:27 PM CDT up reply actions
They supposedly are doing great things with Centre Ice.
I get that NBC wants to grow their casual hockey fan as far as promoting the Ovie and Sid show to get them hooked.
It is going to come down to whether they want to be on a network or THE sports channel. If they can get on ESPN ( even a game of the Week…though ESPN would probably go whole hog. )
NBC could be like ABC and Monday Night Football used to be.
Versus would have to either buck up ( and their was a rumor I remember in a story about their being an NBC/Versus sports type network in discussions )
ESPN is already there…the most market penetration. But don’t discount NBC either. They have seen a huge success with NHL is traditional markets. If it lags ( and it does!) in Nashville/Florida and the Sunbelt…that is something they can work on. I saw the Thrashers on that NBC sked a couple times I think.
The Canadian market is pretty saturated. I can see damn near every game anyhow. People can get access to feeds of games pretty easily these days. ( another story I can’t quite remember, but for the factoid that the NHL had a huge uptick in online ratings and how they measure those things last year too ).
We’ll get you guys hooked yet.
At least until the next bloody fight or Bertuzzi type incident.
LOL
Of course Ovie and Sid are up there: they’re the two biggest faces. Other sports do the exact same thing. Everybody broadcasts good Barcelona, Inter, or Man U games. Basketball absolutely milks the Celtics, the Lakers, and the Cavs. I don’t watch NFL so i couldn’t tell you, and baseball isn’t a sport so there’s no point in mentioning it.(Let’s not flame about this) It’s just business. Also, NBC broadcasts quite a few Ranger v Bruins games, all of which involve less than 5 goals and the only well known players being Lundy, Gabby, Zedno, and Savard.
"Mes que un club"
"You're a pro or you're a noob. That's life"
by Scratch and Snif on Aug 27, 2010 10:07 PM CDT up reply actions
I pretty much agree with most of these points
though I don’t know how it answers the question I posed regarding the wisdom in showing hockey games that feature teams from cities that won’t guarantee ratings… I guess we’re on a different discussion now?
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 27, 2010 10:14 PM CDT up reply actions
No…same thing. The thing is, showing Rags/Bees is a slam dunk for ratings. Two of the bigger sports and hockey markets in the Northeast is a no brainer.
And yeah, of course they show more of the big teams. Again, a no brainer. Even for a non sport, the Yankees are an obvious example of that.
You’ll read or hear about the normal attendance at Jays gams are around 22K. But 35K were there last series, and that sure isn’t all the traveling fanatics from New York.
That same cachet is why the Hawks will be on national TV more next year. A Cup will do that. You always want to market from a strength.
I remember reading the stories about the improved ratings, and of course there were huge gains in Chicago. Those old Dollar Bill days are long gone, and the numbers are growing more now because of the team.
But the ones that were spiking huge were teams like Washington. Big numbers and around 200% increase. Some of the other gains were more modest, or might have sounded great ( a 40% increase in Miami may sound good, until you realize the initial number was about 12K !)
The NHL needs to market different in different places. A sophisticated market would easily be able to show a..say…Canucks /Hawks game as the early game of a dbl header with two more marquee (Pit/Was ) (Det/ NYR ,Phi/Bos)…
They are sorta using that in the sked by filtering in teams like the Kings and Thrashers, as well as the five national games they have for Minny. Though that may be finally being smart enough to give them what they want.
But in the South, maybe they need to market the game more on its merits first. I know that Carolina seems to have an ingrained market of hardcore guys. Use the game. How in the hell guys that love watching cars go left all afternoon so they get into accidents could be sold on the carnage implicit in our game.
re: Caps
It’s true that there is a massive market for teams that have a Hockey Desert around them: Caps fans who are also my friends hail from MD, Va and WV… there is a massive market for Hockey in this sort of an area and they’ll be frustrated at not seeing their guys in favour of more Sid..
by mightymike D on Aug 28, 2010 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, the Caps’ local ratings on Comcast Sportsnet jumped 110% I think.
by red army line on Aug 28, 2010 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Fact 1: hockey fans are more likely to watch their own team than another team
Fact 2: America has more people than Canada
Fact 3: NBC is American, not Canadian.
NBC loses out on an entire hockey market by putting one of their GotW teams in Canada. During the playoffs it’s tougher to work around that and I think a Canadian team got on NBC, but still, considering that they’re picking teams that get really good ratings, they lose a lot.
by red army line on Aug 28, 2010 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
That is sort of what we were saying above. That the American market is not yet mature enough. Too many casual fans to snake in yet. There are hardcores…and growing ones.
But you cannot say that they “lose out on an entire hockey market” because they show an American team against a Canadian one.
The Original Six teams still have fans all over. Teams like the Canucks have been quality long enough that you see more and more blue ( and our other colours! ) jerseys at away games every year.
Maybe you lose out on a local audience…perhaps. But you gain too. And I was never talking about entirely. One game in an entire season is not too much. I would wager that one Canucks/Hawks properly marketed would be one of the top draws of the season.
Once you get hockey fans hooked, they are HOOKED too. Its the nature of the game. They would know, and the broadcasters and league could help “educate” them. How in the hell could you screw up marketing a game between two deep and talented teams…with top individual stars…that have the added bonus of heated rivalry? Because one is north of the 49th?
(BTW..do you really think that networks and companies that sell to the NA market do not realize that about 90% of the Cdn. market is situated along the border In easy broadcast range. I am watching an American station right now The money is only .05 from par. It all spends to them!)
Sure, you wouldn’t show Nucks/Flames. That is an example of a good game. But it would be…or should be…easier to market and get a quality…intense and wonderful advert for the game by showing the Canucks play the Hawks. ( It is an awesome rivalry, and the games are great no matter the score.)…than it would be to market Wild and Hawks ( a game they will be showing next year )
Besides, in most of the burgeoning markets in the NHL today, you can get most of the games on local and regional sports networks…or are getting more and more every year.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I was assuming that Canadians don’t get NBC and thus NBC wouldn’t get the local ratings.
by red army line on Aug 29, 2010 3:11 AM CDT up reply actions
see, the hockey fans that you say would still watch the nucks/hawks games
are also the same hockey fans that would already be watching the hawks/philly game, BECAUSE they love hockey and will watch it regardless of who’s playing. You don’t necessarily “gain”. You just lose that local audience.
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 29, 2010 8:01 AM CDT up reply actions
You guys are missing my point.
I am saying…that Van/Chi game would/could and should be marketed as a marquee event…a game that should be watched.
The loss of some local market because they didn’t see their team for ONE weekend would be offset by the quality of the hockey and the fans it would draw on a national audience.
And yes red army, I get NBC here. Like I said, 90% of the Canadian population lives within 300 miles of the border. We get it, we buy the products we see on it…( sometimes a game or program is simulcast with Cdn ads…but the TV network is still getting paid somehow from that.)
I totally agree with you.
I believe a Van/Chi game would be watched by many fans in both countries, but it’s not us you have to convince. We are the ones watching hockey no matter what two teams are playing. Hockey seems to be an afterthought by NBC no matter who is playing. They would show a bowling tournament before a hockey game if they thought it would get better ratings.
How would you like a job where, every time you make a mistake, a big red light goes on and 18,000 people boo?
I know that, but my point of contention with it
that I don’t think you’re addressing at all, is that it rests on the marketing of the NHL and the RISK that their marketing might not draw the audience they want. You’re throwing around phrases like “it would be offset by the […] fans it would draw on a national level” but do you know this for sure?
Yes, the NHL would never know until they tried, but as I also pointed out earlier, because the NHL is in the last year of their TV contracts, it can’t afford to take these kinds of risks (and yes, these are risks, even for just one weekend) just yet. When they have a longer deal in place then they can experiment with a number of gimmicks and marketing tactics to draw what they think would be a large national audience, but for now I see no problem with sticking with a formula that’s worked.
(Tweets @ChiBlackhawks and blogs at Blackhawks Down Low.)
by chiblackhawks on Aug 30, 2010 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm talking about the NHL
not properly marketing its product. In almost all sports, fans watch their team more than other teams.
I’m not talking about NBA losing money putting on games in Canada. It’s about the NHL not marketing its product so it can draw a larger TV contract because people want to see more of their games, including those with Canadian teams.
There’s always going to be the large market draw for their respective teams in the big markets like NY, Phi, Det & Chi. The NHL simply doesn’t do enough to promote its sport that warrants a big TV contract.
Just win the next game...!
by blackhawk24 on Aug 30, 2010 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
should read
I’m not talking about NBC losing money
Just win the next game...!
by blackhawk24 on Aug 30, 2010 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, the NHL makes 80% of the total from NBC’s games with their revenue sharing deal, so there’s that. The NHL started marketing post-lockout all wrong, but now that they’ve dug themselves into a hole, they really have to go with big American teams all the time.
by red army line on Sep 4, 2010 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions
maybe not the Leafs so much
but the Habs are a brand like the Yankees. The history, the tradition, the sweaters, the fact that they made deep run last year, the fucking quaintness of the city, the French angle…
June 30, 2010. We will rue this day.
I think in the case
of Montreal playing Toronto, the NHL schedules those games to be played on Saturday nights so CBC can have it as one of their marquee match ups during the season.
Maybe, just once, someone will call me 'Sir' without adding, 'You're making a scene."
But that won't draw the American market
enough to make NHL on TV relevant South of the border. And again that’s my gripe with that dumbass Bettman. Can there be any more of a classic than Habs/Leafs? 35 combined cups? Except for us diehards, who knows that and to boot, it’s only on CBC (great for up there) but several carriers here don’t carry CBC.
But if the NHL front office folks can pull their heads out of their asses long enough to figure things out, they’d market these teams and get a TV contract so a game like that would be on NBC or ESPN. OK, maybe it’d be a shift to Sunday instead of Saturday night and would piss off Don Cherry. But if we’re ever going to see our game even get in the same arena of recognition with MLB and the NBA (forget the NFL for now), Bettman and his wonks have to promote the game better.
And there should be more than 6 Canadian teams in a 30-team league. This shit about teams too close to one another (when the RIMM guy was trying to buy the ‘yotes and move them to Hamilton) has got to stop. Toronto could have 2 teams and there’s no reason why Hamilton, Quebec City and Winnipeg shouldn’t also be represented. Hell, the Blues almost moved to Saskatoon in the 80’s. Instead I have to deal with Nashville, Anaheim, 2 Fla teams, Atlanta, Carolina etc. They expanded geographically but not demographically.
Just win the next game...!
Hell, I'll watch local youth hockey
but I am a hardcore fan – the mass market just isn’t going to be as big ratingswise where a non-US or weak market US city is featured.
Unforunate, but a fact nontheless.
Preparing my psyche for the coming Capocalypse
Confusion will be my epitaph.
Don't you think that if the league
self-promoted better, that would make a change for the better?
Just win the next game...!
eventually ... if done well ... it could be like football
but I just don’t see that happening (a) maybe ever, or (b) certainly not any time soon
Preparing my psyche for the coming Capocalypse
Confusion will be my epitaph.
I do love those Big Canadian Nights..
Not just for all the commentary/colours being delightfully “Flappy-Head/Beady-Eyed Whit’s That All Aboot, Eh?”
© South Park…..
by mightymike D on Aug 28, 2010 2:22 PM CDT up reply actions
"sorry, boss
I couldn’t come to work today because the ’Hawks were on.."
In light of that really not flying as an excuse round here I’d better utterly confuse my Manager by putting in requests for late shifts/days off after all those game.. oh the joy of living in GMT..
Ah great, more Vs broadcasts with that God-awful audio
Seems like their HD doesn’t have very good 5.1 audio. Whereas CSN ( and I can’t believe I’m actually commending anything Comcast ) 5.1 audio is great, especially when the game is at the UC. I crank up the sound and its almost like being there.
Just win the next game...!
What brand speakers you use? 5.1s are berry berry expensive.
"Mes que un club"
"You're a pro or you're a noob. That's life"
by Scratch and Snif on Aug 26, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions
It's a complete pkg by Samsung
I got along with a Blu-ray player when I bought the TV. Sounds pretty good for the home games on CSN.
Best system I have is by Yamaha. It’s several years older & the rcvr doesn’t have HDMI so I run the cable box right to the TV on HDMI then pull the TV audio out to the rcvr to capture the 5.1 sound.
Problem with all those Vs and NBC games in the playoffs it seemed like they didn’t even have the surrounds on. The audio was as if I was listening to the crappy TV speakers.
Just win the next game...!
definitely better than crappy 2.1 speakers, playing even crappier audio through a live streaming website.
"Mes que un club"
"You're a pro or you're a noob. That's life"
by Scratch and Snif on Aug 27, 2010 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions
I've just scanned through these comments
and to amplify — there is no way NBC will feature a Canadian team until they are forced to — the latter round of the Stanley Cup Finals, and the Finals themselves. An All Canadian Stanley Cup would be ratings death for NBC.
Unfortunately, there is just not enough casual interest in the NHL in America outside of the hotbed markets. Most people will turn to the NBA finals, even if they live in Omaha (let’s say) and are just casual NBA fans. It’s the NBA Championship, so they’ll watch.
Only the real hardcore are watching the Stanley Cup Finals. This year, the draw of the colorful major-market Blackhawks did draw a little more interest, but not a mammoth tune-in.
Most of America just does not hold this game in the regard that we do.
And, since the NHL isn’t on ESPN , it doesn’t have an automatic tune-in. Many people just watch ESPN — whatever they happen to be airing at the time. Even crappy Arena Football, there are people watching on ESPN.
If Comcast (owns Versus) is able to turn Vs. into a 24-Hour sports channel (a real competitor to ESPN) — which is a possibility when the economy improves (that means dumping their current craptastic ‘sports’ programming) and make sure the outlet is widely available on cable and satellite — well, then that could help the NHL, having a real, national sports network (one that doesn’t carry rodeo and tractor races) to its’ own.
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Sep 2, 2010 8:26 PM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- The Chicago Blackhawks’ seven-game losing streak is bad for everybody
- According to NHL, here’s why Dominic Moore escaped suspension for Fedotenko hit
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
- Youth hockey coach, parents clash over alleged tirade over 9-year old’s 200th goal puck
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
