BOOOOO! That’s all I have to say on the matter.

Posted by Sp4r7an on 01/22/08 at 09:28 PM ET

Versus ratings my be on the rise, but my carrier (Time Warner in Cincinnati) still REFUSES to carry the network.

Posted by drimo from Cincinnati, OH on 01/23/08 at 08:57 AM ET

Stop griping people. It’s obvious ESPN has no real interest in the product still, so I don’t know where exactly you think you’re going to get a carrier for the games.

Does it suck if you don’t have Versus?  Yes, but that’s your carrier’s fault, not the NHL’s.  Complain to your carrier.  NO huge network is going to come in, get rights, and be your savior here.  If they were, the NHL’d already have an agreement with them, because I doubt they relish being on a netwokr withotu 100% availability and home penetration.

Posted by Primis from Michigan on 01/23/08 at 10:37 AM ET

We sure are spoiled up here in the Great White North…Sure I can shell out the money for the Centre (er, Center) Ice Package, but between CBC, TSN, Sportsnet and the NHL Network, I still get more games than I can watch (er, that my wife will let me watch).

As for Versus, nope it’s still OLN up here and they do have Road Hockey Rumble (which is a very funny show, by the way)

Posted by dash_pinched on 01/23/08 at 12:43 PM ET

Some people are griping because they might want better coverage on the same channel, though.

The most common idea I hear is a nightly highlight show.

We sure are spoiled up here in the Great White North.

Yes, you are.  Enjoy it. 

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 01/23/08 at 01:29 PM ET

Hradek mentioned on NHL Live that there have been talks with ESPN and the NHL.  Versus would have to sign-off and allow ESPN to broadcast some games.

So, the ESPN option still remains open.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 01/23/08 at 01:33 PM ET

Versus is part of the so-called “extended” cable package I bought here in Las Vegas, which includes FSW (Kings hockey broadcasts) and FSN-Prime (Ducks hockey broadcasts) in addition to ESPN and ESPN2 and I don’t seriously watch either one because of this retarded obsession with watching men in boxer shorts and tank tops running up down a floor.  (They should make the courts bigger ten feet by ten feet and THEN maybe I’ll be interested in that game.  Naaaaah…it’ll never happen.)

Posted by SYF from Las Vegas, NV on 01/23/08 at 01:50 PM ET

Hey Paul,

I’ve said this many times before and I’ll say it again. ESPN and the NHL need each other. Bad. Here’s why:

1. Gary Bettman talks all the time about “growing the game in the U.S.”. Well, it’s awful hard to grow a game when most of it’s national tv exposure is on second tier pay cable tv(ie: Versus, NHL Network). I personally don’t care where the NHL has it’s TV rights, I’ll shell out the extra money. It’s the “fair weather fans” that we need to worry about. The regular joe sports fans in the U.S. are just dying for something new to pop up, because let’s face it, Poker, Nascar, the NBA, FIFA, and UFC Fighting wore out their welcome ages ago, which leads me to number 2.

2. ESPN needs some fresh programming. You can only show football and basketball so much before you feel like vomiting your chesse dootles. ESPN will always be the go-to sports station in the states, but they need some fresh programming to really start generating some buzz again. (and I have to watch Chris Mortenson or Chris Salisbury spend another 5 minute segment talking about where Tom Brady bought his groceries ten minutes ago I’m gonna go nuts!

Posted by Steve from New York on 01/24/08 at 04:32 PM ET