Mr. Sharp should stick to writing about what he knows because he obviously knows little about hockey. I will concede he has a point about hockey’s lack of visibility but his suggestions to improve it are infantile. Obviously it was a slow news day for Mr. Sharp.

Posted by Spector from Charlottetown, PEI, Canada on 12/23/06 at 07:16 AM ET

I’m willing to cut Drew a tiny bit of slack this time of year.  After all, what else is there for him to cover--the Lions?  :D

Posted by Baroque on 12/23/06 at 07:29 AM ET

I am still at a lost as to why ESPN is the only way to save the NHL. It seems to be the only suggestion from anyone… Just how many people are on ESPN’s payroll anyhow?

The NHL problems need a bigger plan than “throw it on ESPN and they will come”..

Posted by canesice from Raleigh on 12/23/06 at 09:47 AM ET

Nobody’s suggesting ESPN is the only way to save the NHL. What we’re suggesting is that it’s the best way to improve the league’s visibility and popularity in the American sports market. Having games televised on Versus just ain’t cutting it.

Oh, and I work for Foxsports so my recommendation that the NHL get back on ESPN has no bias on my part.

Posted by Spector from Charlottetown, PEI, Canada on 12/23/06 at 10:49 AM ET

What Lyle said.  Versus may have the NHL as its lead major sport, but you still get bass fishing, bull-riding, and “action sports” five days out of seven, with no NHL highlights show, and Versus is still VERY hard to find if you don’t have Comcast cable.

Otherwise, Evil Drew is just a plain old loser.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/23/06 at 10:58 AM ET

Here is my take- No insider info but I think we may see some crossover.  A game or two a week on ESPN or ESPN2, some on Versus and some on NBC.
One darkhorse is Fox, their regional carriers have been ramping up HD coverage and I wonder if the Fox Network will want to get involved too?

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 12/23/06 at 10:59 AM ET

So it’s not outrageous that the Pens-Caps game last week had a rating of 0.2? That’s the impression I get from all the Versus apologists.

Posted by Blackcloud on 12/23/06 at 11:13 AM ET

That’s very reasonable.  Spread the weatlth around.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/23/06 at 11:13 AM ET

ok. so good points. Why Can’t foxsports televise a national game of the week? Pick a few of the best local matchups and send them national.

I think it all starts to boil down to making sure there is as broad of visibility as possible. I think getting a weekly game on say NBC during a prime time slot would do a whole lot more than ESPN, as they would hit every house in the US…

With all of the new bloggers, all of the press, the people in the NHL, why can’t all these minds come up with a better way to market this game?

Here’s what I think is missing in the US, and is ever present in Canada:
A) HNIC is always showcasing young talent, and stories from the kids. Where is this in the US?
B) On Versus (or FSN, etc.) Why is there not a daily Hockey recap show? carve out 30 min and show highlights, interviews, etc.
C) Restaurant Industry Promotions - I see many cross promotional merchandise with McDonalds in Canada. Why not in the US in NHL cities? But don’t flood, make the stuff limited, make it something the kids want, and get some of that TV advertising.
D) Do better cross promotion with the AHL and other hockey leagues. Let’s start calling all the non-NHL pro leagues “Minor League Hockey”. Does the average person in the US know the difference between the Milwaukee Admirals and the Phoenix Coyotes? National Hockey League, American Hockey league, etc… Sounds all about the same if I’m not a fan…

Posted by canesice from Raleigh, NC on 12/23/06 at 11:13 AM ET

What is outrageous Blackcloud is the game didn’t sell-out.

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 12/23/06 at 11:18 AM ET

So back to my point on the minor league designations.. I was just searching in wikipedia…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_hockey_leagues

“Note: There is no official classification system for minor professional hockey leagues, and appellations such as “AAA,” “AA” or “A” leagues are not generally acknowledged by hockey authorities. The AHL is the most highly-ranked minor league. The ECHL, UHL, and CHL are on the next tier below and act as feeders to the AHL, with the ECHL being the greatest of the three “equals” due to its more official ties to the NHL. The UHL would be considered second to the ECHL and slightly above the CHL due to higher allowance of veteran players and a higher salary cap. The SPHL in turn is a feeder to the ECHL, UHL and CHL. This teir is followed by several lower-grade and semi-pro leagues.”

Things need fixing top to bottom, not just at the top…

Posted by canesice from Raleigh, NC on 12/23/06 at 11:21 AM ET

I’ve heard nothing from Foxsports with regards to picking up games for national broadcast but if the will is there and if Bettman and company are willing to negotiate I think it would be a great idea.

As things stand now FSN has no requirement to do a hockey recap show because they’re not carrying games nationally. Versus, on the other hand, should be since they’re the national carrier of NHL games.

Doing an NBC Game of the Week in Primetime is a good idea, although it doesn’t provide the daily visibility required to build up the game’s popularity as is possible only via ESPN right now. It also doesn’t help that no NHL games are televised by NBC until January and almost no post-season coverage.

As for McDonald’s promotions, they’re big in Canada because hockey’s big in Canada. They do test researching to determine what will work for promotions and what won’t, and the NHL is a no-sell for McDonald’s in the US.

Cross-promotion with the AHL is a great idea.

Yes, things need fixing top to bottom, but the fact remains that the best, and right now only, way to bolster the NHL’s profile in the American sports market is via ESPN.

Posted by Spector from Charlottetown, PEI, Canada on 12/23/06 at 02:44 PM ET

From Sharp’s article:

“[ESPN] dictates the primary sports talking points of the day through its extensive television, radio and Internet services. And it will happily steer the discussion to sports properties with which it holds broadcast rights.”

ESPN clearly dictates talking points but they are not so powerful as to steer the discussion.  The NFL is a perfect example.  ESPN only holds the rights to Monday Night Football. 

Fox holds the rights to the NFC and CBS holds the rights to the AFC games that take place on Sundays.  Thursday and Saturday games are broadcast by the NFL network.  NBC holds the rights to broadcast Sunday night games.

The NFL is so popular that everyone wants to broadcast their games.  So even though ESPN does not dominate the landscape when it comes to the NFL, they realize the popularity of the sport so they have lots of broadcast coverage (tv, radio, internet) on the sport.

Sharp doesn’t seem to understand how media works, even though he works in the industry.  Broadcasting a program nationally, especially if you do a good job promoting the program, will generate a large audience.  But if the audience doesn’t like the programming and doesn’t continue to watch the programming it doesn’t matter how much you talk the program up.

ESPN is going to follow the crowd when it comes to the sports they broadcast and cover.  They can’t make the NHL more popular just by talking about it all the time.  If they tried to do stuff like that they’d lose viewers and their revenue would drop.  Right now Versus can provide the NHL with consistent national coverage.  It isn’t ideal as it isn’t widely available but Versus can help to build exposure for the sport in the U.S.

It is up the league to drive demand for the game.  If Gary Bettman ever gets the NHL to the point where it is the most popular major sport in the U.S. then every national broadcast entity will compete for the broadcast rights, driving up the cost for those rights.

The sooner that happens the better, but CBS has been nationally broadcasting NFL games since 1956.  Hockey Night in Canada has been on the air since 1952.  I don’t think it is mere coincidence that the NFL is the most popular sport in the U.S. and the NHL is the most popular sport in Canada.

Posted by Dave on 12/23/06 at 05:29 PM ET

Canada was hockey mad long before HNIC hit television, as any history book wil tell you. HNIC certainly helped but all it did was capitalize on the sport’s popularity in Canada.

Posted by Spector from Charlottetown, PEI, Canada on 12/23/06 at 06:53 PM ET

Dave, that’s the whole problem--Bettman’s such a stupid-head that he wouldn’t think of going back on his deal with Versus to do something sensible like marketing the NHL to other networks…

Chairman Mao said that the long march of 15-25 years would make the NHL NFL-like in popularity, right after the lockout, and he seems to be unwavering in his belief that “slow growth” will save us all.  In this day and age, “slow growth” will make the NHL the on-ice version of major league soccer soon.

It’s about marketing the product and marketing the players--and, contrary to popular opinion, the NHL does not need a league of thugs and punks to get attention, just open, honest people who will talk about the game and will speak bluntly about their experiences--both of which are alien ideas to Bettman.  This is a league that’s bravely announced it’s going to air SEVERAL commercials on its broadcast partner (NBC) during NFL games, and we’re all supposed to be awed, like no sport has ever done cross-promotion before. 

Bettman believes that if you watch the game, you’ll be hooked, and he believes that small market teams, parity, and roster turnover will carry the league.  Two years into his experiment, he gets an F from me, and I’m actually staying with this game while my Wings are in a SIX-GAME STRETCH of Columbus, Columbus, Minnesota, Minnesota, Minnesota, Columbus.

Unbelievable.  He’d rather move the Blue Jackets to the East than the Wings, too.

Gary can come to Detroit.  He and I can have a nice talk on the riverwalk, right next to the Detroit River, whose shipping channel cut produces a lovely undertow...Either that, or it’s Nietzschean Sock Puppet Theatre until he cracks.  The Ubermensch is argyle.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/24/06 at 12:45 AM ET

“What is outrageous Blackcloud is the game didn’t sell-out.”

Amen to that, Paul. I was able to walk up thirty minutes before face-off and get seats four rows up in the upper level in the Penguins’ end. These were really good seats, too, not dregs. Verizon Center did have more people than usual, but the announced 14K was in reality closer to the 10K they announce for other games that really get 7K. Disgraceful in every respect. I could have gotten seats close to the ice, I’m sure, but I don’t have that much moolah.

The Caps have a problem which I don’t really see raised when attendance problems are discussed. That is, most of the suites are empty, and the club level is deserted for every game. I joked to a friend that you could tell the Pens-Caps game was a big one because there were more than two people in the club seats. I could have a club section all to myself if I wanted, just by buying one seat. Maybe one day I will.

The Caps have a good if erratic product. But they seem incapable of attracting people to it. I have no doubt that I have no solution to the chicken-egg dilemma we have here. Does increased attendance bring increased ratings, or vice-versa? You guys are at a loss to answer, and are much more clued into it than I am. I can only tell you what I see, which is more empty than occupied seats. I couldn’t even tell you if the attendance and TV problems can or should be solved together, or if they’re the same problem. But be solved they must. In the meantime, though, I’ll look at the silver lining: fewer people at Verizon Center means better seats for me.

By the way, if you’re unaware of it, ESPN won the rights to the Euro 2008. Granted, that’ll air in the summer, but nonetheless it’s another event ESPN will be showing that isn’t hockey, and possibly the most obscure one of all. If that’s not a problem for hockey, there’s no such thing.

Posted by Blackcloud on 12/24/06 at 01:50 AM ET

I should add that I agree that hockey needs as many outlets as possible. Versus should have games, and NBC, and FSN, and ESPN, and whoever else. They should increase streaming, and eventually do as MLB does and offer packages to all games online.

Oh, and ticket prices have to come down. The Caps, to use them again as an example, are overpriced for their market. I’m not sure how much it would help, but it can’t hurt in getting people interested. Doing a better job promoting their generous student discounts might not be a bad idea, either. Or maybe DC really is a lousy sports town.

Posted by Blackcloud on 12/24/06 at 02:16 AM ET

The game needs to be made more visible during times that hockey games are not being aired, and in all honesty, I think the big markets have to try as hard as the small or “non-traditional” markets in selling their product, investing in name-recognition and brand-recognition…

And NHL’s bigger-city teams (which include both traditional and “non-traditional” teams, if Washington can be called that having a team in town for 30 years) need to suck it up, stop jacking ticket prices up because they think they can get away with it, and they need to work a lot harder to generate single-seat and mini-pack sales.

Here in Detroit, you didn’t get a ticket to the Yzerman game unless you were a season-ticket holder or you either bought a 20-game mini pack or bought 20 single seats to purchase a World Series game ticket as well.  Our promotions?  Come to the game and get a magnet calendar!  Ooo!  Buy a ten-game package and only see the same Central Division team three times!

Four tickets, food, and parking for under a hundred bucks?  Or a buck fifty?  No way in hell.

Actual player availability?  Sure, if you can pay for it.  If you want to pay $250-500 a plate, you may actually be able to have dinner with a Red Wing at the two black-tie events the team holds. 

Training camp?  a 250-mile-drive north of the city, in a resort town that’s not exactly cheap, because our GM says that the Joe would never have the atmosphere of the cushy resort town’s <s>golf courses and fishing trips</s>, I mean rink, would. 

Open practices?  Sure.  We had two last year, one for a donation on a weekday with one week’s notice, and one as part of a $40-a-year membership to a pay website that hasn’t been updated since 2003-2004. 

Team-generated media content?  20 minutes of “Red Wings Weekly” per week, repeated for the next two months as “intermission features,” and a few player interviews per game--which is way up from one per game.  Our team went for broke and spent money on a dressing room hallway cam this year.

Chicago won’t air home games.  Rags games are expensive.  Even the Leafs, with their media-saturation and team network, are so extraordinarily expensive to see in person that you get the same corporate crowds you see in other big markets, and a fifth of them just don’t show up, depending on the game--and when those seventh and eighth divisional games come up, even if they’re Original Six matchups, there are swaths of thousands of empty seats in towns that’ve had hockey teams for over half a century.

The league as a whole mails it in.  The teams that try their butts off to market themselves are offset by the big teams that assume people will jump up and down for the privilege of overpaying to see the same opponents over and over again. 

The big guns at the top think that Ovechkin and Crosby are enough to sell 28 other markets, and the rest of the U.S. and Canada, on hockey. 

The other sticking point is huge, and it’s completely ignored.

The NHL and its member clubs also refuse to acknowledge that the lockout tested the most die-hard fans’ dedication to the game. 

Half the hockey fans I know--Detroit fans, from all over the world--have either become casual fans, or they don’t follow hockey, period.  The fans that are still here are immensely dissatisfied, and it’s not with the so-called “lack of goals” or “star power” (again, 28 teams don’t have Crosby or Ovechkin, ONOES!), it’s plain old watching the same 14 teams for the vast majority of the season, while being told you have to pay more to do so, and, moreover, that your team can’t hold on to some of its best and more marketable players “for the good of the game.”

Maybe you want parity if you’re a Blue Jackets fan, but if you’re a Wings fan, you don’t want your GM constantly talking about the cap, the cap, and the cap, parity, parity, parity, not being able to ice as good a team as before, and how it’s great for the league, and oh, by the way, you’re paying the same ticket price for half the payroll, which we once claimed were related to one another, whoops!

The NHL does not need to become the NBA or NFL.  The NHL needs to become aggressive in marketing itself, its teams, its players, and its product on other sportscasts, TV shows, in the newspaper, online, and it needs to use its accessable players to generate the kind of access to benches and locker rooms that the other sports do to at least generate a lot of media content and attempt to prove--through examples, instead of assumption--that the NHL buck will go as far, if not farther, than the NFL buck, the NBA buck, the MLB buck, the college sports buck, the golf buck, or the NASCAR buck.

Instead, our commissioner says that “when HDTV comes...” and “When Versus gets more households...” and “we really have a great product, how about that Crosby kid?  Parity, it’s great, eh?  And our fans tell us that they love the schedule!”

Arrogance.  Stupid assumptions.  A lack of effort.  The NHL is an underachieving league that’s happy to wear its Bart Simpson shirt saying, “Don’t have a cow, man, we’re going to be fine in ten years,” while lustfully looking at turning hockey into another game entirely on the ice because it’s cheaper than marketing the game off the ice. 

Sixty bigger nets are cheaper than an advertising campaign that doesn’t include a nameless, faceless “gladiator” in an aftershave commercial triumphing “My NHL.”

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/24/06 at 03:25 AM ET

One last comment.  MLB went through a similar downturn in fan appeal during a 1994 work stopage that canceled the World Series.  The home run race between Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa helped to rekindle interest in the game.  So Sid Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin could drive interest in the NHL.  Of course both NHL players wouldn’t need to use steriods, human growth hormone and corked hockey sticks to accomplish their feats.

Posted by Dave on 12/24/06 at 09:42 AM ET

I don’t think it’s fair or accurate to compare the post-lockout situation in the NHL to what happened in baseball a decade ago. Yes, there was a downturn in fan appeal, the lockout did anger a lot of fans. But MLB had a much broader fanbase to draw from, and even where it was after the lockout is far better than what the NHL has ever been in those terms. The national pastime will get the benefit of the doubt in a way hockey won’t. Baseball’s having its own problems these days (read: Barry Bonds), but it’s still in a far better position than the NHL. The NHL went from barely there to virtually non-existent. That’s not even close to what happened with baseball.

Posted by Blackcloud on 12/24/06 at 10:25 AM ET

The NHL lockout was indeed very particular and unique to the sport. 

If you toss the SI article that everybody seems to think personified the NHL’s imapct upon the North American sports landscape, the honest truth is that the NHL was *just starting* to make a media impact in the States, period, and what little fans they’d gained disappeared, as did some serious hard-core fans, after that first lockout. 

The NHL was finally recovering from the last lockout when we went a full year without hockey.  The fans that remain now are ticked off at the awful schedule and the dynamics of a capped “but pay top dollar for tickets anyway” league, so...this league is in serious trouble.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/24/06 at 05:40 PM ET

I just remembered the first lockout myself. Kudos for getting there much earlier, George.

Posted by Blackcloud on 12/24/06 at 10:44 PM ET

NP...All of us are speaking very constructively in criticizing the NHL, and it’s good to be part of this discussion.  Let’s hope somebody from the powers that be stumbles upon this discussion somehow.

The thing that scares me is that there’ve been two lockouts in the past eleven years because the owners weren’t satisfied with the business aspects of the game, assuming all the while that fans would simply flock back, and it’s taken a year and a half for the concept that, even with more profits, all is not well with the NHL to sink into the owners’ heads (if only for brief moments).  What happens when the “revenue streams” start drying up again? 

Do they pin it on the players for a third time, and call off another season trying to burn down the village in order to save it?

That’s where we are.  You can only raze the village so many times before no one will come back to rebuild.

Posted by George James Malik from South Lyon, MI on 12/24/06 at 11:17 PM ET

the only thing that the nhl needs is to move teams with poor attendance up into canada or at least northern u.s.a. where people actually know and care about hockey

Posted by cf4l-88 on 05/30/07 at 12:58 PM ET