Saturday's NHL on NBC fiasco

Repeat after me: the price of tickets has nothing to do with players' salaries. Nothing.

Let's not drag that old canard out.

If they were, Leafs ticket prices should have dropped approximately 25% this since their salaries dropped from about $60 million to $40 (or whatever the cap is). Nope, stayed the same.

And, Leafs ticket prices have gone up for next year.

And you can probably buy a ticket for a Preds game for $20.00 or two for $30.00--but the salaries between the two teams are pretty much the same.

Ticket prices are driven by the market. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Sorry, I didn't read your post. Eloquently put.

 

Here's the problem with trying to sell hockey in any meaningful way:

Most Americans never played the game as a kid and don't get what most Canadians get intuitively: it's a bloody difficult game to play, even at the beer league level.

It doesn't televise all that well.

Dropping ticket prices will have no affect on popularity or attendance. At least nothing significant.

Now, one of the more successful non traditional hockey franchises has been San Jose.

Don't ask why but it's been a hit from almost day one.

And I understand youth hockey is huge in some parts of California. Go figure.

 

The ticket prices only impact the live attendance, not the TV ratings/exposure.

Hockey still draws a strong level of support at the gate, primarily the 'hard core' US hockey fans, or at least that's a reasonable premise. It's still the best sport to see in person, IMHO, so it can legitimately sustain the ticket prices (which are high when you compare across sporting options.)

The US problem is TV. The Versus decision was a horrible, horrible move. The majority of the country doesn't get the channel. And what does that do to viewership? Well, the casual fan who might be interested in dropping in on the playoffs is goign to get a handful of weekend games at best, and is pretty much going to go, "screw you, NHL, if I can't see how this story plays out all along to conclusion, it's not worth it". And the self fulfilling prophecy continues.

The league should have done anything it could to find a spot on a basic cable channel: the duece, the ocho, USA, VH1, the Food network. Anything to keep the product available. And they really should try to figure a way to work with ESPN, because they could definitely use the marketing muscle and exposure the Bristolites can bring to any game. I wouldn't be surprised to see them make lacrosse interest grow. In a spot that could have been hockey's.

 

I haven't scanned the thread, but I just heard the CBC drew 1.4 million viewers for Saturday's game. This is roughly the same as any old Hockey Night In Canada, from what I've heard.

Nick Kypreos just said he "expects 3 to 4 million viewers for a clinching game for a Canadian team on a Saturday night."

Howard Berger just said he would think somewhere around 2 and 2.5 million would have been about right for a long weekend, HNIC game that featured a Canadian team clinching.

 

Southern hockey has been successful where the franchises have been able to establish the game at a youth and recreational level.

Dallas and San Jose are the two prime examples of that. Both areas have very competitive youth teams, a large number of rinks and the opportunity for the general public to play without a huge amount of hassle. Conversely, in markets like Florida, Phoenix and Atlanta, hockey is not a major player in youth sports nor is hockey thought of as a participation sport. Sure, there are a few teams at a youth level but it's thought of as a sport you watch more than a sport you participate in.

Getting the locals to try to sport or know someone who plays makes a huge difference in selling hockey to non-traditional markets. It can't account for everything (Nashville is struggling because there's a lack of corporate support but their individual fan base is pretty strong), but that's been the biggest key to the two most successful "non-traditional" markets.

Now, those teams still need success on the ice. San Jose went through a downturn in support when the Sharks struggled, and Dallas fans, fickle as they are, are slightly fed up after three straight first round exits. Heck, when the Oil and Wings struggled, fans didn't go then. But their smaller audiences will still be better than Phoneix or Florida draw on a good night.

 

Actually, Florida has a strong system up and running, and has started putting kids into junior and minor leagues. They're also seeing teams go north and have success in tournaments north of the border.

 

The sad thing is that NBC's NHL coverage is, far and away, better than Fox or ABC ever did.

 

1.4 million is about right for a regular season Leafs vs Tampa or Florida.

If the last Buffalo/Sens game were on Saturday night, I think Howard's closest. 3 to 4 million maybe for a Cup clinching game. Not a Conference clinching.

That said, Elliotte would probably know better.

 

I question the connection between playing and watching. US kids have been forced to play soccer for the last 40 years, yet soccer isn't close to being as popular as football, baseball or basketball as a spectator sport.

 

What is this NHL I keep hearing of?

 

If you haven't played baseball, you dont know how hard it is to hit a curveball.

If you haven't played football, you can't quite grasp how violent a game it is.

If you haven't played hockey, you don't know what hockey is fundamentally about: decision-making. And at full speed with some guy about to take your head off. If you've never played, you can't really appreciate it

When my son was in Bantam, (15 years), we played a father son game. Until you got down on the ice with all those kids --all superb hockey players--you couldn't really appreciate the speed.

And kids know that intrinsically soccer is boring to play and watch.