Stanley Cup Finals Game 5 play

Why? Wouldn't there be a great deal of across-the-board reader interest in Bob Barker?

 

I'm sure Barker's Beauties weren't interested, in Barker's story, at least.

 

The Orange County Register did a six-page special section wrapped around of the entire paper. Two-line banner:
CUP-LIFTING
EXPERIENCE
with the appropriate Neidermayer holding up the Cup photo.

 

The Daily News didn't travel with the hockey teams either and only covered home games -- hence why they should have had strong (at least decent) coverage for a game in Anaheim.

I also saw the San Diego Union-Tribune today. Hoffman's 500th save was the centerpiece on A1 and dominated the front sports page. They did have a sports front page column on the Ducks' win that jumped inside to match up with the gamer. I know the Ducks had a regular-season push to get San Diego hockey fans to drive up to see the Ducks with special ticket deals.

 

My point was about risk. The world will not end if hindsight proves what you put on the front on Day X was the wrong call, especially in Sports.
The best sportswriting involves human interest.
My former outfit sends a person to the Cup final and he crafts a piece on brother handing Cup to brother (the Niedermayers). Those moments, properly spun, can generate as much broad-based interest as Bob Barker retiring.
Or the fact that six players on the Ducks had played at least 12 seasons before winning a Cup, most notably Teemu Selanne, a talented, decent, intelligent, articulate athlete who said after winning that its likely he'll retire because he wants to go out on top.
Hell, if the guy did a good enough job and I was ME, I'd consider throwing it on A1, assuming nothing huge had happened that day (and by that I don't mean another climate debate at the G8)
I'm not saying replace the usual content you need for your readership. But geez, don't be afraid to mix it up.
Readers crave good news stories. Sit in enough focus-marketing meetings and that's the No. 1 response. (That and better crosswords).
Journalists are often too self-important and forget that their readers are just that, readers. They like to read, and good stories are worth reading.

 

Page 13B

Main headline: If it quacks like a cup ...

 

Why? His last show on CBS in a couple of weeks will get triple or more the ratings last night's game got -- and that's on in late morning.

More people care about Bob Barker than the Stanley Cup finals. That fact is undeniable.

 

So if Bob Barker's last show is in a couple weeks, and not today, why run that piece today when you could run something about a local team winning a famed trophy? It seems like a feature on Bob Barker could go any day, and may even be a good piece to attract readers to a Saturday or Sunday paper.

Even if hockey isn't popular in the States, the Stanley Cup has gained some visibility. It has appeared a couple times on the Simpsons, and players have taken it on shows like Leno and Letterman before. As much as there are people who don't care for this sport, I think there is something interesting about the Stanley Cup, especially when it's in your own market.

 

We did absolutely nothing for it. It was on our website with the rest of the AP stories.

 

Because he taped the show yesterday, so that's when the news happened.
I understand the history behind the NHL and the Stanley Cup. It's been around many decades. But the fact is, the vast, vast, vast majority of people don't care and weren't watching/following it.

 

Something you don't see every day:
The Daily News had the same headline as the L.A. Times

 

C1 photo teaser, bottom left of the page.

I live in an NHL market.