NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

I get the only important thing about you that needs to be gotten (why it took me this long I have no idea). If someone differs from your opinion, they are wrong. If you misinterpret what someone posts, they are wrong. And the Gophers are the mostest wonderful thing since the invention of ping pong.

That's about how much sense you make or are worth. This thread has outlived any useful purpose it once served. May God have mercy on my soul if I ever am dumb enough to click on it again...

[The Rube]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

I get the only important thing about you that needs to be gotten (why it took me this long I have no idea). If someone differs from your opinion, they are wrong. If you misinterpret what someone posts, they are wrong. And the Gophers are the mostest wonderful thing since the invention of ping pong.

That's about how much sense you make or are worth. This thread has outlived any useful purpose it once served. May God have mercy on my soul if I ever am dumb enough to click on it again...

The Gophers being the most awesomest thing in the world is exclusive to the tv markets in the Midwest/East Coast.

UND has their own sweet tv contract (much to my dismay). Every home game is televised. BSU has some sort of tv deal, where their home games (dunno if it's all home games, or what) are shown on tv. These are in the Twin Cities' market. Dunno if SCSU/tUMD/Mankato have that (there are occasional games, but no regular deal).

In the midwest, Fri/Sat is hockey nights for fans. Period. FSN has had phones overloaded with complaints due to a technical problem during a Gophers game.

For eastern teams, you can catch a game kind of whenever, and not really travel a whole lot to get there (Boston, the city, looking at you). An hour is about the closest that any WCHA team has to travel (SCSU/MN). So it's not only state hatred (UND/MN, MN/WI), it's also regional.

My point is, we watch hockey on tv. Even if it's a game we don't care about, we'll put it on in the background while we do something else.

Midwest > easterners for TV hockey.

[JDUBBS1280]

I get the only important thing about you that needs to be gotten (why it took me this long I have no idea). If someone differs from your opinion, they are wrong. If you misinterpret what someone posts, they are wrong. And the Gophers are the mostest wonderful thing since the invention of ping pong.

That's about how much sense you make or are worth. This thread has outlived any useful purpose it once served. May God have mercy on my soul if I ever am dumb enough to click on it again...

There you go again. Deflecting and not addressing the points I made. It has nothing to do with me not listening to what you say, or always thinking I'm right.

You see, when you debate something, one party makes a point, and then the other party makes a counter point. That's how it works.

However, all you guys want to do is continue to repeat the same thing over and over.

Let's say for the sake of this argument that you are right about the number of households where these networks are available. You guys STILL haven't addressed the point that has REPEATEDLY been brought up by me and others.

That is - It doesn't matter if NBC is in twice as many households if twice as many people in the Big Ten markets watch hockey and these people are far more likely to watch the games on the Big Ten Network.

So please, save the victim act. It's a weak defense.

[Tipsy McStagger]

NESN is in 4 million households. Versus is in 75 million. Do the math.

I believe NESN has more reach than that because I get NESN here in Minneapolis on DirecTV, but that is beside the point.

Your argument is that because the programming is available that people will watch it. If the world cricket championships were shown on ESPN, would more people watch it? Probably, but the increase is probably going to be very small because if someone doesn't already follow cricket, they aren't going to watch it just because they can. They will find something they already know they like.

I read a great article about why MTV doesn't show music videos anymore. Its because people would change the channel when a music video came on that they didn't like. Advertisers didn't like that. So MTV put on something that got more consistent ratings...crappy reality tv. So airing something that guaranteed a certain number of viewers is more important to MTV than airing something that has a possibility of drawing a higher number of viewers but is an unknown quantity.

The point is that the people that want to follow hockey east already do, and the people that don't follow it aren't going to start simply because it is on one of the 150 choices that are available to them

[Osorojo]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

No. Keep getting things wrong.

It's still a small audience. Smaller than poker, WNBA, reruns of World's Strongest Man, etc. I hate it, but it's the truth.

Smaller than Jerry Springer's audience also. It would be unwise to advertise Lexus autos on the Jerry Springer show, but college hockey fans might be an excellent target audience for such ads. Size and quality are not synonymous. Before you inform others of their errors you should consider what they said.

[4four4]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

I read a great article about why MTV doesn't show music videos anymore. Its because people would change the channel when a music video came on that they didn't like. Advertisers didn't like that. So MTV put on something that got more consistent ratings...crappy reality tv. So airing something that guaranteed a certain number of viewers is more important to MTV than airing something that has a possibility of drawing a higher number of viewers but is an unknown quantity.

I was always wondering why MTV did that and now I know. I have to agree with MTV if I didn't like the song in 1981 I would change the channel. For hours we were always flip back and forth. Crazy.

[The Rube]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

Smaller than Jerry Springer's audience also. It would be unwise to advertise Lexus autos on the Jerry Springer show, but college hockey fans might be an excellent target audience for such ads. Size and quality are not synonymous. Before you inform others of their errors you should consider what they said.

You think advertisers are going to waste time with that small of an audience? Nope. They want numbers, period. No numbers? No ads.

[Handyman]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

It has nothing to do with Minnesota, and everything to do with the Midwest. And I need to go there to prove my point. I realize the polite thing to do would be to not state the obvious, but I didn't start this discussion or the brash statements, so I am laying all the cards on the table.

Bottom line. It doesn't matter which network is available in the most households because more people in Big Ten markets will tune in to watch college hockey.

Look I get what you are saying, and much of it is right (no one watches hockey on TV...they still wont despite BTN and Vs.) but some of your reasoning is just off the charts horrid. Then you come back with some really stupid stuff that has no basis in the argument anyways.

For example:

The Gophers were not expected to blow out UNH. Most GOPHER fans, including myself, thought they might win, but were unsure because UNH was a ****ed good team that year. The Gophers got lucky to beat Michigan in OT in the semis. Halfway through the third period most of the arena had no clue who was going to win. I was in Buffalo, I had season tickets that year and saw every postseason game live believe what I say on this. The ratings didnt drop because of the matchup, the date or the Wild game, they didnt drop because Gopher fans did not watch; they dropped because no one else watched. There was no casual interest in the game because there was no story to the game, no hype. The '02 games ratings werent inflated by Gopher fans as much as they were inflated by everyone else. Gopher fans watched, Gopher haters watched, Maine fans watched and so on. It was the perfect matchup at the perfect time.

Second, regional networks and their deals mean squat in the argument. As was posted Michigan (one of the teams you use to make your argument that the Midwest > East) gets almost no ratings for its regional broadcasts. That begs the question why do they have the contract but that is another argument for another day. You cannot compare the East and Midwest and their deals because the markets are just not similar. Lets say you are NESN in Boston...which team do you sign to show all the games of BU or BC? What about Northeastern or Hahvad? Lets not forget the UMASS schools...the market is saturated there. North Dakota has no other teams. The Minneapolis area is dominated by Gopher fans. Regional networks out here dont have to make any tough decisions. Maybe Fox Detroit does between MSU and Michigan, but it doesnt sound like anyone cares there anyways

There is more, but these are the important ones.

Your overall point is right, Vs. and BTN are not going to get really anything out of showing these games. FSN barely makes money off the Gophers (been confirmed on GPL a few times including once by a guy from FSN) so I doubt the BTN will off the games. Vs. will be able to fill programming and might convince a few local business to advertise who wouldnt normally but that is about it. Neither of these deals will change anything no matter how much people want to pretend they will. It will mean more access out of market, but sports tiers on satellite and cable provide the same thing.

[komey1]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

One thing I thin Vs will be able to do is to mention their college hockey telecasts. Let say they are showing Montreal. Now lets say Brian Gointa does something in the game. Now the announcers can mention he is from BC, and oh by the way, you can catch BC taking on UNH Friday at 7:00 only on Vs. Some people might decide to check out the game than would otherwise.

I'm not suggesting that Vs will do that. I'm certainly not suggesting that even by doing that, the numbers would be a lot better than they would otherwise. But it's certainly one way to promote college hockey in general. It's one thing that Vs will be able to do for the sport that the BTN will not be able to.

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

Handy -

1. I admitted I was just threw out the game being expected to be a blowout as a guess. It's been a while, and I thought I remembered many expecting it not to be close, but it appears I was wrong. The thing is, that wasn't even a point that I brought up in the first place. However, I do think a large part of the fact the ratings were so high were related to the fact the Gophers hadn't one a championship in so long and the game was in Minnesota. And as for the low ratings for the 2003 championship, the Wild made their playoff run that year, and played that night. I think it's hard to argue that had some effect on the viewership.

2. As for TV viewership for NBC and the BTN, I'm sorry, but I stand by my points. I think more people will tune in to watch the games on the BTN then will people who tune in to watch games on Versus, regardless of the fact that Versus is available in more households. Michigan might not have as much TV viewership of hockey, but there is much more viewership in the Midwest in general than there is out East. So, I doubt Versus will give Hockey East and Notre Dame any competitive advantage over the Big Ten Hockey Conference and the BTN in terms of either revenue or exposure.

[JDUBBS1280]

One thing I thin Vs will be able to do is to mention their college hockey telecasts. Let say they are showing Montreal. Now lets say Brian Gointa does something in the game. Now the announcers can mention he is from BC, and oh by the way, you can catch BC taking on UNH Friday at 7:00 only on Vs. Some people might decide to check out the game than would otherwise.

I'm not suggesting that Vs will do that. I'm certainly not suggesting that even by doing that, the numbers would be a lot better than they would otherwise. But it's certainly one way to promote college hockey in general. It's one thing that Vs will be able to do for the sport that the BTN will not be able to.

I'm sure they will do that. I still think very few new college hockey viewers tune in, especially regularly.

[Priceless]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

Handy -

1. I admitted I was just threw out the game being expected to be a blowout as a guess. It's been a while, and I thought I remembered many expecting it not to be close, but it appears I was wrong. The thing is, that wasn't even a point that I brought up in the first place. However, I do think a large part of the fact the ratings were so high were related to the fact the Gophers hadn't one a championship in so long and the game was in Minnesota. And as for the low ratings for the 2003 championship, the Wild made their playoff run that year, and played that night. I think it's hard to argue that had some effect on the viewership.

The Wild played that night? I guess the Sports Illustrated writer whose game recap was time-stamped at 7:58PM must have been clairvoyant.

[komey1]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

I don't think this should be BTN against Versus. The main fact is that there will be more exposure to college hockey because it will be available on another channel. Whether people watch is another matter.

For me, when I choose to watch which game I want to watch (which are weekend RIT is on the road), I look for what matchups look interesting to me. My conference has no deal - but if by chance one of them is on I will probably watch. Something like Minnesota-Penn St or tOSU-MSU are not likely to keep my attention as opposed to a North Dakota-Denver game or BC-UNH.

[J.D.]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

Is there any one point being debated here in this craptastic thread?

[Priceless]

Re: NBC/Versus deal with College Hockey

Is there any one point being debated here in this craptastic thread?

Bacon is good.