What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Pro and Cons of who I should root for:

Chicago
Has a Badger alum on the team (Pro)
Is captained by a Sioux alum (Con)
The entire city of Chicago smells like a urinal (Con)
Grew up a North Stars fan, hate the Blackhawks (Con)
Technically, they are the local team, since the NHL isn't in Milwaukee. (Pro)
That's only true because Bill Wirt$ fought tooth and nail to keep the NHL out of Milwaukee (Con)
I genuinely ****ing hate Chicago sports fans (Con)
Seven Teeth Keith (Pro)

Philly
If they win, will likely be an inspiration for a great episode of "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia" (Pro)
Is a sports team from Philadelphia and therefore has terrible fans (Con)
I was previously cheering for Montral (Con)
I have to admit, it was hilarious to hear Flyers fans mock the Habs with the "Ole Ole Ole" cheer (Pro)
Chris Pronger is a douuchenozzle (Con)
Actually... a lot of their players are douuchenozzles (Con)
Okay, but they work their tails off, which I like to see (Pro)
I'm not a big fan of Rocky (Con)
Chris Pronger is a douuchenozzle (Con)
Philadelphia is an interesting city that doesn't smell like a urinal (Pro)
Chris Pronger is a douuchenozzle (Con)
Honestly, I hate the idea of Chris Pronger ending up with his name on the cup again (Con)

You know what? **** Pronger, I'm pulling for Chicago. I guess.
Click to expand...

I will never EVER root for Philly.

One more Pro and Con for Chicago:

PRO: Original 6 team
CON: I want the Hossa jinx to continue!!

Go Chicago. Hossa's the biggest con I have for them.

The only Pros I have for Philly:

JVR.
Not Montreal.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

Speaking of ratings: Games on NBC and Versus in the first round averaged 742,000 viewers per telecast according to the NHL and Nielsen ratings service. That's more for a first round since 2000 (ABC/ESPN/ESPN2) when the average was 750,000. And it's a 24% increase from last year. And through Monday, Versus' conference semifinal round coverage has averaged 1.055 million viewers, up 31% from last year's 806,000 viewers.

So far NBC's six broadcasts are averaging 1.71 million viewers, up 4% from a year ago.

-LA TIMES


In Boston:
And Im just rounding these numbers but Game 4 of Boston vs. Philly on VS. drew ~400,000 in Boston, compared to 300,000 on NESNfor Sox/Yanks and 124,000 on ESPN for C's vs. Cavs.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

NMU8405 said:
Speaking of ratings: Games on NBC and Versus in the first round averaged 742,000 viewers per telecast according to the NHL and Nielsen ratings service. That's more for a first round since 2000 (ABC/ESPN/ESPN2) when the average was 750,000. And it's a 24% increase from last year. And through Monday, Versus' conference semifinal round coverage has averaged 1.055 million viewers, up 31% from last year's 806,000 viewers.

So far NBC's six broadcasts are averaging 1.71 million viewers, up 4% from a year ago.

-LA TIMES


In Boston:
And Im just rounding these numbers but Game 4 of Boston vs. Philly on VS. drew ~400,000 in Boston, compared to 300,000 on NESN for Sox/Yanks and 124,000 on ESPN for C's vs. Cavs.
Click to expand...

That's great for VS. Those would be good #'s for the CW network, but not for NBC. Not for prime-time.

NFL regular season games on NBC average 19.4 million viewers. NBC averages 4-5 million viewers for prime-time (and that's with Jay Leno's fiasco dragging down the numbers); top 25 shows average 10-25 million. No one at NBC is doing cartwheels that they have to surrender prime-time to the Stanley Cup Finals. Even if they win their time slot (as Game 7 did last year), this is still a ratings nightmare for NBC. Their execs are hoping for a four-game sweep that will limit the damage.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

The NHL is only popular enough for placement on a sports tier channel on cable/dish. Even if you had a final involving the Kings and Rangers, I don't think you'd get high enough ratings on a major network to trump what they get with their regular programming.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

Priceless said:
That's great for VS. Those would be good #'s for the CW network, but not for NBC. Not for prime-time.

NFL regular season games on NBC average 19.4 million viewers. NBC averages 4-5 million viewers for prime-time (and that's with Jay Leno's fiasco dragging down the numbers); top 25 shows average 10-25 million. No one at NBC is doing cartwheels that they have to surrender prime-time to the Stanley Cup Finals. Even if they win their time slot (as Game 7 did last year), this is still a ratings nightmare for NBC. Their execs are hoping for a four-game sweep that will limit the damage.
Click to expand...

It's Chicago and Philly, not Nashville and Carolina. Keep your panties on. It's a ratings nightmare regardless. You're acting like there's some magic team that gets NBC acceptable primetime ratings.

They're probably breathing a sigh of relief that it wasn't San Jose-Montreal, where one fanbase is watching on a different channel, and the other is pirating internet feeds in the office multiple games in the series because the games are starting at 5pm local time.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

bronconick said:
It's Chicago and Philly, not Nashville and Carolina. Keep your panties on. It's a ratings nightmare regardless. You're acting like there's some magic team that gets NBC acceptable primetime ratings.

They're probably breathing a sigh of relief that it wasn't San Jose-Montreal, where one fanbase is watching on a different channel, and the other is pirating internet feeds in the office multiple games in the series because the games are starting at 5pm local time.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, people will be pirating to get CBC's coverage anyway. :p
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

I understand wanting to get Canada involved; they deserve a shot at a game, too. I just don't think two games a year are needed. Just my .02, but it waters down the coolness of it. I think it would have been best to have the "dream" match up (Crosby v. Ovechkin) this year, and let Canada have the game the following year.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

OvahInDovah said:
I understand wanting to get Canada involved; they deserve a shot at a game, too. I just don't think two games a year are needed. Just my .02, but it waters down the coolness of it. I think it would have been best to have the "dream" match up (Crosby v. Ovechkin) this year, and let Canada have the game the following year.
Click to expand...
I'm also worried about watering it down too much, but right now I think two games are almost a necessity for the NHL. You can't have a Canadian team in the American game, because then you've eliminated a major ratings market for NBC. But you can't just eliminate the Canadian teams altogether for about a million reasons. And if you use two Canadian teams, well, NBC is going to go ballistic because as cool as the event is, the ratings would be godawful in the States.

One American and one Canadian tilt sounds fine to me. Gives both national broadcast rightsholders the chance to really cash in, which is the point.

Also, one game on New Year's Day and another in February is a far better idea than the original concept of a New Year's Day doubleheader.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

OvahInDovah said:
I understand wanting to get Canada involved; they deserve a shot at a game, too. I just don't think two games a year are needed. Just my .02, but it waters down the coolness of it. I think it would have been best to have the "dream" match up (Crosby v. Ovechkin) this year, and let Canada have the game the following year.
Click to expand...

Honestly, the coolness of it has already been watered down.

I found myself switching from this year's game to the LSU-Penn State game because they were playing in a mudhole, which now occurs less than an outdoor hockey game.

They've done both classic baseball stadiums already.

And if you're going to play in Pittsburgh, you play on this field with the possibly frozen river as a backdrop, not at the usual bland football stadium.

field_center.jpg
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

Traditional caveat of bias aside, NHL Network's Media Day coverage is the best programming the network has ever aired. The interviews, the set-up, the exterior shots, the production value overall. Gives me some hope.

I still wish they'd mix in a different commercial or two every so often.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

bronconick said:
Honestly, the coolness of it has already been watered down.

I found myself switching from this year's game to the LSU-Penn State game because they were playing in a mudhole, which now occurs less than an outdoor hockey game.

They've done both classic baseball stadiums already.

And if you're going to play in Pittsburgh, you play on this field with the possibly frozen river as a backdrop, not at the usual bland football stadium.

field_center.jpg
Click to expand...

Granted I'm a big PNC Park fan...but...Is it really THAT much different?

Heinz Field is right on the river too...Plus they will easily sell that stadium out with the two teams coming in.

heinzfield.jpg


Rangers have to be in this game next year. Islanders perhaps? or Devils? Montreal?
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

PrezdeJohnson09 said:
Granted I'm a big PNC Park fan...but...Is it really THAT much different?

Heinz Field is right on the river too...Plus they will easily sell that stadium out with the two teams coming in.

heinzfield.jpg


Rangers have to be in this game next year. Islanders perhaps? or Devils? Montreal?
Click to expand...

Dude the baseball stadium has a significantly better view of downtown Pittsburgh, the river, and an especially nice touch with the bridge in the middle of the shot.

My worry with Canada is how stale it could get quickly. Canda's available stadiums are all fairly lackluster. I mean were talking about BC playing in a Dome, Ottawa doesn't have a stadium that can even meet 15k in seating, Montreal would have to play in lackluster Molson Stadium, Toronto has two choices that aren't ideal (Rogers Center with the roof off and BMO stadium). After Calgary and then maybe going back to Edmonton, you're almost tapped out of the outdoor Canadian venues and somehow a rotation of 2 or 3 just isn't that sexy.
 
Re: 2010 Stanley Cup Playoffs III: "Don't Toews Me, Bro!"

BoomGoestheDynamite said:
Dude the baseball stadium has a significantly better view of downtown Pittsburgh, the river, and an especially nice touch with the bridge in the middle of the shot.
Click to expand...
I don't care how awesome your baseball stadium is, and PNC might be the best, you don't want to immediately follow Wrigley and Fenway. No way. Fair or not, it will not compare.

I think we talked about this before, but after those two, how much "cooler" can you go with venue?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top