Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sports Media Watch)   Dear overly anxious NHL fans: Stanley Cup Finals garnered best TV ratings since 1994. With 3.3 U.S. rating and just under 5.8 million viewers on NBC, hockey is fine   (sportsmediawatch.com ) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Stanley Cup Finals, NHL, NBC, U.S., valuations, NBC Sports Network, Stanley Cup playoffs, Blackhawks  
•       •       •

416 clicks; posted to Sports » on 26 Jun 2013 at 10:34 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



73 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-06-26 10:41:44 AM  
Hmm, so when Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc are in the Cup Finals, people tend to watch.

I'd love to see the panic on Bettman's face if we ever have a Phoenix-Nashville series.
 
2013-06-26 10:42:40 AM  
Looking at the graph in TFA, it's almost as if the ratings have nothing to do with the health of the NHL, but instead mimic the teams' fan base.  If you have large US cities, in the north (Boston, Chicago, Philly, Detroit), that care about hockey (sorry, Robsul, but no one cares about the Devils), then the ratings are higher.  If you have southern cities (L.A., Anaheim, Carolina) or Canadian teams, no one watches.  It's not Rocket Surgery.
 
2013-06-26 10:45:32 AM  
Well, it is the best game out there. I can't think of another sport where the entire playing surface has to be walled off so the people watching don't die or get horribly maimed. No where to run out of bounds, the speed is incredible and grabbing somebody by the neck and punching them repeatedly is part of the process. I like.
 
2013-06-26 10:54:17 AM  
If the NBC games were getting 6-8mm viewers and the average viewership was under 1.5mm... the number of people turning on the NBCSN games must have been atrocious.  I note that their press release doesn't want to mention games 2 or 3.
 
2013-06-26 10:57:57 AM  

abmoraz: Looking at the graph in TFA, it's almost as if the ratings have nothing to do with the health of the NHL, but instead mimic the teams' fan base.  If you have large US cities, in the north (Boston, Chicago, Philly, Detroit), that care about hockey (sorry, Robsul, but no one cares about the Devils), then the ratings are higher.  If you have southern cities (L.A., Anaheim, Carolina) or Canadian teams, no one watches.  It's not Rocket Surgery.


Like always, hockey is a regional sport in the United States.  The sooner everyone (including the people in NHL offices) realizes this, the better off we're going to be.
 
2013-06-26 11:01:29 AM  
Chicago is always good for sports.
 
2013-06-26 11:02:15 AM  
I'm glad the Finals were popular.

it's a little bittersweet though, because considering we just had a lockout, this shows we are all mindless lemmings leaping off cliffs in blind allegiance to the hockey gods.

oh well! It was a hell of a series.
 
2013-06-26 11:15:10 AM  

hockeyfarker: it's a little bittersweet though, because considering we just had a lockout, this shows we are all mindless lemmings leaping off cliffs in blind allegiance to the hockey gods.

oh well! It was a hell of a series.


Things I learned from the lockout:  a 50 game season is so much better than 82 games.  After the players got their legs, the average game was much faster than one during a normal regular season.  I'd go for a 50-game season starting in late October with the Cup awarded by early May (I'd prefer earlier, but then the playoffs would overlap March Madness).
 
2013-06-26 11:16:17 AM  

hockeyfarker: I'm glad the Finals were popular.

it's a little bittersweet though, because considering we just had a lockout, this shows we are all mindless lemmings leaping off cliffs in blind allegiance to the hockey gods.

oh well! It was a hell of a series.


They could have had pee-wee hockey on and I would have watched. I think most folks just wanted something. We could not have another non Cup season.
/my .02
 
2013-06-26 11:22:05 AM  
Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)
 
2013-06-26 11:27:08 AM  

MugzyBrown: Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)


By the way that's rating, not people.
 
2013-06-26 11:29:17 AM  

Galloping Galoshes: Things I learned from the lockout:  a 50 game season is so much better than 82 games.  After the players got their legs, the average game was much faster than one during a normal regular season.  I'd go for a 50-game season starting in late October with the Cup awarded by early May (I'd prefer earlier, but then the playoffs would overlap March Madness).


I'd say something like 64-68 games would be perfect, enough time that a 6-week injury to a star player doesn't destroy your season but not the grueling 82-game slog the NHL season can be.  And I love the idea of starting the playoffs the week before the Final Four, honestly the NHL shouldn't worry about other sports at all, except for when they idiotically schedule games on Sunday during NFL season.
 
2013-06-26 11:30:35 AM  
Yes, ratings follow fan bases since we all know the average person in New Mexico and Arizona couldn't give two figs for hockey...

shouldn't it also wrap up sometime before summer?  I'm a Bruins fan, and I barely watched.  I've got stuff to do and now that summer is here, I can actually do it.  Hockey's great in the depressing blackness of February/March, but by May/June, with the sun out, so am I.

/North Dakota
 
2013-06-26 11:38:46 AM  

MugzyBrown: Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)


I heard like 13 million people watched that idiot fail to commit suicide over the Canyon.

Not sure if the NHL should be happy about less than half that many watching a Cup Finals with two of their premiere franchises.

I also shudder to think how many millions watched whatever reality show is the new hotness now. I'm guessing more than 6 million.
 
2013-06-26 11:41:47 AM  

MugzyBrown: MugzyBrown: Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)

By the way that's rating, not people.


Haha
 
2013-06-26 11:41:48 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: the idea of starting the playoffs the week before the Final Four


That could work.  It's only a couple days they'd have to schedule around.
 
2013-06-26 11:42:36 AM  
0% of my household watched the NHL and NBA finals
 
2013-06-26 11:44:09 AM  
There was also a large segment of people in the Chicago area that lost power the night of Game 6
 
2013-06-26 11:44:42 AM  

Galloping Galoshes: Yanks_RSJ: the idea of starting the playoffs the week before the Final Four

That could work.  It's only a couple days they'd have to schedule around.


Yeah, and they could have a couple of big hockey markets playing in the afternoon, might grab people who wouldn't ordinarily watch but are hosting gatherings for the Final Four that starts after 7 pm.  And HNIC would obviously go on as usual, but Canada doesn't care about the Final Four.
 
2013-06-26 11:49:14 AM  
TV networks need a new rating system, accounting for every single viewer in the country, rather than a sample size of large cities. Then we can find out how many people really watched the series

/willing to bet the number is a lot higher
//also, reality TV might be a lot lower
 
2013-06-26 11:49:42 AM  
Between 11/1 & 4/1 you could play 3 games per week and get 60+ games

Nobody cares about the regular season anyway, so I say expand the playoffs.

1)Expand to 32
2) Play everybody in your conference 2x's and out of conference 1 time - 46 games.
3)Regular season is just to seed teams, break out into 8 - 4 team groups based on standings (divided by conference)... everybody is in.
4)playout sort of like the world cup.  Play 3 games per group team (higher seed gets the extra home game) - 9 games
5) Top 2 from each group goes into a 16 team bracket, best of 7.. playoffs as usual from there.
 
2013-06-26 11:59:02 AM  

MugzyBrown: MugzyBrown: Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)

By the way that's rating, not people.


Here's the thing about ratings: a lot of people will watch something that is in truth a flaming pile of crap. That's why crap shows like American Idol and Survivor are still on TV. Ratings doesn't equal quality.

Should the NHL and NBC be happy with the ratings they got? Totally. But no one should be comparing the NHL's ratings to any other sport, unless we start to see the NHL's ratings become close to the NBA's ratings. That will be newsworthy. Until then, it's not news.
 
kab
2013-06-26 12:03:48 PM  

MugzyBrown: Perspective:

US Open Golf - 6.1
Daytona 500 - 9.9
NBA Game 7 - 17.7
World Series - between  7 - 8.9
Wimbleton Finals - 2.9
Superbowl - 48.1
MLS Cup - 0.7 (Who are these people?)


More perspective:
Zero farks given.
 
2013-06-26 12:07:03 PM  
How do they count bars into these numbers? Almost everybody I know went out for the game with not many people sitting at home. Every single bar I passed on the way to the one I went to was already packed by 5pm.

I'm not saying this means that the NHL ratings are anywhere close to the NBA, but Boston and Chicago are big bar cities and I would think a lot of the people that were watching were not watching from home. I'm just curious as to how this is factored in.
 
2013-06-26 12:11:20 PM  
Was the series good?  Did you enjoy the time spent watch the games? Good.

Please stop using television ratings as metric for quality.
 
2013-06-26 12:12:50 PM  
Huh. Turns out fans will watch hockey when they know how horrible the NBA finals will turn out to be.

/alternating days helps
//CM Punk gets another one-up moment on John Cena
///I don't care what happened earlier this year, I'm not rooting for Boston anything.
 
2013-06-26 12:13:40 PM  

SovietCanuckistan: Well, it is the best game out there. I can't think of another sport where the entire playing surface has to be walled off so the people watching don't die or get horribly maimed. No where to run out of bounds, the speed is incredible and grabbing somebody by the neck and punching them repeatedly is part of the process. I like.


NASCAR?

Oh, I'm sorry. You said "sport". :P
 
2013-06-26 12:16:41 PM  

Gunny Highway: Was the series good?  Did you enjoy the time spent watch the games? Good.

Please stop using television ratings as metric for quality.


It's not a metric for quality. Who even suggested that?

It's a metric for how much longer you'll be able to watch it on TV. Bad ratings means not much longer.

/obviously these aren't even bad ratings for the NHL, since they set records and all
//but comparatively to other sporting events, they're bad ratings
 
2013-06-26 12:31:04 PM  

balki1867: Hmm, so when Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc are in the Cup Finals, people tend to watch.

I'd love to see the panic on Bettman's face if we ever have a Phoenix-Nashville series.


You'll never an all-mid-level market Stanley Cup Finals series. Markets like Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville and Columbus are screwed as Bettman will never allow those teams to make it all the way through.
 
2013-06-26 12:37:35 PM  

mjohnson71: balki1867: Hmm, so when Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc are in the Cup Finals, people tend to watch.

I'd love to see the panic on Bettman's face if we ever have a Phoenix-Nashville series.

You'll never an all-mid-level market Stanley Cup Finals series. Markets like Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville and Columbus are screwed as Bettman will never allow those teams to make it all the way through.


Columbus needs elaborate conspiracy to keep them sucking? Haha.
 
2013-06-26 12:42:44 PM  
I doubt they use the number of people who were watching in bars, or the number of people who were in large groups at homes watching the games either.

I think ratings numbers for sporting events are always skewed.
 
2013-06-26 12:43:13 PM  
NHL - slightly more popular than tennis.

And that's with the best ratings in nearly 20 years. Favorable circumstances, to say the least.

Now, I don't care how popular the NHL is. As long as it draws enough of an audience to continue existing and being broadcast and attracting top talent worldwide, that's fine. If more people want to watch poker or bowling, that's their loss. And I doubt the NHL is crying much. either. The last few years have been as profitable as ever for the league, and with expansion almost a given (and those fat expansion fees), I think most everyone is pretty happy.

Well, most everyone but a few dickhead fans who don't seem to understand brand marketing or how the health of the whole includes the illness of a few franchises. No, no. Better to contract to 20 teams, and only in places where they still wear beaver-skin hats and keep firewood chopped year-round. And even then, lord help them if they're going through a rough patch and have lost the bandwagon fans. Whatever. The point is to nod your head when Don Cherry is talking.
 
2013-06-26 12:57:19 PM  

balki1867: Hmm, so when Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc are in the Cup Finals, people tend to watch.

I'd love to see the panic on Bettman's face if we ever have a Phoenix-Nashville series.


Sometimes you're going to have good match-ups, and sometimes you are going to have match-ups less attractive to a national audience.  The inevitable consequence of real competition.

Both the league and NBC (and every sports broadcaster, for that matter), understand and accept this as part-and-parcel of covering the unpredictable world of sports.

If there were a Phoenix-Nashville series, NBC would do their best to promote it, and the league would focus on the bright side (namely, the large viewership gains likely to be made in those particular markets).
 
2013-06-26 01:15:26 PM  

abmoraz: Looking at the graph in TFA, it's almost as if the ratings have nothing to do with the health of the NHL, but instead mimic the teams' fan base.  If you have large US cities, in the north (Boston, Chicago, Philly, Detroit), that care about hockey (sorry, Robsul, but no one cares about the Devils), then the ratings are higher.  If you have southern cities (L.A., Anaheim, Carolina) or Canadian teams, no one watches.  It's not Rocket Surgery.


Yep, no one watched last year when the Kings improved on the previous years numbers, helping this years improvement become the first ratings gain streak in a few years for the NHL.

In short, fark you.  You're just as bad as the east coast baseball douches who want to see a circlejerk between the Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, Phillies, and Cardinals year in and year out and complain about 7pm Pacific start times
 
rka
2013-06-26 01:25:11 PM  

Doc Daneeka: balki1867: Hmm, so when Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc are in the Cup Finals, people tend to watch.

I'd love to see the panic on Bettman's face if we ever have a Phoenix-Nashville series.

Sometimes you're going to have good match-ups, and sometimes you are going to have match-ups less attractive to a national audience.  The inevitable consequence of real competition.

Both the league and NBC (and every sports broadcaster, for that matter), understand and accept this as part-and-parcel of covering the unpredictable world of sports.

If there were a Phoenix-Nashville series, NBC would do their best to promote it, and the league would focus on the bright side (namely, the large viewership gains likely to be made in those particular markets).


Spot on. This constant concern trolling over mid-market Finals (in any sport) is just perpetually grumpy (and paranoid) people in life looking for yet another thing to be grumpy (and paranoid) about.

I swear that 50% of Fark hockey fans really do not like hockey and just use it as an excuse to biatch about things.

mjohnson71: You'll never an all-mid-level market Stanley Cup Finals series. Markets like Minnesota, St. Louis, Nashville and Columbus are screwed as Bettman will never allow those teams to make it all the way through.


Case in point, you. Stop spouting this retarded Truther nonsense.
 
2013-06-26 01:27:03 PM  

rka: swear that 50% of Fark hockey fans really do not like hockey


I feel the same way about wrestling fans.

/I know you dont like wrestling but it is something that drives me crazy.
 
2013-06-26 01:28:51 PM  
Has Bettman found a way to have another lockout this summer and kill this momentum?
 
2013-06-26 01:36:19 PM  

bluenote13: Has Bettman found a way to have another lockout this summer and kill this momentum?


A possible no Olympic break next year is his best possibility.
 
2013-06-26 01:43:59 PM  

drunk_bouncnbaloruber: bluenote13: Has Bettman found a way to have another lockout this summer and kill this momentum?

A possible no Olympic break next year is his best possibility.


But having NHL players in the Olympics is a golden marketing opportunity for the league. More so next year since the league's 2 primary broadcast partners are Olympic broadcasters (NBC and CBC). Bettman is not one to pass up a marketing opportunity.
 
2013-06-26 01:44:23 PM  

bhcompy: abmoraz: Looking at the graph in TFA, it's almost as if the ratings have nothing to do with the health of the NHL, but instead mimic the teams' fan base.  If you have large US cities, in the north (Boston, Chicago, Philly, Detroit), that care about hockey (sorry, Robsul, but no one cares about the Devils), then the ratings are higher.  If you have southern cities (L.A., Anaheim, Carolina) or Canadian teams, no one watches.  It's not Rocket Surgery.

Yep, no one watched last year when the Kings improved on the previous years numbers, helping this years improvement become the first ratings gain streak in a few years for the NHL.

In short, fark you.  You're just as bad as the east coast baseball douches who want to see a circlejerk between the Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, Phillies, and Cardinals year in and year out and complain about 7pm Pacific start times


No one (comparatively) did watch last year.  It was the second lowest ratings in the last decade (only Ana-Ott in 2007 was lower).  Last year's ratings were barely half of this years and a 35% lower than the year before that (Bos-Van).

So in short "fark you" for talking out your ass and not even looking at the article.
 
2013-06-26 01:49:26 PM  

desertgeek: Bettman is not one to pass up a marketing opportunity.


NotSureIfSerious.gif
 
2013-06-26 01:51:38 PM  

desertgeek: Bettman is not one to pass up a marketing opportunity.


Bettman could fark up a cup of coffee.
 
2013-06-26 01:58:08 PM  

alienated: hockeyfarker: I'm glad the Finals were popular.

it's a little bittersweet though, because considering we just had a lockout, this shows we are all mindless lemmings leaping off cliffs in blind allegiance to the hockey gods.

oh well! It was a hell of a series.

They could have had pee-wee hockey on and I would have watched. I think most folks just wanted something. We could not have another non Cup season.
/my .02


I watched a lot of College Hockey this year.   There were some great college games this year.
 
2013-06-26 02:23:34 PM  

desertgeek: drunk_bouncnbaloruber: bluenote13: Has Bettman found a way to have another lockout this summer and kill this momentum?

A possible no Olympic break next year is his best possibility.

But having NHL players in the Olympics is a golden marketing opportunity for the league. More so next year since the league's 2 primary broadcast partners are Olympic broadcasters (NBC and CBC). Bettman is not one to pass up a marketing opportunity.


It's not just as simple as saying yes, there's stuff that still has to be negotiated. As of Bettman's pre-final press availability, the NHL has most of what it wants, and the issues still on the table are things the NHLPA wants, but since the NHL and PA are working together on this one, the NHL wants what the PA wants, and negotiations with the IIOC and IIHF are still ongoing.

Vancouver was a lot simpler- the time zone made it much more attractive as a marketing tool for the NHL. When games are going to be on at 4AM or whatever, it's not useful to the NHL as marketing unless they can secure rights to use highlights, use logos, and whatnot, and the IOC is notoriously stingy with stuff like that.
 
2013-06-26 02:30:11 PM  

drunk_bouncnbaloruber: bluenote13: Has Bettman found a way to have another lockout this summer and kill this momentum?

A possible no Olympic break next year is his best possibility.


I dunno. Do the break and just cut the season down to 64 games while you're at it.
 
2013-06-26 02:44:50 PM  
What are the numbers this year if you take out the numbers from the cities of the teams participating, vs doing the same for last year?

Put another way, what were the numbers in, say, New Orleans this year vs. last year?
 
2013-06-26 02:47:55 PM  

dellsworth1007: I watched a lot of College Hockey this year.   There were some great college games this year.


So I heard. However, I can only watch streams I can , ummmm, find. I was lucky to find anything in the post season as sites kept going down : (  .
Yeah, I know- pay for cable. I pay for cable internet, and even if I could afford the sports channels- SoCal is not known for having coverage of college hockey ( its mostly a club sport down here in the pac-12 ) . sigh
 
2013-06-26 03:23:06 PM  
The NHL gets zero monetary return on having players in the Olympics. Everyone always says the exposure will be a boost but it's never happened.

It's awesome to watch sure but the league assumes a lot of risk for no reward.
 
2013-06-26 03:33:12 PM  

ElwoodCuse: The NHL gets zero monetary return on having players in the Olympics. Everyone always says the exposure will be a boost but it's never happened.

It's awesome to watch sure but the league assumes a lot of risk for no reward.


Hockey is simply a sport without casual fans.  If you don't have a direct interest, most people don't care.
 
2013-06-26 03:38:39 PM  

bhcompy: abmoraz: Looking at the graph in TFA, it's almost as if the ratings have nothing to do with the health of the NHL, but instead mimic the teams' fan base.  If you have large US cities, in the north (Boston, Chicago, Philly, Detroit), that care about hockey (sorry, Robsul, but no one cares about the Devils), then the ratings are higher.  If you have southern cities (L.A., Anaheim, Carolina) or Canadian teams, no one watches.  It's not Rocket Surgery.

Yep, no one watched last year when the Kings improved on the previous years numbers, helping this years improvement become the first ratings gain streak in a few years for the NHL.

In short, fark you.  You're just as bad as the east coast baseball douches who want to see a circlejerk between the Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, Phillies, and Cardinals year in and year out and complain about 7pm Pacific start times


This might be my favorite response because, for some reason, the Cubs and Cardinals are now part of the 'East Coast bias' despite being no where near the east coast and getting little more than a teaspoon of coverage (especially the Cubs).

The Cardinals are getting coverage because they won the WS in 2011, were in a very good NLCS last year and have the best record in baseball this year.  As far as the Cubs getting coverage...well...you must not watch much ESPN because they barely mention either Chicago baseball team unless it is to talk about the players they might trade away in the next 5 weeks.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report