A Question For Americans Who Have An NHL Team In Their City

So, the NHL has been trying for years to make the game appeal more to American audiences since ratings are at an all-time low and attendance in certain cities is low as well. The latter is mainly because people in those cities just simply don't care about hockey but I've never heard an explanation as to why people aren't watching the game. Does the sport just not appeal to you in any way? Is it the fighting? Or are you just waiting for your local team to make a run for the Cup and jump on the bandwagon?

 

By far the biggest reason is that it competes directly with the NBA, a very popular sport, especially in the northeast, which heavily influences TV programming. Another reason is that some people feel that it's a foreign sport, like soccer. We have several truly American sports (baseball, basketball, football), so some people feel that they don't need anything else.

I actually really do like hockey (the strike really turned me off the game, but I'm getting better), but I also like watching the English Premier League more than NFL football, so maybe they should revoke my citizenship.

 

We have several truly American sports (baseball, basketball, football)

Well, not exactly truly American since basketball was invented by a Canadian and American ffotball borowed a lot from Canadian football (quaterback, forward pass, 2 point conversions)

Hockey should be brought back to Winnipeg and Quebec City and the Predators should head to Hamilton. Hockey belongs here.

 

Well, I live in Dallas, so we already automatically have to franchises that are going to be bigger than hockey, but the real fanatical fans are hard core.

I think the lack of popularity is due to the unpopular home audience for the games on television, because every Stars game I've ever been to is either sold out, or nearly sold out.

The holdout really hurt keeping casual fans, as well.

 

Even though I don't live in an NHL city, whenever I mention that I'm a fan, people usually give me a reason or two why they're not. The one I hear the most from casual fans is the lockout.

Popularity of hockey in the States seemed to be on an upswing during the 90s, largely due to Wayne Gretzky in LA, the success of teams like Detroit and Colorado, plus the hooplah over the Rangers winning their first cup since 1940. A lot of that fell by the wayside after the lockout. It didn't help that sports fans were still reeling over MLB labor issues, as well. Add in ever-increasing ticket prices and lack of decent marketing, and there's your dwindling fan base.

I also think that putting teams in Southern cities such as Nashville, hasn't helped a whole lot. Yes, there are some fans in those cities, but not enough as the sale and inevitable move of the Predators proves. It drives me insane that there are awesome hockey towns that are continually overlooked because they aren't huge media markets. Portland, OR is a perfect example. I understand from a business perspective, but still. It seems, especially in Southern cities, the NHL tries to market the sport as this new, flashy thing that eventually loses its appeal because the novelty wears off. Instead, they should've tried areas that have at least a small history of supporting the sport and expanding on that.

I'm going to stop now before this turns into another of my Gary Bettman rants.



EDIT: This article made me weep.

 

By far the biggest reason is that it competes directly with the NBA, a very popular sport, especially in the northeast, which heavily influences TV programming.

Well, the NFL competes with the NBA as well it's doing as good as ever but I guess that's mostly because of the way the NFL is scheduled.

Hockey should be brought back to Winnipeg and Quebec City and the Predators should head to Hamilton. Hockey belongs here.

It's really strange that the Predators are probably gonna move considering they have a pretty good team.

Popularity of hockey in the States seemed to be on an upswing during the 90s, largely due to Wayne Gretzky in LA, the success of teams like Detroit and Colorado, plus the hooplah over the Rangers winning their first cup since 1940.

I'm going to stop now before this turns into another of my Gary Bettman rants.

Yeah, the States were all over hockey during the Gretzky era and then of course Mr. Bettman came in as the commissioner. If Sidney Crosby can continue to play the way he has, then something similar might happen in terms of regaining that popularity. And I agree about Detroit, Colorado, and also New Jersey. I think the league needs those dynasty-type teams back but under the current system it's really hard to make that kind of team.

I understand Bettman is to blame for expanding the league into markets where there's not much interest in the game but my question is why aren't those people interested in hockey in the first place....I'm not asking why the NHL is in a financial hole. Sure the lockout contributed but it was like this before it.

 

I went to a Coyotes game earlier this year... only hockey game I had ever been to, and I think it might be the only one I ever go to. I had a free ticket so I thought, "why not?" I watched the first period and it was the most boring time of my life so I left.

Not sure why the sport sucks. But it does.

 

You need to watch more than one game.

 

And more then one period.

I think the one problem with ratings not being as high as they could be, is obviously because of other sport markets, like someone mentioned already I think; the city just doesn't care. If you look at New Jersey for instance, Continental Airlines Arena had low attendance and it was competeing with the Giants, Jets and Nets all in the same vicinity, thus its certianly going to affect attendance, plus the arena was just crappy as a whole.

Or maybe, people aren't watching because they automatically think their city is a football only town or belongs to Baseball and they can't possibly have a good team without giving them a chance?

Sorry, if my words are a bit messy here in this little rant.

 

If he can't make it through one period at a live game, I don't think he's going to watch a game on TV.

Aside from being a sport that just plain doesn't translate well to the TV screen, I think the problem with hockey is there's been way too much expansion so it's become too diluted. The "feel" of a sport is very important. Watching a game between the Toronto Maple Leafs and Boston Bruins has an authentic feeling. A game between the Nashville Predators and Atlanta Thrashers? Not so much. I got heavily in to hockey at one point. I sat down and watched every single game of the Stanley Cup Finals between Detroit and Carolina. It had compelling history behind it. Hasek going for the cup, Ronnie Francis back in the Finals, the Hartford Whalers finding success again in Carolina, etc. Good historical context to it. Hockey to me now just screams "blah"

 

why?

I gave it a shot... it didn't impress me with the one-thirds of a game I saw, so why bother?

it's just boring. I almost fell asleep.

Not to mention people were cheering for things that didn't seem at all impressive to me... made no sense at all.

 

Because it's quite possible you just happened to catch a game that wasn't the most exciting. Are you telling me there are never boring basketball or baseball games? And as far as things not making sense, you need to watch it more and then things will start to make sense.

Huh? How so?

 

I would watch the most boring baseball or basketball games over the game I saw.

 

Alright then.

 

Huh? How so?[/quote]

Half the time the puck's not even visible on the screen, and half the time it actually is on there somewhere, it can be difficult to find.

 

w00t! I got you to give up!


*does happy dance*

 

Half the time the puck's not even visible on the screen, and half the time it actually is on there somewhere, it can be difficult to find. [/quote]

That's probably the lamest excuse I've ever heard. I remember the first time I started watching hockey, it took a few minutes, but afterwards I was following the play well, even if I didn't know what was going on.

 

1/5 mics.

I'm guessing you were a fan of Fox's red and blue streaks?

 

In NC, the Hurricanes are just up against too much basketball tradition. They are in the Triangle and there's just no way they can compete with the history of UNC, NC State, and Dook, (and Wake Forest). It's not necessarily a reflection on the game, it's just they're more a victim of circumstance. Of course this was/is also a problem for the Charlotte Hornets & Bobcats and the Carolina Panthers (initially). There are definitely some rabid Caniacs in the Carolinas and you have a ton of retired Northerners who come to the area. Canes game are a blast live, but attendance is definitely a reflection of the team's performance. There was definitely a bit of irony in that the state's first professional sports championship came from hockey.

 

I have four NHL teams within an hour of my house. One is about 20 minutes, another is 30 minutes, another is about 45 or so (depending on traffic), and the forth is an hour. Those teams in order is the Devils, the Rangers, Islanders, and the Flyers.


I have to say that the Rangers are actually quite popular around here, but the problem why they dont get a lot of fans is that ticket prices are really expensive. I bring three people to a baseball at Yankee Stadium for the same price as one ticket in nosebleed to see the Rangers or the Devils. But people still pay for tickets. So I really dont know...

 

To say hockey is not viable in the U.S. is nonsense. It used to be a lot more influential in the U.S. before Gary Bettman screwed it up. I would say New York's most passionate fans are Rangers fans (especially the cop and firefighter contingent).
Hockey's biggest problem was overexpansion and overcoaching that started to wane interest. Cutting some fat would deepen the talent pool and even overcome some coaching maneuvers.

The NHL is somehow boasting greater revenues than last year, but that can attributed to ticket price increases.

 

I live in Chicago and the Blackhawks are a joke but surprisingly we have a huge amount of Hockey fans in Chicago who follow the AHL Chicago Wolves.

 

Hockey is like soccer, but much worse.

Low scoring, back and forth. No one ever really has possession of the ball/puck.

You pass it around until you turn it over. If someone is close enough, they take a shot.

Everything is deflections and miss-hits. It's sloppy. It just seems random and lucky.

And that's boring.

 

Go watch a Habs/Leafs, Sens/Leafs, Oilers/Flames game and you will be wrong with your analysis.

For that matter, go watch some of the top American teams - Devils, Sabres, Wings, Ducks, Stars etc... Even watching a young and inexperienced team like the Penguins is fun, especially watching Crosby, Staal, Malkin etc...

 

Well for one thing, what did they expect when they went to Versus? Hockey is off in cable purgatory practically all year until the middle of the Stanley Cup Finals, and they wonder why the ratings hit record lows. It's not like ratings were much better before the lockout, but at least then it was more in the public eye. The NHL NEEDS to be on ESPN, because like it or not, ESPN=credibility.

They need to market their superstars better too, like Crosby. He could, and very well maybe should be, this generation's Gretzky.

Finally, the NHL should make all effort to turn the Blues into a Cup Contender.