The NHL's television audiences in Canada this season are a mixed bag of surprises and contractions.
Regionally, only one team, the Ottawa Senators, has increased its audience.
Nationally, the numbers are down or about flat.
The good news for the league is, since the prelockout season of 2003-04, the audiences, for the most part, have grown.
The Vancouver Canucks rank as the biggest surprise.
Despite leading the Northwest Division, Canucks regional audiences are down 20 per cent. Rogers Sportsnet is averaging 242,000 viewers a game compared with 303,000 at this point last season.
Networks pay closer attention to long-term trends than year-to-year measurements, but the Canucks numbers also have declined 29 per cent from the prelockout season of 2003-04.
What's gone wrong?
"You can drive yourself nuts trying to analyze ratings," Sportsnet president Doug Beeforth said. "It's like the stock market. It is the long term that counts."
The Canucks' weak audiences may be an example of a winning record failing to mitigate the tedium of dull hockey. Goalie Roberto Luongo, not the goal scorers, is the team's star.
The Canucks' viewership decline may also explain why the national audience for the Western based Game 2 of the CBC's Hockey Night in Canada is down from last year. Limited interest in the home market will pull down the national number.
Hockey Night's Game 1 audience of 1.181 million is down 10 per cent from last year and 7 per cent from 2003-04.
Game 2 is averaging 686,000, a drop of 8 per cent from last year and a 15 per cent decline from 2003-04.
TSN, on the other hand, is averaging 463,000 viewers for its NHL telecasts, up 3 per cent from last year at this time and a whopping 49 per cent over 2003-04.
To explain Hockey Night's drop-off on Saturday nights, look no further than the decline on the ice of its leading property, the Toronto Maple Leafs.
At this time in 2003-04, the Leafs had the fourth-best record in the Eastern Conference. A year ago, they slipped to ninth. This season, they're down to 14th.
The weak Leafs also affect the Hockey Night Game 2 audience. After watching a bad Leafs performance in Game 1, the Eastern audience is less inclined to stay tuned for Game 2.
Another factor that has reduced Hockey Night's Game 2 audience is the increased TV exposure of the Calgary Flames and Edmonton Oilers. In 2003-04, not all Flames and Oilers games were televised. Now they are, on either on CBC, TSN, Sportsnet or pay per view.
"Saturday night is still special," Scott Moore, the head of CBC Sports, said. "But when every game is on TV, Hockey Night isn't the only game in town any more."
Moore says that Hockey Night, because it draws more than twice the average audience of TSN, has a larger number of casual fans watching. And they're more likely to switch channels if the game is boring or their favourite team is losing.
TSN president Phil King attributes his network's increases to the success of teams outside Toronto. A Canadian team has competed in each of the past three Stanley Cup finals. The playoff races are close and competitive. And the paucity of prime-time entertainment programming, caused by the Hollywood writers' strike, has increased TSN's week night hockey viewership.
Other regional audiences:
Flames: Averaging 117,000 viewers, down 3 per cent from last year at this point, up 3 per cent from 2003-04.
Oilers: Averaging 116,000, down 30 per cent from last year, up 22 per cent from 2003-04.
Leafs: Averaging 411,000, down 3 per cent from last year at this time, up 7 per cent from 2003-04.
Ottawa Senators: Averaging 102,000, up 17 per cent from last year, up 38 per cent from 2003-04.
Montreal Canadiens: Averaging 643,000 on Reseau des Sports, down 9 per cent from last season, but up 65 per cent from 2003-04.
You've got to think the ratings drop for Canuck games have everything to do with dull hockey. I can honestly say if I was not a Canucks fan I would be hard pressed to make a choice of watching a Vancouver game. Even as a Canucks fan at times it can be just brutal to watch.
Even the Maple Laffs are a better team to watch...they might lose but at least they play a somewhat exciting brand of hockey.
HNIC's ratings are down because they INSIST on showing the Leafs.
Here's the headline from TSN.ca this afternoon:
NHL's top teams collide in Ottawa The Red Wings look to rebound from a rare loss and extend a six-game road winning streak tonight when they meet the Eastern Conference-leading Senators in a matchup of the league's top teams.
The low Canuck ratings is also due to the NHL schedule. People get sick of seeing Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado and Minnesota 8 times a season. At least I get sick of seeing the same teams.
I wonder how PPV did for the Rangers-Canucks game, or the NJ-Van game????!!?!??
The average viewer might not notice, but the cameras are really crappy on Canucks TV. The play-by-play is for radio, not TV. The whole broadcast seems weak.
I paid for my first pay-per-view a couple of weeks ago and was really disappointed at the quality. It didn't have the same energy...the Big Brother inserts, although admirable, were boring. There's just something not "real" about the whole thing.
I'd have been REALLY pissed off if the Canucks had lost! But I still wouldn't do it again.
Would the ratings go up, would the league be more interesting to follow and would the caliber of the game improve if, instead of 30 teams, the NHL were reduced to 18 or 24 highly skilled and motivated teams playing 60 regular season games in a slightly shorter schedule with fewer games per week? A nine-month hockey season with two or three games offered every night and teams earning a point for a tie even though they lost in overtime, makes for a dull season.
What is the difference? I have yet to hear a play-by-play for TV. Every broadcaster I know of tells you obvious stuff you can see for yourself. It's just the names of the players that may be useful.
In the pre-expansion ('67) era Montreal Canadians owned first rights to all junior age players born in Quebec. Imagine what it might be like in the NHL if portions of the country were divvied up provincially, ie: Vancouver Canucks - - gets first choice on all players born and/or living in British Columbia; Edmonton OIlers & Calgary Flames - - players from Alberta, Manitoba & Saskatchewan; Toronto Maple Leafs & Ottawa Senators - - Ontario Montreal Canadiens - - Quebec Players from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and the Northwest Territories might be selected via a lottery draft or selected according to a team's previous season finish. American franchises: they get all the USA talent. All teams would then share draft selections from all other continents and Canadian players not previously drafted. Reduce the league down to 18-24 teams, including franchises in Hamilton and Winnipeg.
Hey, I'm only saying, what if . . . (note: I'm not running for league president).
"Canucks ratings sink due to lame broadcast signal from SportsNet. Fans tuning in record droves to butterflies mating in HD."
Get me the SPac feed in HD. Get me the PPV games in HD and I'll watch and stop playing World of Warcraft and listening to the game online.
I agree, SportsNet 's Vancouver broadcasts have really poor cameras. Local cable could do better. If they slick up the production and make all those new LCD and Plasma screen scream, then they have a chance.
I tried a PPV and was shocked at how awful the picture was. It's there a decent HD mobile in Vancouver?
What is the difference? I have yet to hear a play-by-play for TV. Every broadcaster I know of tells you obvious stuff you can see for yourself. It's just the names of the players that may be useful.
Sorry, for me there was an obvious difference. Radio has to articulate every single move...TV does less of that. I could have closed my eyes and gotten just as much of the experience. Not worth the $12.50 or whatever it was.
Would the ratings go up, would the league be more interesting to follow and would the caliber of the game improve if, instead of 30 teams, the NHL were reduced to 18 or 24 highly skilled and motivated teams playing 60 regular season games in a slightly shorter schedule with fewer games per week?>>snip<<
I say 'yes'. Its not going to happen of course (g-r-e-e-d) but its nice to dream, isn't it?
The average viewer might not notice, but the cameras are really crappy on Canucks TV.
To judge by the amount of bitching I hear on the call-in shows, plus the opinions of every 'average viewer' I know, they notice. Personally, I don't pay for the ppv. I've sampled it and was not impressed, to put it mildly.
Two words...er...letters. HD!!! I wonder when broadcasters are gonna WAKE UP and realize most people now have HD TV's! Big screen TV's have been outselling the smaller ones since 1996 believe it or not!
I get the impression that those wonderful, rare Sportsnet HD games on 298 aren't going to be free after Wednesday. The message I got from SHAW was that it was going to cost $160.00 for a half seasons package. Does anyone know if that's true?
A: Creating an all-Canadian division. Cut down on travel costs by scheduling two games in 3 days (i.e.: Canucks would host the Habs Friday/Saturday or Saturday/Sunday). If not "A" then try....
B: Completely revamp the divisions & conferences. There is no reason (other than ownership greed) that the Atlantic Division should stay intact where teams can drive home most nights after road games. It would be tantamount to having a Pacific Division that consists of two Vancouver teams, plus one each in Burnaby, Victoria, Seattle and Portland. The NFL and Major League Baseball manage to survive having their New York teams in different conferences/leagues, why should the NHL be any different?
C: Abandon the "hokey" shootout. In the time they waste clearing a centre patch down the ice and submitting shootout lists, they could expand the OT frame to 10 mins. If it's STILL tied, 1 pt each. The 1 pt reward for LOSING a shootout has led to a league where 26 of 30 teams have a record of .500 or better. SO WRONG.
D: Borrow a page from soccer and make wins worth 3 points. THEN you'll see teams hungry for a "W".
E: League contraction. There isn't enough top caibre talent to ice 30 teams in the NHL and another 29 farm teams in the AHL. Better to have 24 quality NHL teams and I'd chime in on including at least ONE more Canadian franchise (Hamilton or Winnipeg).
F: Why do we need a 2 month post-season? First step, shorten the pre-season then expand the regular season by 4-6 games (2-3 more home gates for EVERY team). Then shorten the playoffs by making the first two rounds best of 5 affairs or a single game elimination for the 16 best franchises REGARDLESS of which conference they're in. OR create two POOLS of eight teams out of the top 16 teams in the regular season, have a round robin and the top 4 from each POOL square off in a single-game elimination leading up to the Stanley Cup game which would be hosted by a different team each year (a la the Super Bowl).
But I'm sure Bettman and his Governor friends will continue their quest to have teams in hockey hotbeds like Kansas City, Oklahoma City, Las Vegas, Houston, Cleveland, etc. Can you imagine the excitement a few years from now a Cup final featuring Columbus/Atlanta or Oklahoma/Carolina will generate.
Sportsnet numbers down - but are they counting those who instead are watching CH. 298? I love watching the game in HD - makes me wonder how I saw the puck all those many years in front of my 21" tv.
I hate to be "that guy" but I like the shootout. I was at the pub last Tuesday for the game against teh Isle that went to shootout... and whenever T. Linden steps on the ice, the place goes mental... then he scored and it was fun.
but maybe you're right about how liberal they are with handing out points to losers. Have it go to shootout... one team walks away with 2 and one with zero.
Does anyone else notice how brutal the East is in general? If the Oil were in the Atlantic they'd be number one with a bullet! No wonder Ottawa dominates the way they do, they get to beat up on Toronto 8 times a season... any tema with that cherry schedul;e from the West would be tops.
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Logged
Male
