How to fix the NHL

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever

Then why suggest putting the NHL in a similar-sized city? Do you have different rules for different cities, or different expectations?

You didn't read the post properly: I said that the NHL was small potatoes compared to the NFL. The NHL is more viable in smaller cities than the NFL is, provided there is a decent level of interest in hockey amongst the population.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever

Seriously, do you only think that 1 to 2% of people in sunbelt metros care about an NHL team that is in their city? It's much higher than that. .

I wasn't talking about all Sunbelt metros, but look at the TV ratings for Phoenix and Atlanta: between 8,000 and 12,000 households. Let's say an average of two people per household are watching. Then divide that by the metro populations... you still get 1% or less that are interested in watching. Look at that, then look at the average attendance (which usually includes free or nearly-free tickets) and it is easy to conclude there aren't that many people interested. OK, there maybe people who "care" who DON'T watch on TV and DON'T go to games, but how many more realistically?

Compare this with local TV ratings in Canadian NHL metros of around 1 million people like Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa. They are usually in the 100,000 range. Which means that close to 20% of the local population (two people watching per household) is actually watching your games on TV. Plus you have all the people going to the games lives, plus all of those who are casually interested (those who "care").

So sure the Sunbelt metros are bigger, and a metro of five million offers more sponsorship potential than a metro of one million. But you can only cash in on the potential if people care. Advertisers won't pay big bucks to advertise on Coyotes' games if there are only 16,000 people watching, or at least they will pay a lot less than to reach the 100,000 people who are watching the Calgary Flames on their local channel. Corporations don't blindly throw money at commodities that very few people are interested in.

Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever

Granted, it's likely lower than what you'll find in a small northern hamlet, but by the numbers, given the size of such metros, they still are competitive.

Certainly not all of them, as is becoming quite clear.

Anyway, if sheer metro size was the only criteria, I guess Shanghai would be a great location for an NHL team, right? Lots of people, lots of money, huge corporate base. Let's go for it people!

[Stars&StripesForever]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I wasn't talking about all Sunbelt metros, but look at the TV ratings for Phoenix and Atlanta: between 8,000 and 12,000 households. Let's say an average of two people per household are watching. Then divide that by the metro populations... you still get 1% or less that are interested in watching. Look at that, then look at the average attendance (which usually includes free or nearly-free tickets) and it is easy to conclude there aren't that many people interested. OK, there maybe people who "care" who DON'T watch on TV and DON'T go to games, but how many more realistically?

Compare this with local TV ratings in Canadian NHL metros of around 1 million people like Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa. They are usually in the 100,000 range. Which means that close to 20% of the local population (two people watching per household) is actually watching your games on TV. Plus you have all the people going to the games lives, plus all of those who are casually interested (those who "care").

So sure the Sunbelt metros are bigger, and a metro of five million offers more sponsorship potential than a metro of one million. But you can only cash in on the potential if people care. Advertisers won't pay big bucks to advertise on Coyotes' games if there are only 16,000 people watching, or at least they will pay a lot less than to reach the 100,000 people who are watching the Calgary Flames on their local channel. Corporations don't blindly throw money at commodities that very few people are interested in.



Certainly not all of them, as is becoming quite clear.

Anyway, if sheer metro size was the only criteria, I guess Shanghai would be a great location for an NHL team, right? Lots of people, lots of money, huge corporate base. Let's go for it people!

I enjoy the sport of hockey. However, it's not exactly fun to watch on television, given the quickness of the puck. There's nothing like watching hockey live. The coolness of the arena. The sounds of the puck getting slapped against the boards. The fights. A 2 on 1 power play goal. The roar of the crowd and the resulting music when a goal is scored.

Seriously, I do not think that most hockey fans watch the sport on television. It's not a great tv sport, but it's the best spectator sport. On the other hand, football and baseball are much better tv sports than spectator sports, though both have their aura about them.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever

I enjoy the sport of hockey. However, it's not exactly fun to watch on television, given the quickness of the puck. There's nothing like watching hockey live. The coolness of the arena. The sounds of the puck getting slapped against the boards. The fights. A 2 on 1 power play goal. The roar of the crowd and the resulting music when a goal is scored.

Seriously, I do not think that most hockey fans watch the sport on television. It's not a great tv sport, but it's the best spectator sport. On the other hand, football and baseball are much better tv sports than spectator sports, though both have their aura about them.

Having your own personal preference is fine. But that doesn't take away from the fact that hockey is a TV-watchable sport for a good chunk of the population in Canada and several of the northern states.

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Except that places like Nashville and Columbus are in the NHL at the moment and are not significantly bigger than Knoxville, Greensboro or Quebec City.

And don't forget that metro populations in Canada are more conservatively calculated than in the U.S. Officially according to Statistics Canada Quebec City's metro is about 800,000 but if you used the U.S. Bureau of the Census criteria it would be something like 1.2 million.

Plus Winnipeg just got back in the league, and although its metro is officially the exact same size as Quebec City's, it has even less less people than Quebec City does in radii of 100 km, 200 km, 300 km, and beyond to draw from.

Nashville and Columbus are significantly bigger than Knoxville and Greensboro. Quebec is a different situation, because it's a Canadian city.

Nashville is the 29th largest US TV market (1,039,000 TV homes)
Columbus is the 34th largest (916,000 TV homes)
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point is the 47th largest (699,000 TV homes)
Knoxville is the 59th largest (557,000 TV homes)

Buffalo is the smallest US NHL market (51st - 636,000), but has a much longer history than most teams. When they got their team, they were much higher in the market rankings.


Also, I'm not sure how Canada calculates its metros, but in the US it isn't done by distance or anything like that...it's strictly based on commuting patterns.

Canadian cities tend to be more compact as it is...so if you used terms of distance from the cities, you wouldn't be adding as much population as you see in the US Metros especially in the South.

[Man About Town]

Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever

Oh please. Hartford is a rinky-dink town wedged between New York and Boston. It'd be like Greenville-Spartanburg being given an NFL team, while Atlanta and Charlotte surround it.

So what if Hartford is near Boston and New York? Oklahoma City and San Antonio are overshadowed by Dallas and Houston, but that didn't stop the NBA from putting teams there. Jacksonville is overshadowed by Atlanta, Tampa and Miami, yet the NFL let them have a team. How would having a new Hartford Whalers team in the NHL be any different?

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by Man About Town

So what if Hartford is near Boston and New York? Oklahoma City and San Antonio are overshadowed by Dallas and Houston, but that didn't stop the NBA from putting teams there. Jacksonville is overshadowed by Atlanta, Tampa and Miami, yet the NFL let them have a team. How would having a new Hartford Whalers team in the NHL be any different?

Hartford's situation has more to do with their crappy arena than anything else. Yes, there could be a potential problem if the NY teams and Boston object to having a new team in Hartford, but ultimately, if it came down to it, I doubt it would matter.

I think Hartford is on the list for potential relocations...but probably a little ways down the list. First and foremost, they need a new arena...but building one doesn't guarantee a team, so it's pretty risky.

[Man About Town]

Originally Posted by nashvols

Hartford's situation has more to do with their crappy arena than anything else. Yes, there could be a potential problem if the NY teams and Boston object to having a new team in Hartford, but ultimately, if it came down to it, I doubt it would matter.

I think Hartford is on the list for potential relocations...but probably a little ways down the list. First and foremost, they need a new arena...but building one doesn't guarantee a team, so it's pretty risky.

Exactly. The crappy Civic Center (XL Arena) is the real issue. Cannibalizing fans and viewers from the Bruins, Rangers, Devils and Islanders is not as big of an issue, because all four of those teams survived when there was a Whalers team playing in Hartford. I don't think it would be any different the second time around.

[bostonguy1960]

One way to fix the NHL is to televise a game on network tv on Thanksgiving Frida afternoon.

Oops, NBC is starting that this year!: Detroit @ Boston. Sure, many hockey fans will be out holiday shopping, but it seems like a good idea, no? It'll let sports fans know the NHL even exists at this point of the season. This wouldn't have been possible pre-Bettman, pre-new-NHL juicy tv deal.

[nashvols]

Originally Posted by bostonguy1960

One way to fix the NHL is to televise a game on network tv on Thanksgiving Frida afternoon.

Oops, NBC is starting that this year!: Detroit @ Boston. Sure, many hockey fans will be out holiday shopping, but it seems like a good idea, no? It'll let sports fans know the NHL even exists at this point of the season. This wouldn't have been possible pre-Bettman, pre-new-NHL juicy tv deal.

For the women, that's fine. If the men are doing it....man card = revoked.