Hoss Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 From Rick Westhead of TSN: Breaking - TSN has learned ESPN has won the U.S. broadcast rights for the World Cup of Hockey, beating out NBC and Fox. This will be the first major hockey to air on ESPN since 2005. How do you feel? Good or bad? Thoughts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotentPowerPlay22 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 ESPN has done everything in its power to completely ignore hockey. Maybe this deal will change that situation. BTW, did you know that about $6 of every cable or satellite customer bill goes directly to ESPN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 ESPN wouldn't know hockey if Zadorov cross checked them with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 ESPN would really have scrape the bottom of the barrel to find someone as opinionated and ignorant as Millbury doing intermission updates. I'm sure they will find someone with a mullet, not sure if they will find anyone less successful in hockey than Millbury, and consider them an expert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 ESPN would really have scrape the bottom of the barrel to find someone as opinionated and ignorant as Millbury doing intermission updates. I'm sure they will find someone with a mullet, not sure if they will find anyone less successful in hockey than Millbury, and consider them an expert. I think their guy is Barry Melrose currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 They had better bring back Gary Thorne to do announcing, at least it would play off of nostalgia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is there a legal/economic reason, like the nhl demands too much money for highlight rights, to explain why espn doesn't cover hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is there a legal/economic reason, like the nhl demands too much money for highlight rights, to explain why espn doesn't cover hockey? Economic. When ESPN has the rights to bouncy-ball through almost the entire NHL season, and football & baseball though good portions of it; they'll promote/highlight those much more than a sport broadcast by a prime competitor. Tack on their love of showing scoring plays and the love of bouncy-ball becomes even more pronounced. Out of 50-75 scoring plays, there should be a handful that look good on a highlight film; for hockey, they're looking at showing 3 of 5, at least one of which probably isn't booya worthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 At least it will give ESPN a good forum to promote NBA Training Camps which will be starting soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Economic. When ESPN has the rights to bouncy-ball through almost the entire NHL season, and football & baseball though good portions of it; they'll promote/highlight those much more than a sport broadcast by a prime competitor. Tack on their love of showing scoring plays and the love of bouncy-ball becomes even more pronounced. Out of 50-75 scoring plays, there should be a handful that look good on a highlight film; for hockey, they're looking at showing 3 of 5, at least one of which probably isn't booya worthy. I'm shocked that people don't get this. It is purely a money based decision and it makes perfect sense. "Hey people, here is encouragement to go watch something on a station we don't own." That will never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 I like it. I'm not a fan of Doc Emrick. Would be nice to listen to Barry Melrose and Jojn Buccigross again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted February 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is there a legal/economic reason, like the nhl demands too much money for highlight rights, to explain why espn doesn't cover hockey? Likely bitter that the NHL spurned them for upstart OLN back in the day. Which worked out BRILLIANTLY for the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 If this is true, it makes the NHL look really bush league: Some NBC execs upset. They believe NHL delayed telling them World Cup news until after Super Bowl, so NHL could use NBC hospitality venues http://deadspin.com/report-nhl-and-nbc-feuding-over-just-the-dumbest-thing-1683753007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biodork Posted February 4, 2015 Report Share Posted February 4, 2015 If this is true, it makes the NHL look really bush league: http://deadspin.com/report-nhl-and-nbc-feuding-over-just-the-dumbest-thing-1683753007 As crummy as that would be of the NHL to do, I feel no sympathy for the greedy NBC folks who continue to relegate my favorite game to a high-tier cable channel with no alternative (paid) viewing options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Economic. When ESPN has the rights to bouncy-ball through almost the entire NHL season, and football & baseball though good portions of it; they'll promote/highlight those much more than a sport broadcast by a prime competitor. Tack on their love of showing scoring plays and the love of bouncy-ball becomes even more pronounced. Out of 50-75 scoring plays, there should be a handful that look good on a highlight film; for hockey, they're looking at showing 3 of 5, at least one of which probably isn't booya worthy. That makes sense, still pisses me off though. I was told what Tank said below a few years back and I always figured they were still upset about it. Likely bitter that the NHL spurned them for upstart OLN back in the day. Which worked out BRILLIANTLY for the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Economic. When ESPN has the rights to bouncy-ball through almost the entire NHL season, and football & baseball though good portions of it; they'll promote/highlight those much more than a sport broadcast by a prime competitor. Tack on their love of showing scoring plays and the love of bouncy-ball becomes even more pronounced. Out of 50-75 scoring plays, there should be a handful that look good on a highlight film; for hockey, they're looking at showing 3 of 5, at least one of which probably isn't booya worthy. Don't forget that ESPN also got better ratings with poker than they did with NHL games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two or less Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 This is the only World Cup of hockey thread i found so i figured i'd bring this back. Per Elliott Friedman, Kings GM Dean Lombardi will be named the GM of team USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 This is the only World Cup of hockey thread i found so i figured i'd bring this back. Per Elliott Friedman, Kings GM Dean Lombardi will be named the GM of team USA. That is excellent news for Team USA. Best GM in hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 That is excellent news for Team USA. Best GM in hockey. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 I agree.DARN shame Don Waddell wasn't :w00t: available. Sorry. Tried to get through that w/ a straight face but just couldn't. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrassValleyGreg Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Missed this before and didn't realize ESPN wanted back in the hockey business. Put me in the not happy camp! In an era where most major North American sports have significantly altered rules under the guise of "broadening" fanbases, hockey has been able to maintain it's integrity. Some decision makers have found it profitable to sacrifice defense for the sake of increased scoring (DB rules in football, the joke of NBA refs, etc.). For the most part, hockey today is the same as it was post '05 lockout. Now part of the reason why hockey has been able to insulate itself from this short-sighted trend has to do with the types of players and fans the sport already attracts, and the culture of hockey as a whole. These guys would be just as happy to make 100k a year. But the almighty dollar is the ultimate corruptor. And keeping a healthy distance from the greedy giant mitt of Mickey Mouse has, in my opinion, only strengthened the sport. Plus, I remember the divorce of hockey from ESPN as acrimonious, as if ESPN said go ahead and try to succeed without us. And hockey did just that. Nice to see a multi-national corporation come crawling back, but I'd much rather keep a healthy distance from the disneyfication of sport. Obviously this is just one tournament. But I don't like it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) Missed this before and didn't realize ESPN wanted back in the hockey business. Put me in the not happy camp! In an era where most major North American sports have significantly altered rules under the guise of "broadening" fanbases, hockey has been able to maintain it's integrity. Some decision makers have found it profitable to sacrifice defense for the sake of increased scoring (DB rules in football, the joke of NBA refs, etc.). For the most part, hockey today is the same as it was post '05 lockout. :blink: I think you can say a lot of things about today's hockey, but being the same as 05-06-07 isn't one of them. Edited June 22, 2015 by MattPie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 It will be interesting to watch the young guns team as well, Eichel, McDavid and possibly Reinhart on the same team. Especially if the FNC gets to host some pre Tourament Gsnes as rumored Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrassValleyGreg Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Definitely excited for the tournament. :blink: I think you can say a lot of things about today's hockey, but being the same as 05-06-07 isn't one of them. My point was the sport and the rules that govern it have changed less in 10 years than the NHL and NBA. My larger point was F*** ESPN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted June 22, 2015 Report Share Posted June 22, 2015 Definitely excited for the tournament. My point was the sport and the rules that govern it have changed less in 10 years than the NHL and NBA. My larger point was F*** ESPN. Just curious if you realized in your first rant on this that you applauded hockey for not chasing the dollar but failed to not acknowledge that ESPN won coverage by outbidding NBC? So, they kind of are chasing the dollar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.