Hockey Night in Canada

[Rebel_1812]

The streams on cbc no longer work.  They say not available in my region.  What a joke we pay so much in taxes for cbc and they can't even stream the games in ontario.

You might have missed this but the CBC no longer actually holds any rights. Any restrictions on their streams, regional or otherwise, is almost certainly a part of their deal with Rogers.

Also, with an annual budget of around a billion dollars that means every Canadian pays, roughly, about 28 dollars per year for the CBC so it's really not the anvil you make it sound like.

Don't dismiss the financial impact.  Many people live paycheck to paycheck.  Even if you don't why be forced to waste money on a channel that has no decent shows.  The only thing that really brought in ratings was the hockey and as you said they don't own the rights anymore.  CBC should be privatized and sold.

[Potvin29]

The streams on cbc no longer work.  They say not available in my region.  What a joke we pay so much in taxes for cbc and they can't even stream the games in ontario.

You might have missed this but the CBC no longer actually holds any rights. Any restrictions on their streams, regional or otherwise, is almost certainly a part of their deal with Rogers.

Also, with an annual budget of around a billion dollars that means every Canadian pays, roughly, about 28 dollars per year for the CBC so it's really not the anvil you make it sound like.

Don't dismiss the financial impact.  Many people live paycheck to paycheck.  Even if you don't why be forced to waste money on a channel that has no decent shows.  The only thing that really brought in ratings was the hockey and as you said they don't own the rights anymore.  CBC should be privatized and sold.

CBC exists for purposes other than creating television shows.

[Nik]

Don't dismiss the financial impact.  Many people live paycheck to paycheck.  Even if you don't why be forced to waste money on a channel that has no decent shows.  The only thing that really brought in ratings was the hockey and as you said they don't own the rights anymore.  CBC should be privatized and sold.

I'm not dismissing the financial impact. I'm specifically stating what it is. 28 bucks per year or, assuming 26 paychecks per year, 1.08 per paycheck.

Anyways, I think you're wrong about the CBC on both a qualitative and quantitative sense. It has a handful of shows that average around a million viewers, which is a pretty good measure for what is a "hit" by virtue of Canadian TV standards. As for the quality standpoint while I don't personally watch much of their scripted stuff I think their news/investigative stuff is top notch and the Fifth Estate in particular was pretty remarkably good and self critical after the whole Ghomeshi fiasco.

[Deebo]

I moved the talk about the fan change the sports radio thread in non hockey chatter.

http://www.tmlfans.ca/community/index.php?topic=104.msg212144#msg212144

[CarltonTheBear]

Thought that this was a pretty good article looking at how the 1st year of Rogers-dominated hockey broadcasts have gone (hint: not well)...

http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2015/2/9/7983087/rogers-nhl-tv-ratings-decline-why-because-healy-suck-hughson-sucks-they-all-suck

Some of the reasons as to why their ratings have been low are obvious... crappy on-air talent and the fact that the Leafs suck. But their first point is that there's actually a pretty small percentage of Canadians who follow hockey closely. I didn't realize that. They also make an interesting point about how with so many games available every day now the product may have actually become a little diluted.

[Nik]

But their first point is that there's actually a pretty small percentage of Canadians who follow hockey closely. I didn't realize that.

Yeah and that's sort of what I was getting at earlier regarding Strombo as the host. Rogers is going to try to reach the people who aren't hockey fans however they can and while it doesn't look like that move has paid dividends I think anyone hoping that Rogers will just do what HNIC always did needs to accept that they're going to be going for broader appeal.

I know hockey is in kind of a tough position because so many players are just so bland and boring but I still think they need to look at what the NBA has done in terms of bringing in diverse voices from ex-players(but entertaining ones like Barkley), fans(Bill Simmons) and bloggers(the Basketball Jones guys).

[Potvin29]

I miss the old HNIC.

[Peter D.]

Yeah and that's sort of what I was getting at earlier regarding Strombo as the host. Rogers is going to try to reach the people who aren't hockey fans however they can and while it doesn't look like that move has paid dividends I think anyone hoping that Rogers will just do what HNIC always did needs to accept that they're going to be going for broader appeal.

I legitimately question how they are going to achieve this over the long haul.  The broader appeal they are striving to achieve is coming at the expense of long-time fans.  I don't know if the former will ever outweigh the latter.

I mentioned earlier I really like Strombo, and he has the persona to appeal to a new generation of fans, but he is in the wrong role to do it.  If he was on the ground doing what MacLean is doing, as well as continuing to do the 3-player roundtables (which are excellent), I could see him winning over new fans.  Strombo trying to pretend he can carry a hockey conversation while continually laughing and making love to Kypreos on screen, on the other hand, won't.

As for HNiC, instead of growing the brand, while altering it gradually, they just flat out killed it.  No montages, a crappier intro song, no After Hours (whose brilliant idea was that?), no Satellite Hot Stove (mind you, it was a shell of what it was from years back), a subpar panel.  So easy to change the channel.  And with four other games simultaneously on, why stick around?

[Nik]

I legitimately question how they are going to achieve this over the long haul.  The broader appeal they are striving to achieve is coming at the expense of long-time fans.

Is it? I still watch HNIC and among the long-time fans I know I don't see that there are a lot of people who have stopped watching. I don't think their pre-game and intermission stuff is great now but then again I never have.

I mentioned earlier I really like Strombo, and he has the persona to appeal to a new generation of fans, but he is in the wrong role to do it.  If he was on the ground doing what MacLean is doing, as well as continuing to do the 3-player roundtables (which are excellent), I could see him winning over new fans.  Strombo trying to pretend he can carry a hockey conversation while continually laughing and making love to Kypreos on screen, on the other hand, won't.

Yeah, I mean what I take from that is that whatever George might be able to do, he's not going to be able to do it by himself. Like, he can't "carry a hockey conversation" in the sense of the nuts and bolts inside Baseball variety that HNIC lives and dies with but he's a hockey fan. He's a bright guy. He can have a conversation about hockey. The trick is to surround him with people who can play off that.

[CarltonTheBear]

From a David Shoalts article yesterday:

While TSN made a terrible mistake in allowing the offending tweet on the air, this did not result in any ratings damage in its trade-deadline coverage. It scored a big win over Sportsnet, as an average of 206,000 viewers watched its 10 hours of coverage from 8 a.m. Monday to 6 p.m., compared to just 76,000 for Sportsnet. The audience peaked at 491,000 at the NHL's 3 p.m. deadline and a total of 2.3 million viewers saw at least part of TSN's show compared to 1.1 million for Sportsnet. (TSN's parent company, BCE Inc., owns 15 per cent of The Globe and Mail.).

TSN crushed Sportsnet in terms of ratings on deadline day.

[Potvin29]

Not really surprising.  Especially with the internet there's not really need for more than one deadline broadcast, and if people choose one I'm not surprised they go with the one that's been around longer.

[Nik]

From a David Shoalts article yesterday:

While TSN made a terrible mistake in allowing the offending tweet on the air, this did not result in any ratings damage in its trade-deadline coverage. It scored a big win over Sportsnet, as an average of 206,000 viewers watched its 10 hours of coverage from 8 a.m. Monday to 6 p.m., compared to just 76,000 for Sportsnet. The audience peaked at 491,000 at the NHL's 3 p.m. deadline and a total of 2.3 million viewers saw at least part of TSN's show compared to 1.1 million for Sportsnet. (TSN's parent company, BCE Inc., owns 15 per cent of The Globe and Mail.).

TSN crushed Sportsnet in terms of ratings on deadline day.

The interesting thing about that to me though is, and I think this a lot about the NFL pre-game shows, is there a point where Sportsnet is getting so badly beaten where they'd start seriously considering changing things up and actually doing something substantially different. I mean, I know that we here are a just a particular corner of the net and maybe a bit of an esoteric one but a lot of us seemed to say that we'd prefer a more stripped down less "Sports Shouting" sort of deadline coverage. Is there a breaking point where Sportsnet finally says that they may be better off going after those sorts of fans.

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

From a David Shoalts article yesterday:

While TSN made a terrible mistake in allowing the offending tweet on the air, this did not result in any ratings damage in its trade-deadline coverage. It scored a big win over Sportsnet, as an average of 206,000 viewers watched its 10 hours of coverage from 8 a.m. Monday to 6 p.m., compared to just 76,000 for Sportsnet. The audience peaked at 491,000 at the NHL's 3 p.m. deadline and a total of 2.3 million viewers saw at least part of TSN's show compared to 1.1 million for Sportsnet. (TSN's parent company, BCE Inc., owns 15 per cent of The Globe and Mail.).

TSN crushed Sportsnet in terms of ratings on deadline day.

The interesting thing about that to me though is, and I think this a lot about the NFL pre-game shows, is there a point where Sportsnet is getting so badly beaten where they'd start seriously considering changing things up and actually doing something substantially different. I mean, I know that we here are a just a particular corner of the net and maybe a bit of an esoteric one but a lot of us seemed to say that we'd prefer a more stripped down less "Sports Shouting" sort of deadline coverage. Is there a breaking point where Sportsnet finally says that they may be better off going after those sorts of fans.

I hope so.

[seahawk]

I watched bits and pieces of both coverage. I prefer the insiders on TSN to those on Sportsnet. However, I didn't enjoy the 'entertainment' segments on TSN. You are a damn sports channel. Stick to what you know.

[LuncheonMeat]

I miss the old HNIC.

You and me both.  I used to really enjoy the opening montage, but now I just forward past it.  Even when the Leafs were doing well I skipped it.  I also miss the Hot Stove segment as it was.

When I lived in Toronto I didn't really enjoy the TSN telecasts, but now they don't look so bad.