NHL TV ratings are down across the board on average for Rogers

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Last year it was absolutely worth it. This year, GameCenter Live brought back blackouts. Most Flames games, it won't let you watch

Brutal. Does that include for opposition broadcasts as well?

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by MacFlame

I used to make sure that I tuned in to the Satellite Hot Stove during the second intermission of HNIC. There was always some sort of tidbit that made me immediately open up my laptop and look into the stats of a particular player that "was on the move" or disgruntled, etc.

Now? There's nothing. An unintended consequence of the salary cap has been the collapse of the "rumour mill" and the trade....any trade. Rumours and trades were one of the most exciting parts of hockey and its dead. There's nothing for these guys to talk about.

The inability of a team to quickly improve via the trade market is a real negative for the league and it has lead to some pretty boring intermission talk IMO.

They do the 'notes' thing with Friedman and Cox which is basically the same thing just in the studio.

Your other points regarding trades and all of that stands.

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by Benched

TSN panel: Actually interesting and engaging
CBC panel: basically OK. Enough interesting personalities that you MIGHT not flip to something else.
Sportsnet panel: painful to watch (so why would you?)

Factor in the blackouts/regional restrictions (why do I get the Oilers in Calgary, and Flames in Edmonton??? I get the game is on, but you're just pissing me off not encouraging me to go to the game or the bar to watch it), and having the game on horrible low-def, hard to find channels (seriously SN360, what the hell picture is that?)


It probably does have something to do with the current state of most Canadian teams. It probably also does have something to do with the web content/game center. But it also definitely has something to do with the product and what they're putting out there.

Bob McKenzie is the only interesting person on TSN, the rest of the panel is average to painful. The same for CBC and SN. Do you not have HD channels? SN360, SNFlames, and SN1 are all available in HD. I get that those channels are not the easiest to find. Live games on SN360 don't have the lower ticker on.

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I might be wrong on this and you have a lot more knowledge about this business than I do, I was under the impression that the ratings were suppose to be combined for the broadcasts?

When CBC had HNIC they only carried 2 broadcasts usually nationally with some regional coverage for Habs/Sens locally in those markets if the 1st game was a Toronto game. If you were watching NHL on Saturday it was on CBC and that's it.

Now with the setup there are so many different channels that Rogers is able to collect ad revenue on (CBC, City, Sportsnet, Sportsnet 360, Sportsnet 1) etc

A few articles I had read quoting Rogers executives were saying that they just want viewers on the platform and aren't really worried about which channel people are viewing. Example: A 7 pm EST game might have Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg playing. They just want viewers so they take the data and combine them for all viewing on the early game.

Like I said above I might be wrong here but I think one of the goals was to get viewers watching Rogers stations for their team. People got sick of getting the Leafs rammed down their throat and wanted choice, at least that's my feeling and experience.

Thanks

The ratings are combined for each 3 hour block. You're right about the games at 5 MT are added up into one rating and that can be from 1 to 5 games in that time period. The same thing happens at 8 MT where 1 to 3 games can happen. You're also right about the Leafs getting rammed down everyone's throat, it's terrific to have a choice now.

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

There was something special about tuning in to CBC to watch the Leafs at 5 and then the Flames/Oilers/Canucks at 8. Didn't matter who was playing, I always watched. Now it just feels like I'm watching two regional broadcasts. I think a lot of that has to do with them using the same set. They should create a new set exclusively for HNIC to give it that unique feel, and only have the old CBC people on. No more John Shannon on HNIC. Oh, and for the love of God stop interviewing all those awkward teenaged still-going-through-puberty minor hockey kids! Cringe worthy television.

Originally Posted by hwy19man

That was the primary problem with the CBC having the stinkin' Leafs on all the time. It was not special at all, it was disappointing. This was a network that took too long to make changes. The Canucks come into the league in 1970, the Oilers and Jets in 1979, and then Flames move to Calgary a year later and after years of western complaints, doubleheaders finally happened in 1995.

It did matter who was playing, there was no bloody excuse for the Flames playing on Sat. and not being on HNIC. When that was the case, I didn't watch. The CBC missed out on many Sat. Flames games along with the other teams and ruined people Sat. nights. TSN did the same thing on Wed. nights.

[HotHotHeat]

Yes, Twawwassen... We know.

[Buff]

My parents, and my wife's parents don't get to watch as many Flames games anymore because a lot of them are on SportsnetFlames (302 on Shaw). Neither of them get that channel as a part of their Shaw cable package. Way more are on that channel than in previous years. I can't remember how many were on that channel last year, but it feels like a significant jump from last year to this year, but definitely from before Rogers got the big NHL deal.

So, they are losing out on people who don't get all the channels. Probably not a significant amount but it all adds up with the other people they're missing out on.

[Benched]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Brutal. Does that include for opposition broadcasts as well?

correct.

I had to turn on my work VPN yesterday (head office out East) so I could stream the Flames game. No issues once I was VPN'd.

But without it you can't watch the Dallas or Calgary feeds online.



I'm definitely NOT getting GameCenter next year.

Sucks 'cause my gf was watching TV, so I either have to use GameCenter or kick her off.

[nik-]

The "across the board on average" in this thread's title is really bothering me

Are ratings down across the board, or on average?

[SofaProfessor]

Anecdotal, but I find myself watching a lot less hockey this year than previous. I still catch all the Flames games but if the Flames aren't playing then I'm not tuning into other team's games like I used to. Sometimes when I want to watch an out of market game the channel is blacked out on TV. I'm not going to buy Gamecentre Live if they blackout Flames games as I would want it to be a replacement for my TV package. So I just end up watching something else when the games are blacked out.

With so many media options out there these days it's really quite ridiculous that sports leagues want to make it as hard as possible to enjoy their games. I like the rumours that the NFL is trying to find a streaming partner for their Thursday night games next season. Maybe it will prove that free online streaming with no regional restrictions can be successful and profitable.

[Erick Estrada]

Maybe it's just me but it seems like regardless of what game I'm watching I see a lot of empty seats in all arenas. Even last night you could see empty seats in Chicago and while I know those seats are paid for you never saw an empty seat the past few seasons in that building. I can't recall tuning into a game where the arena looked packed (okay I have in Montreal) regardless of what the paid attendance says. IMO that's not good especially seeing empty seats in markets like Toronto, Madison Square Garden, Philadelphia, Detroit, etc. St Louis and Dallas have good teams and they have lots of empty seats in their lower bowls. Heck the Sharks no longer sell out. I'm not exactly sure why but the league seems to be in a bit of a funk in regards to fan interest.

[nik-]

I've definitely turned more Flames fan and less hockey fan over the last two years. A large part of it is that the game is so homogeneous across the league. Almost every team is playing a very similar cycle system that's it's a little boring. Add the same playstyle across the league to all the shot blocking, a way better overall defensive game and huge goalies and it doesn't exactly scream excitement.

[CKPThunder]

Originally Posted by Buff

My parents, and my wife's parents don't get to watch as many Flames games anymore because a lot of them are on SportsnetFlames (302 on Shaw). Neither of them get that channel as a part of their Shaw cable package. Way more are on that channel than in previous years. I can't remember how many were on that channel last year, but it feels like a significant jump from last year to this year, but definitely from before Rogers got the big NHL deal.

So, they are losing out on people who don't get all the channels. Probably not a significant amount but it all adds up with the other people they're missing out on.

I find this interesting. I have the most basic cable package available and I still receive channel 302. Is it because they are on an older cable box? Weird.

[Enoch Root]

A bit off topic, but this seems like the best place to put this...

My brother comes over on Thursday to watch the game and I cant wait to show him what a game looks like on my new 75" UHD TV.

I turn on the Vancouver game and he says "wow".

I flip it to football and (despite those abominations they called uniforms) he says "wow, that picture is unbelievable".

Then I flip it to the Flames game... silence.

And I said "wow, wtf is that?"

It looked like standard def. Remember when HD tvs came out and if you didn't have an hd feed, the picture was actually worse? That's what the game looked like on Thursday (and it wasn't the first time).

Here's the thing: it can't be a Sportsnet thing, because the Vancouver game was excellent.

And it can't be a Shaw thing, because every other channel (including other Sportsnet channels) are fine.

It appears to be ONLY SportsnetWest games (even when they're on other SN channels).

Are Oiler games this bad, or is it just the Flames?

But seriously, what can we do about this? It's outrageous - we're paying the same as everyone else, but getting a substantially inferior product.

How can we create change?

[Badgers Nose]

Radio is better becasue we dont have to see how stupid the speakers are.

Rogers is spread then and has ultra weak talent.

I tolerate Flames games but never watch any other hockey now.

[dying4acup]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Radio is better becasue we dont have to see how stupid the speakers are.

Rogers is spread then and has ultra weak talent.

I tolerate Flames games but never watch any other hockey now.

To be honest I quite like Friedman and kypreos.

Edit: and Hrudey.

[BigTuna]

The big problem is the Leafs are bad and rebuilding. Once their great prospect pool comes to the big team, ratings will go up. The Leafs are the engine that makes everyone $.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

The big problem is the Leafs are bad and rebuilding. Once their great prospect pool comes to the big team, ratings will go up. The Leafs are the engine that makes everyone $.

My god. That's just flat out trolling.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

The big problem is the Leafs are bad and rebuilding. Once their great prospect pool comes to the big team, ratings will go up. The Leafs are the engine that makes everyone $.

The leafs are always bad though. The ratings were better last year and the leafs were trash again. I'm not sure there's much of a correlation considering ratings are down across the boards as per the OP.

[BigTuna]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

My god. That's just flat out trolling.

Just pointing out they are the biggest draw.

Did you see the Blue Jays ratings? They were insane. Huge market gets excited=people watch.