CBC/Rogers NHL Deal: "CBCmegedon"

[d_phaneuf]

I really don't think people would mind paying the CBC a license fee if they had anywhere near the quality of the BBC, and then like the BBC went commercial free

but when the network isn't one that the large majority of Canada watches outside of HNIC, why should it be invested in

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

The TV Licence in the UK is £145.50 per annum.

That is ~$260.

You'd have fricken coronaries if the Canadian government tried to pull off that ####.

Besides, if you wanted a comparable service, you'd have to pay a crapload more than that because the costs resulting from the geographical differences.

Besides, I reckon CBC provides a much better regional offering than the BBC.

Yeah but British folks actually watch the BBC as it owns highest share of their market. Nobody really watches CBC when there's no hockey. It's one thing to charge them for something everyone uses and anther thing to charge them for something few use.

[nik-]

Because the CBC focuses on making programs that either only make old people laugh, or reflect a Canada that doesn't exist anymore.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

The TV Licence in the UK is £145.50 per annum.

That is ~$260.

Per person, or per household?

[Badgers Nose]

Mr D is funny.

[nik-]

oh god no.

[d_phaneuf]

also have to remember its not just one BBC Channel they are paying for

BBC 1
BBC 2
BBC 3
BBC 4
BBC Parliament
BBC News
2 BBC Child Channels

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by getbak

Per person, or per household?

household

[browna]

Wonder if this is Bob Cole's swan song? Can't see him leave the CBC and come across to Snet just to do the 2nd or 3rd game on the simulcast Snet/CBC HNIC this fall.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by browna

Wonder if this is Bob Cole's swan song? Can't see him leave the CBC and come across to Snet just to do the 2nd or 3rd game on the simulcast Snet/CBC HNIC this fall.

This is it for sure imo. He's 80, he'll just retire.

[bluejays]

Shame if it is. His calls and voice are great, despite the nitpicking we do at the small mistakes.

[browna]

Originally Posted by fleury

Shame if it is. His calls and voice are great, despite the nitpicking we do at the small mistakes.

His calls are pretty spirited and enjoyable when the action heats up. However, it's also only exciting if you're a neutral fan to the game, and aren't fussed about the details that he botches or misses.

His mistakes and mis-calls are pretty bad (in the limited watching tonight, the past 5 mins of OT, he's mixed up Chicago and LA three times). He was on the decline, when he did the last 3 games of the SJ series and the SCF in 2004, but fun to listen to, and for his age, good on him.

[MRCboicgy]

It's all in the cadence.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by troutman

If Harper would place his partisan, er government advertising on CBC that number would likely double.

[Arsenal14]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

It's all in the cadence.

Exactly. One of the biggest things a play-by-play announcer can do is convey the excitement of what is happening. Bob Cole does an amazing job of that, probably the best in the business. That's one thing the Sportsnet Flames broadcasts have been lacking - crowd noise being another big one.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

also have to remember its not just one BBC Channel they are paying for

BBC 1
BBC 2
BBC 3
BBC 4
BBC Parliament
BBC News
2 BBC Child Channels

Plus the comedies are actually funny and the documentaries are always good. CBC does an ok job with the passionate eye but it is not as good as BBC.

[Northendzone]

I'll miss hearing bob, just as I miss hearing Don Wittman......these two guys could describe paint drying and make it interesting.........

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I'll miss hearing bob, just as I miss hearing Don Wittman......these two guys could describe paint drying and make it interesting.........

Hockey play calling seems to be a lost art. Nowadays all the guys who go into sports broadcasting seem to want to be wise-cracking Jim Rome knock-offs. Or they're hockey nerds. A compelling voice just doesn't seem to rate in the top-5 qualities the broadcasters look for.

[calgarygeologist]

I don't usually watch the intermission broadcasts (with the exception of Coach's Corner) but I noticed that Andi Petrillo was absent last night? Is she done with HNIC now that the World Cup is just around the corner?

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Hockey play calling seems to be a lost art. Nowadays all the guys who go into sports broadcasting seem to want to be wise-cracking Jim Rome knock-offs. Or they're hockey nerds. A compelling voice just doesn't seem to rate in the top-5 qualities the broadcasters look for.

Totally agree. I think it started when Craig Kilborn went from Sports Center to the Daily Show and then the Late Late Show. Every sports announcer thought they just needed to be funny and then would get a job offer in Hollywood.

I do not see the need for a hockey announcer to have a funny or goofy persona. They should show professionalism and exude a love and knowledge of hockey. There can still be funny moments to the broadcast, just keep it to reporting funny stories from players and pointing out in game bloopers. If you want to tell jokes become a comedian or a writer.

Just to add, it is interesting that Craig Kilborn has pretty much disappeared while his two late night replacements became iconic in their roles.