LaParkaMarka Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 Well, most Canadians don't get ESPN. We have TSN instead. So, yeah, haven't seen em.
Guest Choken One Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 SHOCKED! no one is bitching that ESPN waited 15 minutes to mention the game...
the max Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 I am. I was yelling at the TV after they did a breakdown of Michigan v. Ohio. And the line of 'The frozen tundra of Commonwealth Stadium....not as good as the frozen tundra of Lambo field...' Fuck ESPN.
the max Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 It's fine if their know-nothing talking heads think that, but you don't say it on air. I can only imagine the uproar caused by one of them saying, 'and player X in the nba slams this one down! but really, it was just an average play' on a major happening in the sport's history, which is what tonight was with the Heritage Game.
CanadianChris Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 And the line of 'The frozen tundra of Commonwealth Stadium....not as good as the frozen tundra of Lambo field...' Fuck ESPN. Yeah, fuck that shit. It gets way colder for way longer in Edmonton. Green Bay are a bunch of pussies compared to Edmonton.
nl5xsk1 Posted November 23, 2003 Author Report Posted November 23, 2003 A question for Canadians. What do you think of ESPN's Made in America Hockey ads? I'm an American and I think those ads are bullshit. Especially coming from ESPN, who'd rather show a basketball game between two piece of shit colleges that I've never heard of than show an NHL game. ESPN will grace us with occasional hockey coverage but do so with an ad that their people are "making" hockey here in America. Just another reason to hate ESPN.
lomasmoney Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 the reason why ESPN doesn't give a fuck about hockey is because most people outside of Michigan, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maine, Colorado pretty much don't give a fuck about hockey. Places where the NHL is hugely popular are usually places where hockey is commonly played, and I mean for example in Michigan everyone watches hockey whether it be college or pro, but my friend from Texas didn't even know that the Stars had been to the finals before let alone had won a Stanley Cup
CanadianChris Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 the reason why ESPN doesn't give a fuck about hockey is because most people outside of Michigan, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maine, Colorado pretty much don't give a fuck about hockey. Places where the NHL is hugely popular are usually places where hockey is commonly played, and I mean for example in Michigan everyone watches hockey whether it be college or pro, but my friend from Texas didn't even know that the Stars had been to the finals before let alone had won a Stanley Cup If that's the case, then why does ESPN even have the national cable contract, let alone be claiming the game is "Made in America?" Fools. I'm waiting for the day when the Stanley Cup final is relegated to twenty minutes into Sportscenter, after the all-important Mets-Padres series.
CanadianChris Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 Oh, and Guy Lafleur is my hero. Look at what he said yesterday on the state of the NHL: "If (Commissioner Gary Bettman) thinks the game is great tell him to buy a team."
DerangedHermit Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 It was better when Fox had the TV rights to the NHL. Sure, they had the glowing puck and the robots, but at least they were making an effort.
Guest Choken One Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 I believe NHL Will sign with Viacom and they likely play once a week on Spike. They will be worth about $4 million dollars...
the max Posted November 23, 2003 Report Posted November 23, 2003 It was better when Fox had the TV rights to the NHL. Sure, they had the glowing puck and the robots, but at least they were making an effort. But they only had 1 game on a week, usually the Rangers. Once December 4rd hits, ESPN will have at least one game a week, mostly the big 3 (Detroit, Dallas, Avs) but they are actually getting teams that normally don't get TV time (Buffalo, Atlanta, Carolina, Isles, Tampa Bay, Washington, Florida, etc., etc.) I doubt that FOX would ever do that.
The Czech Republic Posted November 24, 2003 Report Posted November 24, 2003 A question for Canadians. What do you think of ESPN's Made in America Hockey ads? I'm an American and I think those ads are bullshit. Especially coming from ESPN, who'd rather show a basketball game between two piece of shit colleges that I've never heard of than show an NHL game. ESPN will grace us with occasional hockey coverage but do so with an ad that their people are "making" hockey here in America. Just another reason to hate ESPN. I laughed out loud at that commercial. This would be like promos for the Toronto Blue Jays that go "Baseball: It's a CANADIAN thang." Yeah, we're manufacturing hockey in America, all right, we're just churnin' out guys like crazy, aren't we? I mean, Mike Modano, Jeremy Roenick, Chris Chelios, and I could go on and on and on. Don't get me wrong, I'm proud to be a citizen of the United States, but let's just credit where it's due and say that no matter how many teams we steal, and no matter how well the Devils and Red Wings do in comparison to the Oilers and Habs, hockey isn't our sport. As for hockey's popular being very regional, as lomasmoney said, well yeah. Of course it is. Try as they may, people in the South just don't care about hockey that much. For all the talk of Gretzky's arrival with the L.A. Kings making hockey a national phenomenon, and the Dallas Stars winning a cup, and all the front-office rhetoric, only Colorado has been a beneficial gain. To ESPN's credit, they do a passable job of covering hockey. Even though every game is seemingly contractually obligated to feature one of the 3Ds, it's decent enough through the regular season. The postseason is fun even though it seemed they tried their damnedest to not let people know the Ottawa Senators were the #1 team in the league and didn't even cover their first round series against Long Island, while Tampa Bay-Washington was there in all its "glory." And then Barry Melrose is a dumb prick, and that other guy has a habit of slipping up and saying "Detroit Wed Wings." Maybe ESPN isn't that good after all. I need CBC.
nl5xsk1 Posted November 24, 2003 Author Report Posted November 24, 2003 It's a catch-22 ... hockey isn't popular in places other than the ones mentioned (New England, Minnesota, Michigan, Colorado, etc.) because it's not shown there. If ESPN showed as many hockey highlights as they do basketball highlights, then fans in Oklahoma or Nebraska or Oregon or Louisiana would start to learn more players names, and teams, and rivalries. Show a game that's got a fight or two, a few pretty goals, a big hit or three, and a few great saves, and people will start to care more about the game. If they don't see any highlights, then they have no reason to become a fan of the game. Show it, and they will come. And fuck ESPN anyways, I'll get the hockey package until the day I die, and use The Hockey News for my information anyways.
Guest Choken One Posted November 24, 2003 Report Posted November 24, 2003 Are you assholes happy? The game was #1 on the TOP TEN of the week and Berman sucked Hockey's flacicd cock for 10 minutes...
CanadianChris Posted November 24, 2003 Report Posted November 24, 2003 Are you assholes happy? The game was #1 on the TOP TEN of the week and Berman sucked Hockey's flacicd cock for 10 minutes... Well, now I can certainly die in peace. ESPN sure showed us. </super-sarcasm>
Red Baron Posted November 24, 2003 Report Posted November 24, 2003 I say all the american hockey teams that did not win the stanley cup should be moved to Canada except the following exceptions (Buffalo, Minnesota, St. Louis, Columbus) and Carolina will be moved back to Hartford. :-D. Those southerners can watch their precious off-season baseball
nl5xsk1 Posted November 24, 2003 Author Report Posted November 24, 2003 Are you assholes happy? The game was #1 on the TOP TEN of the week and Berman sucked Hockey's flacicd cock for 10 minutes... This asshole still isn't happy. I'll be happy when hockey gets comparable attention to basketball, baseball, golf and NASCAR. And is this the Top 10 plays of the week, so it would cover all sports? Having not watched the Top 10, let me ask how many of them were repetitive dunks by college dropouts? Because heaven forbid the first outdoor game in the 80+ year history of the league gets some attention when I could be seeing a 7 foot millionaire jump up and down.
The Czech Republic Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 An awesome outdoor game for next year (it should be an annual thing) would be Maple Leafs vs. Red Wings at Michigan Stadium.
the max Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 Boston @ Montreal in Percival Molson Stadium (I think it's the Alouettes stadium) would be a hell of a game, given the rivalry and such.
CanadianChris Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 Boston @ Montreal in Percival Molson Stadium (I think it's the Alouettes stadium) would be a hell of a game, given the rivalry and such. I hate to say it, but Toronto at Montreal would draw better.
nl5xsk1 Posted November 25, 2003 Author Report Posted November 25, 2003 I want the Bruins in one The problem is the B's don't have a rival worthy of an outdoor game right now; the Habs would work, but like CChris said, the Leafs would draw better. Technically, at this point, I think a Leafs-B's matchup would draw better than a Habs-B's matchup would, too. Until the Bruins have a matchup worthy of a bigass outdoor game, I'd settle for the Beanpot tournament being played outdoors instead of at the Fleet. Put a rink in Fenway for a weekend, and play the tourney there.
treble Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 The thing is, Molson Stadium's football capacity is smaller than the Bell Centre's hockey capacity, so unless they charge out the ass for tickets, they'd probably take a financial hit on it. They could probably add some temporary seats, but they wouldn't be able to match the attendance that Edmonton got.
the max Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 The Beanpot in Fenway would be awesome. I love that tournament and miss that I don't get to see it anymore.
The Czech Republic Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 The thing is, Molson Stadium's football capacity is smaller than the Bell Centre's hockey capacity, so unless they charge out the ass for tickets, they'd probably take a financial hit on it. They could probably add some temporary seats, but they wouldn't be able to match the attendance that Edmonton got. Michigan Stadium could easily surpass it with about 100,000 seats for football alone, plus temporary seating. Do Maple Leafs-Red Wings and you can get fans from Toronto to make the drive, in addition to dedicated fans from elsewhere in the Great Lakes region. It's a winner, in my opinion.
Guest Olympic Slam Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 An awesome outdoor game for next year (it should be an annual thing) would be Maple Leafs vs. Red Wings at Michigan Stadium. No way! Sharks vs. Kings! Roller Hockey match! Outside! On the beach! Winner gets the bikini babes! Losers have to shine the other guys' surf boards!
The Czech Republic Posted November 25, 2003 Report Posted November 25, 2003 An awesome outdoor game for next year (it should be an annual thing) would be Maple Leafs vs. Red Wings at Michigan Stadium. No way! Sharks vs. Kings! Roller Hockey match! Outside! On the beach! Winner gets the bikini babes! Losers have to shine the other guys' surf boards! Who let Bettman in?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now