“Bettman has only a marginal interest in the weaker teams. He only wants the NHL to make a bigger profit as a whole.” -- Dominik Hasek

April 3, 2007

Seriously, WTF?!

You can't watch an NHL game on ESPN, but you can watch JUMP ROPE COMPETITIONS.

Are they serious?! ESPN, the sports network to end all sports networks, did away with all coverage of professional hockey after the lockout of 04-05, including the popular NHL 2Night highlight show. Instead, they now air poker, dominos, competitive eating and jump rope competitions. You can't tell me that jumping rope pulls more viewers and more ad money than professional hockey.

Holy crap.

6 comments:

B_Washington said...

As you already read ni my blog today, ESPN has killed some sports, in my opinion. They have tried to become bigger than the sport. We now have an hour and a half superbowl halftime shows which almost always overshadow the game itself.

While not just ESPN they were a giant driving factor behind it. While it's nice that they show soem things that I wouldn't be able to see without a network dedicated soley to sports, like US soccer games, all their sports talk has lead to the ruining of sports.

I'm glad they don't air hockey. They would try to change the broadcast for rating instead of letting the game sell itself (even though I miss Gary thorne calling games. He's the best)

Dear Lord Stanley said...

You make a very good point, just as you did in your original post. The messenger definitely has a direct impact on the message when it comes to professional sports.

But, on the flipside, those Super Bowl pre-game and halftime shows have played a major role in expanding the popularity of football. The Super Bowl is the biggest single-day sporting event in the world.

I guess it depends on the direction hockey wants to go: sell its soul for ratings like football, or cling to what makes it great and suffer in obscurity...

Tapeleg said...

ESPN looks at the bottom line, and the bottom line is, Poker is cheap to produce and hockey isn't. Is that the only reason? No. Not even close. But poker and dominoes and darts and eating and every kind of crap ass "game" like this can be edited and cut into a perfect little shape, so it fits in an hour, and you get the dramatic points right on schedule. You know that, in a poker show, that if a guy goes all in with at 9:57, he is going to lose.

ESPN used to know it had a certain amount of responsability. They could make or break a sport, and late night ESPN had the wacky and wild stuff that no one ever showed, like Austrailian Rules Football.

ESPN has gone to hell in a handbasket. They used to be fun. Now they are just like their parent company, Disney. Bland.

As for Gary Thorne, I ate sushi next to him in Minnesota at the World Cup of Hockey 2004. He is a really nice person to boot.

David said...

Remember when you could watch sports on ESPN and music videos on MTV?

If you are under 25, you may not.

Dear Lord Stanley said...

I am definitely over 25, so I do remember the good old days of truth in cable television advertising.

B_Washington said...

With the internet being the way it is.. I'll settle for suffering in obscurity. I can get the radio broadcast in any game on the internet, and I'm sure I can get video of any game over the internet (or will be able to in the next 3 years). I can watch every game for a small fee.

I can read a blog for every team and follow my team with the greatest of ease, without ever going to ESPN. So they can continue to put jump-roing on TV, I'll just stop watching them.

Topic Guide

 
template by free-web-template.blogspot.com