PDA

View Full Version : 2016 Outdoor Games



Blue Heaven
03-08-2016, 07:23 PM
OMG, how much more of this?

:tweet: @Real_ESPNLeBrun
Deals still haven't been finalized but plan for other outdoor games: Detroit at Toronto Jan 1, Chicago at St. Louis Jan 2 (W. Classic) con't
:tweet: @Real_ESPNLeBrun
And a Philly at Pittsburgh outdoor game too next season. Again, nothing finalized yet. But that's tentative plan now

And can't forget the Oilers @ Winnipeg too.

Vodka Drunkenski
03-08-2016, 07:27 PM
Too

Many

Outdoor

Games

Drew a Penalty
03-08-2016, 07:36 PM
So just like the same teams huh?

Karan
03-08-2016, 08:56 PM
What the hell is up the same teams getting outdoor games? Apart from WPG they need to start featuring some other markets.

RichieNextel305
03-08-2016, 09:18 PM
Enough of Chicago. And Detroit. And even us.

Phil in Absentia
03-08-2016, 09:31 PM
How many fucking games is Chicago going to play outdoors?

Drew a Penalty
03-08-2016, 09:35 PM
How many fucking games is Chicago going to play outdoors?

All of them until they're shitty again.

CreaseCrusader91
03-08-2016, 09:39 PM
How many fucking games is Chicago going to play outdoors?

Seriously, if it wasn't ridiculous before it really is now. Idea was that these outdoor games would be used to generate buzz and grow the game to casual fans. That mandate seems to have changed due to over saturation, but it isn't like they are the only team that can draw.

Morphinity
03-08-2016, 09:51 PM
Chicago again? Jesus.

Karan
03-08-2016, 10:28 PM
This is going to be CHI's 5th appearance ugh.

RichieNextel305
03-08-2016, 11:01 PM
It's a little much now with the overuse of Chicago. Like others have said, they are not the only good team with a big fanbase. Enough is enough.

NYRangers92
03-09-2016, 08:43 AM
I'd put money down on Buffalo hosting the Winter Classic in 2018, if NHL goes to Pyeongchang. Would be 10th anniversary of them hosting the first one, too.

SaveByRichter35
03-09-2016, 09:41 AM
Pittsburgh again too, meh

Pete
03-09-2016, 10:00 AM
I mean you can't blame the NHL for including teams with the best attendance records, or the "best player in the game".

Future
03-09-2016, 11:35 AM
What the hell is up the same teams getting outdoor games? Apart from WPG they need to start featuring some other markets.
Well the problem is that nobody would watch about 20 teams in this league unless they are playing against the major market teams. There's a reason the Kings had two outdoor games in freaking California. People watch them. Winnipeg could host an awesome outdoor game every year, but if they're playing Nashville, nobody gives a fuck.

phillyb™
03-09-2016, 11:55 AM
I mean you can't blame the NHL for including teams with the best attendance records, or the "best player in the game".

and ratings. they want people to watch these games.
what's going to draw a larger market? the blackhawks or the tampa bay lightning?

Blue Heaven
03-09-2016, 12:01 PM
Problem is the ratings have been steadily tanking. Besides the hardcore fans, hardly anyone is watching these games.


According to ratings data released by NBC, the game between the Blackhawks and the Minnesota Wild drew a 1.2 overnight rating, the lowest rating that any outdoor game has had on broadcast television.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/madhouse-enforcer/Blackhawks-Wild-Outdoor-Game-Draws-Record-Low-Ratings--369859441.html#ixzz42QTfI3je


NBC, which broadcast the game in the United States, reported that only 2.775 million viewers took in Montreal’s 5–1 dismantling of the B’s at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro, Mass. That was the smallest audience yet for any of the eight Winter Classics, down approximately 20% from the 2015 game between Washington and Chicago and a whopping 40% from the 2014 contest between Toronto and Detroit.

http://www.si.com/nhl/2016/01/04/2016-winter-classic-ratings-sank-to-all-time-low-montreal-canadiens-boston-bruins

Johnnydollaz18
03-09-2016, 12:27 PM
Rangers and any other Original Six team would probably get a high rating. Hell, I think Rangers-Islanders might get a big draw as well.
Enough with Pittsburgh and Chicago.

Blue Heaven
03-09-2016, 12:51 PM
Rangers and any other Original Six team would probably get a high rating. Hell, I think Rangers-Islanders might get a big draw as well.
Enough with Pittsburgh and Chicago.

I feel like that is so 2014. National ratings werent good. It was good locally.

Phil in Absentia
03-09-2016, 04:38 PM
IMO it's because there's no national story being told. There's nothing to market outside of the fact this is a game played outdoors, which only presents itself to two niche groups — the fans of either team and general NHL fans who largely, as the numbers indicate, don't actaully watch.

Think back to the original HBO 24:7 series for an idea of how to fix this. It's called rivalry. You need a national story being told here. There are so many to choose from it's almost hilarious that the NHL gets it so wrong by falling back on Chicago as a default.

Stars/Hawks was the go-to for next year, if they were insistant on the use of Chicago, specifically becuase of how many ex-Hawks are on the Stars' roster. Not to mention the added benefit of promoting the fact that Dallas has two of the game's most marketable, budding superstars in Benn and Seguin. Instead, we'll get the fucking Blues, and the game's ratings will suffer them. All but guarnateed.

Blue Heaven
03-09-2016, 04:45 PM
IMO it's because there's no national story being told. There's nothing to market outside of the fact this is a game played outdoors, which only presents itself to two niche groups — the fans of either team and general NHL fans who largely, as the numbers indicate, don't actaully watch.

Think back to the original HBO 24:7 series for an idea of how to fix this. It's called rivalry. You need a national story being told here. There are so many to choose from it's almost hilarious that the NHL gets it so wrong by falling back on Chicago as a default.

Stars/Hawks was the go-to for next year, if they were insistant on the use of Chicago, specifically becuase of how many ex-Hawks are on the Stars' roster. Not to mention the added benefit of promoting the fact that Dallas has two of the game's most marketable, budding superstars in Benn and Seguin. Instead, we'll get the fucking Blues, and the game's ratings will suffer them. All but guarnateed.

Hawks/Blues is a nasty rivalry......in the midwest. Im pretty sure I heard Jeremy Roenick mention something last week about how much hatred the 2 teams have for each other that he's never experienced that type of hatred anywhere else. Ive been to a Hawks/Blues game in St. Louis about 4 years ago and it was pretty intense in the stands.

RichieNextel305
03-10-2016, 02:23 AM
While I don't disagree, this is a bit much now with Chicago. It's too much. Even their fans are bored with it.

Pete
03-10-2016, 08:17 AM
Chicago fans aren't bored with the Hawks in an outdoor game. Hockey fans are bored with outdoor games.

Blue Heaven
03-10-2016, 08:34 AM
I would think each one of us in here are more than a casual fan and try to watch as much hockey as we can. I can only speak for myself but as far as these outdoor games, I'll watch the players coming onto the ice, and all that hoopla, then turn the channel within the first 5:00 after faceoff. Bored with it already, and its not only b/c Chicago is in it every year, its because its been over-saturated. If the "hardcore" hockey fans are tuning the game out i can sure bet that the casual fan isnt tuning in either.

jjweimar
03-10-2016, 09:22 AM
Dallas v. Minnesota would be good plus it has a story. You need to figure out a game for a team like Florida or Tampa since they do play in the Atlantic you can have them come up to Boston Buffalo Montreal Ottawa. Get San Jose or Anaheim to Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver. Get other teams involved.