Attendance down in the NHL
Michigan
Posts: 4,942 ✭
in Sports Talk
Season too long, competition from baseball playoffs and the NFL. Who besides diehards are interested in
hockey in October?
The Colorado Avalanche played before empty seats at home for the first time in nearly 11 years on Tuesday.
Last week, the Los Angeles Kings had their lowest attendance in five years. The Chicago Blackhawks had 8,008 fans in 20,500-seat United Center the same night.
Is hockey attendance in trouble? Commissioner Gary Bettman says it's too early to hit the panic button.
"It's a couple weeks into the season and any speculation would be premature," Bettman was quoted as saying in Tuesday's Los Angeles Times.
Bettman, the Times said, blamed the "schedule being a little different. It's a little premature two to three weeks into the season to be writing attendance stories."
According to the Times, the Kings have eight home games in October, compared to nine in 2005. Last year, they had one crowd of less than 17,000 during that span; this year, they've had only one capacity crowd.
Attendance in Colorado on Monday was 17,681 in the Pepsi Center -- 326 short of capacity. Previously, Colorado had played to 487 consecutive full houses.
Thus far this season, 14 teams are playing to capacity houses nightly -- Montreal, Tampa Bay, Detroit, Philadelphia, Toronto, Calgary, Ottawa, Carolina, Buffalo, Vancouver, Dallas, Minnesota, the New York Rangers and San Jose.
Chicago, meanwhile, is playing to just 61 percent of capacity at the United Center. A year ago, the Blackhawks played to 65 percent of capacity for 41 home games, lowest in the NHL.
hockey in October?
The Colorado Avalanche played before empty seats at home for the first time in nearly 11 years on Tuesday.
Last week, the Los Angeles Kings had their lowest attendance in five years. The Chicago Blackhawks had 8,008 fans in 20,500-seat United Center the same night.
Is hockey attendance in trouble? Commissioner Gary Bettman says it's too early to hit the panic button.
"It's a couple weeks into the season and any speculation would be premature," Bettman was quoted as saying in Tuesday's Los Angeles Times.
Bettman, the Times said, blamed the "schedule being a little different. It's a little premature two to three weeks into the season to be writing attendance stories."
According to the Times, the Kings have eight home games in October, compared to nine in 2005. Last year, they had one crowd of less than 17,000 during that span; this year, they've had only one capacity crowd.
Attendance in Colorado on Monday was 17,681 in the Pepsi Center -- 326 short of capacity. Previously, Colorado had played to 487 consecutive full houses.
Thus far this season, 14 teams are playing to capacity houses nightly -- Montreal, Tampa Bay, Detroit, Philadelphia, Toronto, Calgary, Ottawa, Carolina, Buffalo, Vancouver, Dallas, Minnesota, the New York Rangers and San Jose.
Chicago, meanwhile, is playing to just 61 percent of capacity at the United Center. A year ago, the Blackhawks played to 65 percent of capacity for 41 home games, lowest in the NHL.
0
Comments
Hockey is still a fun game to watch if you understand the game and have a solid team in your area to watch. Fortunately I live in Michigan and follow a team that in recent history has competed annually for the playoffs, scores a lot, has a solid following and keeps its star players as much as any team. The game is more exciting now with less play stopages and no more ties. It's a better game to the eye than really any other sport in my opinion.
Football is still my favorite sport. I suppose that is partially because I played it, so it's always exciting and I can appreciate a players talent because I know what it takes to make certain plays. I've only played hockey on our pond with friends, basketball in gym class years ago or softball on weekends. I might appreciate those games more if I actually competed in them in school or something, who knows? But baseball is still too slow and boring during the regular season and football does have a lot of time waiting until the next play or pauses everytime teams switch from offense to defense. Hockey is going all the time and that's good for a guy like me with ADD
continues to be a trend the NHL could find themselves in trouble in a few years.
Again.. if you dont like hockey.. that is your choice. You do not speak for the rest of the people. Just because you dont want to see it in October... doesnt mean that everyone who does see it in October are "diehards".
<< <i>Thus far this season, 14 teams are playing to capacity houses nightly -- Montreal, Tampa Bay, Detroit, Philadelphia, Toronto, Calgary, Ottawa, Carolina, Buffalo, Vancouver, Dallas, Minnesota, the New York Rangers and San Jose. >>
Granted most of these are "traditional" hockey cities but about all of them have put entertaining and competitive teams on the ice worthy of spending $60+ to watch. (Didn't Buffalo sell an enormous amount of season tickets?) I think the crowds would return to Chicago if they too put a competitive and entertaining team on the ice.
It's early yet and there's a lot of sports going on right now. Hockey is my main sport but even I can't really get into it until at least after the baseball playoffs. (Then again, I don't live in Toronto or Montreal so hockey is not the main sport of my city.)
<< <i>I am not a hockey fan at all, but if I was, where would I see the games? With baseball, football, and basketball - you can always find a game on a major national or regional network. I honestly don't know who broadcasts NHL games anymore, wasn't it the "Outdoor Network" or some low tier cable channel like that? >>
The cable network is now called "VS" which was changed form OLN (Outdoor Life Network).
They actually do a decent job with their broadcasts. My interest in NHL hockey sank when the Whalers left, but one of my sons likes to watch the Bruins on NESN or the Avalanche on VS.
<< <i>I am not a hockey fan at all, but if I was, where would I see the games? With baseball, football, and basketball - you can always find a game on a major national or regional network. I honestly don't know who broadcasts NHL games anymore, wasn't it the "Outdoor Network" or some low tier cable channel like that? >>
Yes, Outdoor Life I think it was now called "versus" or something like that. Why does hockey even bother in
cities like Los Angeles? I remember reading that they averaged only 120 households tuned in at any time
to a hockey game in a metropolitan are of how many millions? The NHL needs to contract for its own good
down to a manageable number of teams to reflect the interest level of the sport.
Bottom line? Put together a decent, competetive team and the fans will show... I think contraction would be laughed at by any owner of any NHL team, as I have a hard time believing that any of these millionaires made an investment that they are losing money hand over fist on... as was pointed out, it's not like teams stay on the market very long when they are up for sale...
<< <i>The NHL needs to contract for its own good down to a manageable number of teams to reflect the interest level of the sport. >>
I once thought that way, but the league will never be able to grow the sport in "non-traditional" markets if they aren't there at all. Who would have predicted 5 years ago that Tampa and Carolina would be selling out all of their games in 2006? San Jose is hardly a traditional market either.
With the new CBA in place, which pegs player salaries to revenues, owners can now better afford to play in buildings that don't sell out regularly, so even if average league attendance drops to 2,000 per game, that will be reflected in lower player salaries across the board, as enforced by the cap. Obviously I'm brushing a complicated issue in broad strokes, but the bottom line is the NHL is hardly in trouble, and anyone trying to make a story only 6 games into the season needs their heads examined.
As far as Chicago goes, given the team they've put on the ice over the past few years, it's no surprise their attendance continues to drop. Their ownership group is livining in the dark ages, still insisting on blacking out TV coverage for home games. However, if the team continues to perform as they have so far this season, I wouldn't be shocked to see some of the old fans returning.
<< <i>Why does hockey even bother in cities like Los Angeles? >>
Well lets see what their attendance was:
Oct 7 18,118.
Oct 10 14394
Oct 12 14167
Oct 14 17052
Oct 16 17417
Oct 18 14617
Capacity is 18118.
And if there was no interest in hockey in LA, then why would the team (who havent had a contender for quite some time), still be around 39 years??
Jay
<< <i>but when Fox had to make the puck glow so Americans could see it, well, don't get me started. >>
Aren't you the same guy who got all angry when someone said a Canadian had ripped them off on an ebay transaction? Then you make a statement like that. That stupid idea lasted what, 10 minutes? Like any fan, American or otherwise, actually thought that was a good idea.
Jay
<< <i>Aren't you the same guy who got all angry when someone said a Canadian had ripped them off on an ebay transaction? >>
(A) It wasn't 80sToyguy who spoke up, and (B) the original poster in that thread apologized for and edited his comments about Canadians. Get your facts straight.
shocking.
truly shocking.
zzzz.
<< <i>
<< <i>The NHL needs to contract for its own good down to a manageable number of teams to reflect the interest level of the sport. >>
I once thought that way, but the league will never be able to grow the sport in "non-traditional" markets if they aren't there at all. Who would have predicted 5 years ago that Tampa and Carolina would be selling out all of their games in 2006? San Jose is hardly a traditional market either.
With the new CBA in place, which pegs player salaries to revenues, owners can now better afford to play in buildings that don't sell out regularly, so even if average league attendance drops to 2,000 per game, that will be reflected in lower player salaries across the board, as enforced by the cap. Obviously I'm brushing a complicated issue in broad strokes, but the bottom line is the NHL is hardly in trouble, and anyone trying to make a story only 6 games into the season needs their heads examined.
As far as Chicago goes, given the team they've put on the ice over the past few years, it's no surprise their attendance continues to drop. Their ownership group is livining in the dark ages, still insisting on blacking out TV coverage for home games. However, if the team continues to perform as they have so far this season, I wouldn't be shocked to see some of the old fans returning. >>
I totally agree, but it's hard not to get nostalgic for the 'old' NHL. The Sea of White in Winnepeg (this came a little later, I know, but it still 'feels' old school), Peter Stastny tearing it up for the Nordiques, Harold Snepsts being an all around bad ass without a helmet, bench clearing brawls that took 20 minutes to break up... I know why they did what they did, but the game did, IMO, lose a little bit of it's soul when it began aggressively marketing to non-traditional markets.
<< <i>Aren't you the same guy who got all angry when someone said a Canadian had ripped them off on an ebay transaction? >> >>
I looked it up, and it was someone else; my bad.
Still a stupid comment.
The other night, they had a game against Edmonton at home. It was a dead night on TV and what do the Blackhawks do? They blackout the game!!!! Nice marketing there, boys.
Sorry, hockey and Blackhawk fans. In Chicago, only 6 games or so will be televised, and knowing how management is, they will all be during the World Series and Super Bowl. The whole Blackhawks team can walk down Michigan avenue and no one would care.
I love the following dialogue from years back.
REPORTER: "The problem is that the Blackhawks don't have enough players with playoff experience"
BLACKHAWKS GM: "That's wrong, we have many players with playoff experience"
REPORTER: "Yeah, too bad they all play for other teams now"
Remember these Chuck Norris Facts
1. When Chuck Norris does a pushup, he isn't lifting himself up, he's pushing the Earth down
2. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, Chuck Norris can actually roundhouse kick you yesterday
3. There are no such things as lesbians, just women who have not yet met Chuck Norris
Jay
<< <i>but when Fox had to make the puck glow so Americans could see it, well, don't get me started. >>
Now not many Americans can see a game at all. I don't know. I might be behind the times with regard to my TV channel availability but seeing as there's no more hockey on ESPN (i.e. regular cable) I don't know how the league can expect to market itself- especially if they are trying to sell a new and improved game. Even when I go to a friend's house who has the Pheasent Hunting Network or whatever it calls it self now, there never seems to be a game on. (Even when there is a game on it's between two teams that don't interest me.) I know it was ESPN's decision not to renew the NHL TV contract but perhaps the rights fee was astronomical. As much as I love hockey I realize its place in the U.S. and you ain't going to get football TV money.