Because its product is boring
Forum: Why the NHL sucks

no.7
Jul 11, 2007 15:12 ET
There has been a clear trend of falling interest in hockey in recent years. This trend culminated in a 20% fall of the last Cup Final US TV rating from the year before. The table below illustrates the trend:

YearRating
19953.4
19963.6
19974.0
19983.3
19993.4
20003.7
20013.3
20023.6
20032.9
20042.6
20062.3

You can see the same thing on the Internet. This graph shows the number of people visiting one of the biggest hockey websites slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey:

and the nhl.com itself doesn't do much better, even though they keep improving it all the time:

They keep inventing excuses for the ratings going down - hockey is not a good sport for TV, it's not shown on the right channel, people watch less sport and even (the mother of all excuses) that ratings don't matter. Of couse, it's all rubbish. People watch less hockey because it has become boring to watch.
Reply
Anthony19
Jul 27, 2007 05:31 ET
Personally, I love every aspect of the game. The scoring, the defense, the hitting, the fighting, all of it. I'll admit having the same thing over and over again does get boring. Even fighting happening all the time becomes less exciting. Look at now, when a fight happens everyone goes insane. Thats where the NHL goes wrong. They think that scoring wins the fans over. Its not. Its emotion. There are plenty 0-0 games 1-1 games, that were the best I have ever seen. But since they pretty much took out two of the biggest things that get everyone going (Fighting-Hitting), the product becomes boring. 7-6 games aren't going to cut it. Neither is the stupid shootout.

I love when players make beautiful dekes to score and when defenses catch a breakaway player and poke check the puck into the corner, but that happens very rarely. No matter how "Open" you make the game. Now to be fair a 7-6 game every once and awhile could be nice, but a brawl once a week would be nicer. Not every game has to have a fight either. I know people think the Red Wings are pussies, and play a soft game. Well in the fighting aspect, yes they are and do. But in the playoffs they played physical, with emotion, and in two series, did what everyone says they don't do, fight. They played the 3 toughest teams they could of played this past year. 2 of which they beat, and the 3rd which they outplayed and should of taken the series. The way the Wings played in these playoffs is how a team should have played. Hell the Ducks are another good example, they won the cup on a team with character and emotion. They way that series was played, is the way the NHL games should be played.

I also have to say this past playoff was a lot better than 05-06.
Reply
no.7
Jul 27, 2007 06:35 ET
Quote from message by Anthony19
Its emotion.
Exactly. I also think that the biggest problem with the New NHL is that the games are not as emotional as they used to be.
Reply
smelltheglove
Jul 27, 2007 17:42 ET
Quote from message by no.7
Exactly. I also think that the biggest problem with the New NHL is that the games are not as emotional as they used to be.
Do you think that is because of the new breed of player or the rules?
Reply
no.7
Jul 29, 2007 07:44 ET
A whole new breed of players can't develop in a couple of years, so it must be the rules. In fact, it's the way the rules have been applied.

For example, I've seen Brian McGrattan being penalized for things he never did. I've seen him getting penalties for receiving cheap shots. They pretty much tell the coach "McGrattan will get a penalty every time you let him out on the ice". The coach then stops playing him, and then stops dressing him altogether. His place on the roster then goes to some boring 4th-liner.

I've little doubt that this is a deliberate policy of the new NHL. The idea was to get rid of trouble-makers so that soccer moms could bring in their kids without the fear of seeing a Brian McGrattan on the ice.
Reply