Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Stanley Cup final ratings a disaster!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
226 replies to this topic

#121 ubcanuck

ubcanuck

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,027 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:56 PM

I don't know where your numbers come from, but the Globe &Mail is reporting 1.7 million viewers on nbc for game three not the 800,000 you report. And under 2.8 million for the Canucks Bruins game 3 last year. A big drop but likely due to the Boston area watching the Celtics this year, the NBA being much more interesting this year than last and the crap scheduling of not playing every second night.

This whole dead pick thing is stupid. I love this series. LA plays a great game and they are shutting jersey down by playing well. This is great hockey. If you can't appreciate it if would suggest you are not a hockey fan but rather a Nucks fan only. And I could care less what 4 major papers print. They have to sell papers and to do that they write to the lowest common denominator I.e. The uneducated masses.

Edited by ubcanuck, 06 June 2012 - 07:01 PM.


#122 Sedintron

Sedintron

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • Joined: 04-January 12

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:03 PM

I've never watched a cup final until the Canucks were in it last year. It gets boring after the teams you cheer are out.

Posted Image


#123 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:10 PM

I don't know where your numbers come from, but the Globe &Mail is reporting 1.7 million viewers on nbc for game three not the 800,000 you report. And under 2.8 million for the Canucks Bruins game 3 last year. A big drop but likely due to the Boston area watching the Celtics this year, the NBA being much more interesting this year than last and the crap scheduling of not playing every second night.

This whole dead pick thing is stupid. I love this series. LA plays a great game and they are shutting jersey down by playing well. This is great hockey. If you can't appreciate it if would suggest you are not a hockey fan but rather a Nucks fan only. And I could care less what 4 major papers print. They have to sell papers and to do that they write to the lowest common denominator I.e. The uneducated masses.


I posted a link. The numbers I posted where the American ratings, Globe and mail reported Canadian numbers. You contradict yourself in your own post. You use a news paper source to try to disclaim what I said, and then immediately slam news papers. The only newspaper out of the ones that would be biased in this situation would be the Globe and Mail, because their parent company owns an NHL franchise.

Not only did I supply a link to a credible source backing the numbers I said, you are welcome to Google it and see for yourself how many sources there are.

#124 soshified

soshified

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,963 posts
  • Joined: 11-March 09

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:12 PM

I don't know where your numbers come from, but the Globe &Mail is reporting 1.7 million viewers on nbc for game three not the 800,000 you report. And under 2.8 million for the Canucks Bruins game 3 last year. A big drop but likely due to the Boston area watching the Celtics this year, the NBA being much more interesting this year than last and the crap scheduling of not playing every second night.

This whole dead pick thing is stupid. I love this series. LA plays a great game and they are shutting jersey down by playing well. This is great hockey. If you can't appreciate it if would suggest you are not a hockey fan but rather a Nucks fan only. And I could care less what 4 major papers print. They have to sell papers and to do that they write to the lowest common denominator I.e. The uneducated masses.


Why would Boston watch LA vs NJD? Even with or without Celtics, i bet they're not going to contribute 1 million more viewers. Also, without reports and such, i can tell that last year's finals have way more viewers than this year's.

This hockey is boring. I honestly can't watch more than 3 minutes. And don't label me as the Canucks fans only crap, I've enjoyed the previous 4/5 SCF pretty well.

In all, its different opinions. Many people are hockey fans and they dislike this series. You can't just say they're not hockey fans because they hate this series.
Hockey can mean many different things to different people



 


#125 ubcanuck

ubcanuck

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,027 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:14 PM

Expanding nets? Floating blue lines? Why not just invent a new game. The problems are twofold. One, too many teams means too many marginal players and two, the equipment gives players a sense of being invulnerable and so shots are blocked that used to get through and hits are made with no physical pain on either player.

The game needs no changes, certainly none like those I mentioned. Go watch b'ball if you need to see scoring adnauseum.

#126 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:17 PM

Why would Boston watch LA vs NJD? Even with or without Celtics, i bet they're not going to contribute 1 million more viewers. Also, without reports and such, i can tell that last year's finals have way more viewers than this year's.

This hockey is boring. I honestly can't watch more than 3 minutes. And don't label me as the Canucks fans only crap, I've enjoyed the previous 4/5 SCF pretty well.

In all, its different opinions. Many people are hockey fans and they dislike this series. You can't just say they're not hockey fans because they hate this series.
Hockey can mean many different things to different people


We forget some people only grew up watching "dead puck" era hockey. They are welcome to find a more defensive/strategic game entertaining, but ratings are down. So a majority do not fine this watchable at the moment.

#127 r3pLaY

r3pLaY

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 573 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 08

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:30 PM

this is the first time in 20 years i have not watched the entire playoffs. Once the Canucks got tossed i tryed to watch, but once all the big teams got tossed aswell there was nothing but booring trap teams left and i could not stand to watch this type of hockey again. Not to mention the Horrible HORRIBLE officiating that has been rampid threw the entire playoffs.
Posted Image

#128 puckluv

puckluv

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 316 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:37 PM

stanley cup is in the balance and the refs suck, imho

Always turn a negative situation into a positive situation. Michael Jordon


#129 sting

sting

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 11

Posted 06 June 2012 - 10:11 PM

Minus about a million to both of you, the NHL got into this mess because of too many stupid rule changes, everytime you change the rules its like a butterfly effect, it causes more problems, then more rule changes are made trying to fix the problems the first rule change caused, little Napoleon tried to fix something that wasn't broken and made things worse. You make rule changes to promote offense, the coaches will focus all their energy on defenses to beat it.

The root of the problem is over expansion, we need to let about six teams of dead wood die off, that would reduce hooking and holding by removing about 120 of the weakest skaters from the league.



I disagree.......The talent level of the league has never been higher. More nations than ever are producing elite level players and the US is starting to produce almost as many NHL players as Canada. I work with a guy that played in the NHL in the 80's~90's and in his own words the leagues players are faster, bigger and more skilled. Your argument was relevant about 10 years ago.

My ideas are radical and if you read my post carefully you would see that my overall preference would be BIGGER ICE (92 wide) And REDUCED GOALIE EQUIPMENT. The problem is the owners don't want to lose seats and the goalies constantly whine about not being safe with less equipment. SO ......simple adjustments can be made to offset this.

The NHL fails if it is not constantly looking for ways to better the game. The NBA adopted 3 pt lines, shot clocks and 3 pt lines to produce a better product and obviously it's worked amazingly. I continue to watch the playoffs and am a fan of the game.I have been totally impressed by how good LA has been. But the style of play that is successful today is going to do nothing but drag the NHL back to the 90's dead puck era. If teams are rewarded for attacking style offense and skill then Coaches will have no choice but to follow suit with strategies to create more chances. Win Win IMO

Edited by sting, 06 June 2012 - 10:14 PM.


#130 Zamboni_14

Zamboni_14

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 03

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:29 PM

If a penalty is a penalty in October, the same thing should be called in the last game of the season or the second round of the playoffs. Pissing around with the nets, for a traditionalist like me is wrong. The Internation ice surface is the only change to the game that I would approve whole-heartedly. When you hear commentators saying stuff like how much more did he have to do to draw a whistle? I think things are really being missed, and not just the obvious ones. Off-sides, how many have been missed, and didn't more than one goal result of an offside in this playoff season, so far?
Saw a game in Linkoping Sweden last fall, the game had everything and more that the NHL has, other than overall talent. Which I would say was highend AHL. The trap would be at the very least, not so obvious.
But I guess if an NHL coach wants to win and stay employed, he does the best he can, with what he has to work with.


I know a few people were against my idea, but since you were the first... I'll just quote your response (so this whole post isn't directly at you.)

First, the whole penalty thing... I get what you are saying with "if it's a penalty in October" part. But once again I'll point out that several people were upset after game 1 against the Kings that the refs were calling too much... so I kept bumping it to prove a point that when you call "everything" you still get people all up in arms over penalties. Personally, I hate it when a ref calls "boarding" or "charging" on huge LEGAL hits (I know not all of them are legal... I'm only talking about the legal hits that the vast majority would agree was legal.) That takes away a huge part of the game because players start to become "shy" of throwing a big hit (which could easily change the momentum of a game.)

as for the net size... (so this actually goes out to those that were against the idea of raising the goal height 6 inches.)

I too am a goalie, and usually I am not a fan of changing things when it comes to goalies... but hear me out on this;
1) raising the net 6" doesn't force goalies to "re-learn" the net. Knowing where you are in your net area (post to post, center of the net, etc.) is a huge thing for goalies... so making the nets wider I am totally against. BUT, if you just raise it 6", then goalies wouldn't have to "re-learn" their positions in front of their own net.
2) most goalies today are 6'2" tall and can cover the upper corners from their knees. 12 years ago, the average goalie was 6 feet tall and could cover the upper corners from their knees (while in a butterfly save position) and back in the 80s goalies were averaging around 5'10"/5'11" tall... so in the last 30 years, the average height has gone up 3-4 inches (again, allowing them to cover the upper parts of the net easier and not have to get back on their feet as fast.) Also with the added height, that means their legs are longer as well.. and can cover more of the bottom of the net. You raise it 6" and you are forcing goalies to get back up and not just pad-slide around the net the whole time.
3) high-stick goals/playing the puck. Most players are around 6'-6'1" mark... and can play a puck with their stick as long as it's below their shoulders. So the height in which a player can play the puck has grown over time... yet you can't knock a puck in if you make contact above the 4' crossbar (which hasn't been allowed to change.)
4) pad size doesn't help cover "higher" in the net. I'm not a fan of reducing pad size (since players are able to shoot harder and harder more consistently,) but with this change... it doesn't matter how "fat" a goalie is, because they still couldn't cover the top of the net as easily from their knees. Actually the larger chest protector might hinder them more than help (most goalies wear straps over their chest pads to keep them from "raising" up into their neck/head.)

I know these are just 4 examples supporting the idea... but I'd like to hear some examples of why it's not a good idea to raise it 6" (besides the idea of tradition... if we stuck to that, then goalies would get penalties for dropping to the ice.)

#131 Zamboni_14

Zamboni_14

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 03

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:41 PM

the d-man was recently allowed to slightly impede the forechecking player in an effort to prevent injuries to his d-partner who is retrieving the puck and is about to be destroyed by the forechecker. that's not going to change.


not true, it's been happening for over 10 years now (allowing the defenseman to impede the forward) while the change you are speaking of wasn't even looked at till late in '08 when Kurtis Foster broke his leg against the Sharks (that's when the idea of protecting the d-man getting the puck was looked at.)

#132 MrsCanuck

MrsCanuck

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,635 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 09

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:50 PM

2 most boring teams and passion-less fan bases in the League.

What do you expect.
Posted Image

#133 Kingsman

Kingsman

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 922 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 04

Posted 06 June 2012 - 11:58 PM

How do you find one of those so called 'kings fans'?


Well, you'd be hard pressed to find a Kings fan posting on a Canucks mb during the SC Finals.... but lo and behold you found one! lolbtw; I've been a member here for a long time and used to post regularly a long time ago; I just went missing for awhile.

#134 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,934 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 07 June 2012 - 12:48 AM

LOL @ Conan's bandwagon comments directed towards the Kings 'fans' during his show tonight.
Posted Image

#135 BRAVEMAN91

BRAVEMAN91

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 653 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 03

Posted 07 June 2012 - 01:38 AM

I think the potential riots in LA after they win/or blow this series in 7 will draw more ratings then the series itself.
Posted Image

Follow Me on Twitter: @braveman91
Checkout my Canuck videos on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/braveman91

#136 nucklehead

nucklehead

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,005 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 03

Posted 07 June 2012 - 05:27 AM

I've never watched a cup final until the Canucks were in it last year. It gets boring after the teams you cheer are out.


Right, so you're not a hockey fan. Got it.

 

 


#137 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,238 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 07 June 2012 - 06:31 AM

not true, it's been happening for over 10 years now (allowing the defenseman to impede the forward) while the change you are speaking of wasn't even looked at till late in '08 when Kurtis Foster broke his leg against the Sharks (that's when the idea of protecting the d-man getting the puck was looked at.)

it's been happening for decades, hell probably since the beginning of the sport from some of the old games i've watched, but the past couple years they've been stricter on interference calls so the d-man wasn't allowed to impede the forechecker even close to as much, then they relaxed the rules around it this year after looking at how to protect players. it was widely reported this season.

Edited by avelanch, 07 June 2012 - 06:36 AM.


#138 JLumme

JLumme

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,106 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 07:43 AM

I've never watched a cup final until the Canucks were in it last year. It gets boring after the teams you cheer are out.


The detroit pittsburgh finals were pretty entertaining - but I agree, NHL hockey has gotten pretty boring if you don't support any of the teams in it.

#139 JLumme

JLumme

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,106 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 07:46 AM

Right, so you're not a hockey fan. Got it.


So you have to force yourself to watch a bad product to be a hockey fan? Got it.

#140 Spotted Zebra

Spotted Zebra

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,447 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 07

Posted 07 June 2012 - 08:31 AM

Expanding nets? Floating blue lines? Why not just invent a new game. The problems are twofold. One, too many teams means too many marginal players and two, the equipment gives players a sense of being invulnerable and so shots are blocked that used to get through and hits are made with no physical pain on either player.

The game needs no changes, certainly none like those I mentioned. Go watch b'ball if you need to see scoring adnauseum.


We don't need the goals to be coming in like they were in pitsburgh - philly. What we need is to be drawn in to watch more than a couple minutes at a time. Watching the neutral zone trap for 5 minutes followed by 30 seconds of offensive pressure is not what encourages me to watch more games.

I watched the last 10 minutes of game 4 more than enough.

I have a cardio machine in the TV room, and I watched re runs of everybody loves raymond over the first period of this game.

Vancouver - Boston , especially the games in Vancouver WERE ENTERTAINING.
they were low scoring but there were great chances because of the speed of the game. I loved watching Luongo and Thomas(not really) shut down every thing both teams threw at them.

thats' what you call an entertaining 1 - 0 game. Not this garbage with 20 shots per game
Posted Image
Thanks Vintage Canuck!

#141 LuonGO Canucks Go

LuonGO Canucks Go

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • Joined: 26-November 07

Posted 07 June 2012 - 09:11 AM

i do not know about ratings and all but for the first time ever after moveing to Canada i watched more NBA than NHL after Canucks got out.even yesterday i watched way less of finals game than west final.

#142 chisoxin12

chisoxin12

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,610 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 09:46 AM

it's been happening for decades, hell probably since the beginning of the sport from some of the old games i've watched, but the past couple years they've been stricter on interference calls so the d-man wasn't allowed to impede the forechecker even close to as much, then they relaxed the rules around it this year after looking at how to protect players. it was widely reported this season.

Are you following the Seattle council proceedings? They're trying to approve funding for the SODO funding. It all comes down to another tenant for the building is my understanding.

#143 Zamboni_14

Zamboni_14

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts
  • Joined: 20-January 03

Posted 07 June 2012 - 09:57 AM

it's been happening for decades, hell probably since the beginning of the sport from some of the old games i've watched, but the past couple years they've been stricter on interference calls so the d-man wasn't allowed to impede the forechecker even close to as much, then they relaxed the rules around it this year after looking at how to protect players. it was widely reported this season.


I don't ever remember seeing the type of interference you started seeing about 5 years ago (and I've been watching since the 80s.) Nor do I remember them ever trying to actually "curb" it at some point. Then again, since I am a goalie... it might be memory loss from getting shelled for almost 10 years (my team usually gave up 35-40 shots per game.)

#144 sedinsforever

sedinsforever

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 12

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:41 AM

Only true hockey fans would watch the finals. the rest of you are just following the Canucks and don't give a jack about hockey.
Prove me wrong by watching the finals then.
Yes, I'm sad that the Canucks are out, but I still love the sport of hockey. Whether our team is in our out, the sport still plays on.

I will be watching the finals until it ends, rooting for LA, because they deserve it more than any team in the 2012 Playoffs....except us. We deserve it more, but we're out...what can you do? New Jersey can go s*** it. Brodeur is an old fart.

And as for the ratings, you mean the ratings in VANCOUVER are low, probably...or in any Canadian city. As for American networks, probably higher than Canada's.

tumblr_m5b55qs98T1royi3qo2_500.giftumblr_my0xbtbPpd1t13mnxo8_250.gif

 

 


#145 FiestyDuck

FiestyDuck

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 12

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:46 AM

Well at least the Kings didn't win last night. I hate the Kings and the Ducks don't have to share Wednesday June 6, 2007 with Wednesday June 6, 2012 with the Kings. I was overly excited checking the score for this game last night on my phone. I was waiting for my food at Disney California Adventure.

#146 avelanch

avelanch

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,238 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 07

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:47 AM

Only true hockey fans would watch the finals. the rest of you are just following the Canucks and don't give a jack about hockey.
Prove me wrong by watching the finals then.
Yes, I'm sad that the Canucks are out, but I still love the sport of hockey. Whether our team is in our out, the sport still plays on.

I will be watching the finals until it ends, rooting for LA, because they deserve it more than any team in the 2012 Playoffs....except us. We deserve it more, but we're out...what can you do? New Jersey can go s*** it. Brodeur is an old fart.

And as for the ratings, you mean the ratings in VANCOUVER are low, probably...or in any Canadian city. As for American networks, probably higher than Canada's.

i tried watching the first game and I fell sleep (literally, NOT figuratively). a SCF should NOT do that to me. I switch it to the game for about 5 min each game, get bored and change the channel. I've watched every single SCF since the early 90s, and numerous ones before that. I am a fan of hockey, just not THIS hockey. and the ratings are based off of the american networks, not canadian.

#147 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:49 AM

Nice. onto insulting now eh? i guess I hit the right spot :bigblush:

So you were trolling?

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#148 Down by the River

Down by the River

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,978 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 12:44 PM

The call on David Clarkson's hit last night was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. Time to stop caring about something so inconsistent.

Shiznak at his best: 

Considering their cap hit and age, I'd still take Bonino over Kesler. 

 


#149 Canucksbiggestfan

Canucksbiggestfan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,027 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 07

Posted 07 June 2012 - 03:54 PM

This shows that the Canucks are good for the NHL! They have a huge following of fans and haters, no matter what anyone believes the Canucks sell.


By saying this I don't mean the NHL is rigged, what I mean is that we should be in the Winter Classic and the All-Star game should come to Vancouver.
Posted Image

Posted Image

#150 DooBie604

DooBie604

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 516 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 04:09 PM

I love watching hockey. Not just Canucks but hockey in general. I try to watch the finals regardless of the teams every year. However, even I am having a hard time watching the finals this year. It just feels like I am watching a regular season game. But I don't blame the teams. They both deserve to be there.

I blame what the NHL has become. I can't even tell what a penalty is anymore. More and more I see the outcome of the game not determined by the team but by what calls are being or not being made. Also, five guys all collapsing in front of the net making it impossible to get any shots through makes it boring, although I don't deny the effectiveness. Goals seem to rely more on luck now than skill. Throw everything at the net and hope something bounces in or gets tipped seems to be the only way to score.




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.