MR.OLYMPIA asked:
VS will once again be offering nightly double headers of playoff hockey.
I’m afraid ESPN is too busy promoting the MLS (oops Beckham’s ship has sailed full speed back to Europe) NASCAR , Bowling , X games , Spelling Bee, cheerleaders flying in the air, and what stars are dancing to have time for the NHL.
Let me see ESPN would squeeze a game or 2 as long as they don’t have a NBA game or Bowling and of course GOLF all Tiger all the time.
FOR EVERYBODY THAT SAYS ho much they dislike the Versus announcers
I say – DO YOU REALLY MISS GARY “THE SCREAM QUEEN” Thorne that much? What about Berman talking about the days of the Hartford Whalers. Besides he’s become an NFL guy and is too cool to be talking Hockey.
Look ESPN media is full of Hockey haters at worst and strong apathy at best. Network is full of NBA guys.
Lastly ESPN acts like the day Hockey died was when Gretzky retired or the sport only mattered in 1994 when the Rangers won the Cup.
I must rant 4 times a year against the 4 LETTER NETWORK as I find it quite therapeutic.
I could have gone on about all promos they give to BASS Fishing (an activity you do on your A S S ).
How they tied themselves to Arena Football and it went bankrupt. So much for Colin Cowherds rant that ESPN only promotes sports on the rise.
As a Hockey fan Cowherd is public enemy #1 an unreformed hockey hater.
Mainly, it’s the question of visibility within the sports world. VS. is completely off the sports map, and as a result, for non-hockey fans, it’s almost as if hockey doesn’t exist. You attract alot more casual fans to a hockey game by running house ads during Sportscenter than you do by running them during competitive fishing.
Still, I have to agree with you that ESPN’s “expert” coverage was almost as laughable as VS’s is now.
I DONT HAVE VS!!!!!!!!! and the nhl has cracked down on every site that illeagally boradcasts games online so i wont be able to any playoff game thats on verses which pisses me off.
Quite the rant there.
Look, I realise Versus may not be some broadcasting Valhalla, but anything that keeps Chris Berman off television must be good.
because they dont feel like america repspects the game alot and as u prolly know hockey is a huge pride in canada
Good Question/Answer
I suspect most of the complaining is coming from people who dont have Versus as part of their cable package. Personally I could care less if they put games on the Animal Channel….I will watch regardless. If ESPN can broadcast that violent sport they call the National Spelling Bee (those kids are scary…better keep an eye on them during recess) then I say bring on NHL games on Discovery. Hockey isnt a different game just because it is on (or off) any particuar channel. Let the complainers complain and show me some hockey (I have Versus so life is good).
It’ll (NHL coverage) will never be good enough for some folks. In fact, some won’t be happy until there is no hockey on television.
I don’t like ESPN because they are like a bunch of adolescent college hooligans. Their crap got old real fast a long time ago for me.
If the network didn’y carry UEFA matches like last night’s Manchester United victory over Inter Milan in the Champions League quarterfinal, I could block the channel from ever appearing on my set again.
Besides, a lot of those that start pining for a return to ESPN get their opinions from the blog of the day or an article they read in the paper. They just rather have something to whine about.
Keep in mind too that if the NHL did return to the network, the whining contingent would say the games belong on CNBC.
You can’t win with some nitwit’s.
This reminds me of a conversation Glen Sather had with a reporter last year.
Reporter: Glen, don’t you think that being on Vs is hurting the league?
Sather: Why would you think that?
Reporter: I don’t get Vs
Sather: What is your cable provider?
Reporter: Verizon
Sather: I have Verizon too. I also have Vs.
Reporter: But I have to pay for it if I want to watch it.
Sather: When you want a car from Toyota….do they GIVE it to you? No, you have to pay for it. When you want a Big Mac at McDonalds do they GIVE it you. No, you have to pay for it. When you want to watch a game at MSG do we GIVE it to you. No, you have to pay for it. The NHL is a business, we’re not giving this away for free. If you want to watch it….you’ll pay for it! It’s $3 a month!
The reporter shut up afterwards.
Screw ESPN, all they care about is basketball. Who watches basketball? (I actually do, but only watch when Michigan plays), but still. I don’t have VS because it doesn’t come w/ standard cable, which *****!! I would much rather watch any hockey game, then watch the top two teams play each other in basketball. By the way, has ESPN even showed one hockey game yet this year?
Well, when you don’t have a contract with the league, you are not allowed to broadcast the games =)
Piss on ESPN. If they don’t want hockey, then they can have their Yankees, Bret Favre, A-Rod, Basketball, and Cowboys.
for those of u who dont have vs’s
HOCKEYWEBCASTS.COM
it’ll be your best friend!
personaly i prefer csn’s broadcast (philadelphia local) verses and nbc both ****
and how bout the game of the week almost always being pens or rangers games and they both suck
I do not share the disdain of many people regarding the Versus announcers but I do feel that ESPN did a better job of covering hockey when they owned the contract than VS does. ESPN has deliberately reduced their hockey coverage since they lost the contract. When they owned the contract, they put on a double header once the playoffs started every single night. It took VS a few years to get into that groove and it should not have taken fans near revolt to make that happen. Sorry, but an episode of “The Tournament” airing while there were playoff games being played just didn’t cut it.
Do I feel VS means the end of hockey as we know it? No.
Do I feel VS could have done a better job of covering hockey from the onset? Yes.
Have some of those issues have been avoided? Yes.
Seriously, if you owned or made money from an event, would you spend more time promoting and advertising the product you owned or one that benefits someone else?
Well said. I especially like you gary thorne comment.
Great points, across the board.
The obligatory 60 second with Steve Levy and Barry Melrose once a week(?) hardly seems adequate, given the amount of time ESPN spends showing highlights from several NBA games.
ESPN use to be sports driven. Now it’s blatantly revenue driven. NBA, NFL draft, NCAA tournament. The cash generators seem to be the only sports worth airtime. Wait until Tiger Woods returns to the Masters, the Stanley Cup playoffs will take a distant back seat.