Red Wings TV Ratings Down 21%

[Guest E_S_A_D]

Finally read this forum thoroughly.

It's the Wings 'team', not the economy that is causing the empty seats. Wings fans have always preferred a blue collar tough team, just like the City of Detroit, over finesse.

Yzerman out as Captain, loss of Shanny, and promotion of Lidstrom has caused a lot of season ticket holders to give away tickets or let them rot in their junk drawer.

[Jwo 7]

Finally read this forum thoroughly.

It's the Wings 'team', not the economy that is causing the empty seats. Wings fans have always preferred a blue collar tough team, just like the City of Detroit, over finesse.

Yzerman out as Captain, loss of Shanny, and promotion of Lidstrom has caused a lot of season ticket holders to give away tickets or let them rot in their junk drawer.

Why are there lots of people walking around with Red Wings gear on around the Metro Detroit then? Perhaps you missed the news last month with the auto industry begging for money to the U.S. Government.

Edited February 1, 2009 by Jwo

[Electrophile 3,554]

Finally read this forum thoroughly.

It's the Wings 'team', not the economy that is causing the empty seats. Wings fans have always preferred a blue collar tough team, just like the City of Detroit, over finesse.

Yzerman out as Captain, loss of Shanny, and promotion of Lidstrom has caused a lot of season ticket holders to give away tickets or let them rot in their junk drawer.

Don't speak for everyone, please. I don't care what "type" of team is on the ice, as long as they win. Blue collar, finesse, all European, all American, all Venutian.....don't care. I watch the Wings to see great hockey played by great players who want to be here. How many guys have taken pay cuts or had their contracts structured in such a way that they'd be here for the duration of their careers and the team STILL has money under the cap? We treat them right, they treat us right by wearing the winged wheel until they hang it up. That kind of loyalty transcends whether they're "blue collar" or "finesse".

If Steve Yzerman's retirement caused you to no longer go to games or watch them, you were only watching for Steve Yzerman and not for the whole team. Because that is just a dumbass reason to quit watching the Wings. "Oh Steve retired? f*** 'em, I'm done." Do you know how stupid that person sounds?

[Kp-Wings 3]

Finally read this forum thoroughly.

It's the Wings 'team', not the economy that is causing the empty seats. Wings fans have always preferred a blue collar tough team, just like the City of Detroit, over finesse.

Yzerman out as Captain, loss of Shanny, and promotion of Lidstrom has caused a lot of season ticket holders to give away tickets or let them rot in their junk drawer.

You're speaking my language.

I've never been a season ticket holder, though, so maybe this doesn't apply to me.

[xBrave_Heartx 0]

Lumberjacks season ticket holder, you know why? they play the hockey i like..

[Hank 0]

I haven't read any responses, but here's my one cent.

You don't build a team for TV ratings.

That's a very ignorant and naive statement. Of course you do.

Everything you do with your team is to make money. And large TV Ratings make lots of money.

That's like saying you own a business for the love and don't worry about being in the red every year.

You can only do that so long before you're out of business.

[Hank 0]

Finally read this forum thoroughly.

It's the Wings 'team', not the economy that is causing the empty seats. Wings fans have always preferred a blue collar tough team, just like the City of Detroit, over finesse.

Yzerman out as Captain, loss of Shanny, and promotion of Lidstrom has caused a lot of season ticket holders to give away tickets or let them rot in their junk drawer.

Just thought I'd 2nd your opinion.

And judging by the TV ratings and attendance figures, I'd say we're in the majority.

Heck, more than half the people on this thread are agreeing with us.

The wings have an embarrassment of riches, but that doesn't always mean their style of play matches the fans appetite.

The Devils have been a tremendous team for years too and yet they could barely sell out Stanley Cup games in the dead-puck era. Reason? They were death to watch.

The Wings aren't boring in the same sense that New Jersey was, but still the style we see now isn't what most Detroit hockey fans would choose first.

And lets face it. We've won enough that some people feel they can complain about that. If we hadn't won in 50 years and then had this team, it probably wouldn't be as big an issue.

But there's a big difference between winning and entertaining. Ask Devils fans.

Edited February 2, 2009 by Hank

[Reds4Life 51]

Just thought I'd 2nd your opinion.

And judging by the TV ratings and attendance figures, I'd say we're in the majority.

Heck, more than half the people on this thread are agreeing with us.

The wings have an embarrassment of riches, but that doesn't always mean their style of play matches the fans appetite.

The Devils have been a tremendous team for years too and yet they could barely sell out Stanley Cup games in the dead-puck era. Reason? They were death to watch.

The Wings aren't boring in the same sense that New Jersey was, but still the style we see now isn't what most Detroit hockey fans would choose first.

And lets face it. We've won enough that some people feel they can complain about that. If we hadn't won in 50 years and then had this team, it probably wouldn't be as big an issue.

But there's a big difference between winning and entertaining. Ask Devils fans.

So what would you want? Broad Street Bullies?

You do relize the game has changed, rules are different, right? If you go to a hockey game to watch two goons fight then I am really sorry for you. Current Wings team is built for this era, not for 90s.

So if you want to see some real North American toughness go watch NFL or simillar crap

[A.T.Hun 0]

A little research on this topic also turned up this nugget: at this time last year Red Wings T.V. ratings were up a whopping 50%. So even with this drop, the viewership would be substantially higher than two years ago. Perhaps this is all much ado about nothing?

I also like the questions that were asked on this site

1. What role does an economic environment in which people may be dropping cable altogether have, which results in a fan having access to only four out of 46 games so far (assuming they can get access to CBC)?

2. What role does moving 11% of Red Wings games to FSN Plus, an auxillary channel that is only available on the digital tier of the two largest cable providers in the Detroit area, have?

Back to this thread:

Just thought I'd 2nd your opinion.

And judging by the TV ratings and attendance figures, I'd say we're in the majority.

Heck, more than half the people on this thread are agreeing with us.

Obviously you didn't study statistics in school. Also, trying to gauge the pulse of the average fan by what is posted on a fan site like this is foolhardy.

Edited February 2, 2009 by A.T.Hun

[thedatsyukian 7]

A little research on this topic also turned up this nugget: at this time last year Red Wings T.V. ratings were up a whopping 50%. So even with this drop, the viewership would be substantially higher than two years ago. Perhaps this is all much ado about nothing?

Very interesting post. How easily everyone gets riled up here.

[Guest E_S_A_D]

Just thought I'd 2nd your opinion.

And judging by the TV ratings and attendance figures, I'd say we're in the majority.

Heck, more than half the people on this thread are agreeing with us.

The wings have an embarrassment of riches, but that doesn't always mean their style of play matches the fans appetite.

The Devils have been a tremendous team for years too and yet they could barely sell out Stanley Cup games in the dead-puck era. Reason? They were death to watch.

The Wings aren't boring in the same sense that New Jersey was, but still the style we see now isn't what most Detroit hockey fans would choose first.

And lets face it. We've won enough that some people feel they can complain about that. If we hadn't won in 50 years and then had this team, it probably wouldn't be as big an issue.

But there's a big difference between winning and entertaining. Ask Devils fans.

Well said. For those of us that actually attend games, the game against Dallas with Downey in was the LOUDEST and most entertaining game of the year, even though they lost. There wasn't a butt in the seat when he was placing his 3 HUGE (clean) checks on people. It's the entertainment factor.

Wings fans (as a majority) would rather see a good check and quality defensive game rather than a 7-6 Euro style game.

Also, it is VERY difficult for me to watch games when the Wings get runover like a junior team. When Booggaard and Cutterbuck come to town next Thursday, us not dressing Downey would be a disaster. I doubt we will though, so to save myself the anguish I'm selling my tickets to this game. No joke, they're good seats if you're interested anybody- for sale in the Fan Ticket Exchange here.

[Guest E_S_A_D]

Great post on 'another forum' by "TheRevisionist".

Last Wings fight over 2 months ago

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's horrible. I'm not saying that I want to see a fight everynight (although it would be nice), but I'd love to see some grit, some hitting, some emotion, and some old fashioned hockey.

Let's face it The Detroit Red Wings lack of all the above. And I honestly believe that the ratings are down 21 percent is because the games are just downright boring to watch. There is no doubt there is an incredible amount of talent on the team, but it justs a boring brand of hockey. If you ask any fan around here (metro Detroit area), they'll tell you that the Red Wings are boring (unless they're just bandwagon fans who follow the best team in every sport).

The other night for example. The 2nd period of that game was the most entertaining Red Wings period I've seen all year. I mean look at all of the energy Aaron Downey brought to that game. Did you hear how loud the Joe was? Did you see how he was voted player of the game? Did hear the excitement in Mickey Redmond and Larry Murphy's voices?

That Mr. Holland is exciting hockey.

I know I'm beating a dead horse. It's just I began watching this hockey team in 1990, when I was 5 years old. And was a die hard fan until Babcock and his brand of hockey arrived.

If they Red Wings want to restore the roar. They need to find the Steve Yzermans, The Brendan Shanahans, The Bob Proberts, The Joey Kocurs, The Nick Lidstroms, The Gerard Gallants, The Aaron Wards, and all the players that made the team exciting to watch. That's how hockeytown would become hockeytown again.

But the question I wanted to ask the people on this forum is.....Who do you blame for this brand of hockey. Gary Bettman taking a team and trying to model it as pure elegance and skill. Ken Holland for drafting and bringing the players here. Or Mike Babcock, for clearly coaching anti-physical hockey.

[Electrophile 3,554]

Very interesting post. How easily everyone gets riled up here.

You mean people here overreact? Get out of here.

[Jocu 0]

HASEK = RATINGS!

[OsGOD 3]

It was revealed on WXYT The Ticket last night that the TV ratings for Red Wings games are down 21%.

What is the cause?

It can't be the economy as TV is essentially free.

It can't be the Teams lack of success?

Well yeah.. i mean if you lose your house to foreclosure its kinda hard to get DTE to run an electrical wire to your cardboard box... now isn't it?

Oh and the cable company rape you on costs...