wmubronco420 25 Report post Posted September 24, 2009 To me, the bigger frustration is that hockey coverage overall has declined. First we were reduced to watching VS, now you cannot get it if you have Direct TV. If that wasn't enough, my roomies have decided to get ultra-basic cable, so I'm pretty much limited to watching when NBC covers it, camping out in sports bars or watching over the net on my dinosaur computer. I think I share a lot of the same problems that everyone else has with ESPN. Heaven help you if you're not a Yankees/Red Sox fan during baseball season, but that's another rant for another day, and as I said earlier, I don't even get ESPN, so griping about them is wasted effort. It's definitely going to be a challenge to stay in the loop with hockey this season, but at least I have the internet. I have direct tv and i get versus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dobbles 252 Report post Posted September 24, 2009 i think the thing to remember is just how much power espn has to push the sports it likes. their coverage, or lack thereof, can really form opinions by viewers of whats important. so while you can say 'people want poker more than hockey' that may be true. but it may be true because espn created the market for it. they were very important in helping hockey make strides in many american markets in the 90's. however, much like mtv and music, espn spends less and less time each year actually showing sports. instead they just talk about sports. i think that is huge for a sport like hockey which really captures people with its action. once espn decided not to renew their hockey contract, they seemed to make a decision not to even cover the sport on highlight shows. now the only time they talk about it is when someone gets suspended for attacking another player. its very much a chicken/egg problem. i know hockey is not the most popular u.s. sport, but i think that espn has played a very large factor in that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
