Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NHL the #2 sport in America in 10 years


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#21 Wombat

Wombat

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 396 posts
  • Location:Washington, DC

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:03 PM

QUOTE (RedWings Gone Wild @ January 21, 2010 - 01:37PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think it's within reason, but only if the US national team starts doing something in major tournaments. You can see a direct correlation between how popular a sport is, and how dominated it is by Americans (notice the NBA's popularity dipping with the increase in Euros, and MLBs domination with S. Americans.... it took super-juiced mega-hitters to make Americans remember baseball).


I don't think that has much to do with it. Football is the most popular sport in the US and there are no international tournaments. Baseball is no longer in the Olympics. People don't care about the Olympics and such as much as they used to.

I see the real issue with accessibility to the sport. In the US, I would venture a guess that almost every high school in America has at least one of football, basketball, or baseball offered as varsity sports, and probably a great majority offer all 3. How many offer ice hockey? You need some combination of a large enough metro area to support a rink (with activities besides HS hockey), a community with some money, and a region that historically supports hockey (basically the Northeast and some Midwest). I'd be surprised if even 50% of school districts in Michigan have hockey programs. My hometown (Big Rapids) was the only high school in the region that offered ice hockey if I do recall, and none of our prominent rivals/conference mates did.

I don't think the NHL has a chance to be the #2 sport in the US because of the dearth of high school level programs. It's fairly easy to field high school football, baseball and basketball. Every school has a gym for basketball and it serves as a multipurpose space for assemblies or other sports. Baseball diamonds and football fields are relatively cheap to maintain when you just need to cut the grass and put up some cheap bleachers. Hockey? You need a substantial investment to create a large indoor, refrigerated building that for all intents and purposes is just a single use structure. It costs a lot to maintain.

I also agree with those earlier that stated the cost to enter the sport is difficult too, because of the need for a lot of specialized equipment and space as opposed to the other sports.

#22 RedWings Gone Wild

RedWings Gone Wild

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 741 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:05 PM

QUOTE (Shoreline @ January 21, 2010 - 01:51PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Have you even followed Crosby and his career to understand why he's so marketed and marketable? Compared to Ovechkin who spent most of his time in Russia? The only reason you suggest this is viable is because of your obvious vitriol toward Crosby, and no other reason. Not much more to address than that.


Flat out, irrevocably wrong. Completely wrong.

At this point, every one within the hockey circles has awoken to Ovie being the more marketable of the two, and it's simply the truth. Ovechkin is the one of the two that's on sportcenter regularly, he's the one with the exuberance, the personality that draws fans. Why is the NBA more popular than the NHL? Jordan, Bird, Magic. And each one of them had Ovie's kind of personality. Crosby has zero personality, which is why he simply isn't nearly as marketable. He has yet to have a SINGLE memorable quote or celebrity-affirming moment off the ice, and he looks like a deer in the headlights in front of cameras and during public events. He looked as dumb as Dukakis in his stupid militarized homecoming parade with the cup over the summer.

This is all why Ovechkin, and NOT Crosby, is the one with mega marketing contract, why he was the first NHLer to get a huge bio on ESPN, and why he's the face of the league until he loses it (by under performing, not winning a cup, or doing more stupid knee to knees).

#23 Shoreline

Shoreline

    Panzerfaust

  • HoF Booster
  • 12,817 posts
  • Location:Brampton, ON

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:05 PM

QUOTE (stevkrause @ January 21, 2010 - 10:55AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
once again... it is not there now... not even CLOSE... but over time, if done right, it COULD make the HUGE leap like the NFL did in the late 80's through 90's... I'm not saying it will be easy, but it COULD be done...

Also, I think you are GROSSLY overselling the MLB's popularity in today's society...

The MLB represents baseball. Baseball for Americans isn't just a sport, which you still aren't looking at, and merely mention popularity which is another failure to recognize what impact baseball has here. You somehow think that in some ambiguous time span that baseball will (or "can") lose it's cultural roots with this country and suddenly hockey will step on in? Hockey, as a sport, does not have a foundation that baseball does, here, which is, again, more than simple popularity. How do you develop something to be more popular where there is little-to-no development nor interest? Do you honestly believe that baseball could, in the next, oh, 50 years, bow to hockey in states like -- California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, and so on? The reason it has any popularity in this country is because of permitting weather that makes hockey viable to play in certain parts, and thus fosters interest and then development. This is why anyone would laugh at the suggestion that any other sport, especially one like baseball, would overtake hockey in Canada. I like the fact that you're thinking positive, but you're going way out in space and need to come back to Earth and first understand baseball and it's roots here to be able to first make a decent comparison to hockey.

#24 Shoreline

Shoreline

    Panzerfaust

  • HoF Booster
  • 12,817 posts
  • Location:Brampton, ON

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:10 PM

QUOTE (RedWings Gone Wild @ January 21, 2010 - 11:05AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Flat out, irrevocably wrong. Completely wrong.

At this point, every one within the hockey circles has awoken to Ovie being the more marketable of the two, and it's simply the truth. Ovechkin is the one of the two that's on sportcenter regularly, he's the one with the exuberance, the personality that draws fans. Why is the NBA more popular than the NHL? Jordan, Bird, Magic. And each one of them had Ovie's kind of personality. Crosby has zero personality, which is why he simply isn't nearly as marketable. He has yet to have a SINGLE memorable quote or celebrity-affirming moment off the ice, and he looks like a deer in the headlights in front of cameras and during public events. He looked as dumb as Dukakis in his stupid militarized homecoming parade with the cup over the summer.

This is all why Ovechkin, and NOT Crosby, is the one with mega marketing contract, why he was the first NHLer to get a huge bio on ESPN, and why he's the face of the league until he loses it (by under performing, not winning a cup, or doing more stupid knee to knees).

Jordan, Bird, and Magic were all Americans, spoke English fluently, and were marketed the moment they stepped onto the court, and it was predicted this would happen. The most marketable people are marketed for a long time, and you can foresee the continuation of that. If you ever watched Crosby before he came to the NHL, you knew he was going to be highly marketed in this league. You did not know that of Ovechkin. Why? He was not here, and he was not pushed and given the attention Crosby was. These other attributes you state have nothing to do with marketing. The only way to see the viability of marketing is by sales and attention. Let's see. Crosby comes and suddenly the seats in Pittsburgh fill up. Crosby comes and suddenly Crosby jerseys sell more than any other. Crosby comes, and even before he came, and suddenly every media outlet is paying attention to him. I think we have a winner. It's flat out that obvious, and again, the only arguments I've seen against Crosby being the most marketable all come down to vitriol and dislike toward him and nothing to do with marketing.

#25 RedSea

RedSea

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 135 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:13 PM

QUOTE (Shoreline @ January 21, 2010 - 01:51PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Have you even followed Crosby and his career to understand why he's so marketed and marketable? Compared to Ovechkin who spent most of his time in Russia? The only reason you suggest this is viable is because of your obvious vitriol toward Crosby, and no other reason. Not much more to address than that.


No other reason? Yeah, you didn't read my post. I understand Crosby is a great player (uggh, that hurt), but I'm saying Ovechkin is where the money is at. I see people liking him much easier than Crosby.

But it's moot, because both are being marketed pretty well now I guess.

#26 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:18 PM

QUOTE (Shoreline @ January 21, 2010 - 02:05PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The MLB represents baseball. Baseball for Americans isn't just a sport, which you still aren't looking at, and merely mention popularity which is another failure to recognize what impact baseball has here. You somehow think that in some ambiguous time span that baseball will (or "can") lose it's cultural roots with this country and suddenly hockey will step on in? Hockey, as a sport, does not have a foundation that baseball does, here, which is, again, more than simple popularity. How do you develop something to be more popular where there is little-to-no development nor interest? Do you honestly believe that baseball could, in the next, oh, 50 years, bow to hockey in states like -- California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, and so on? The reason it has any popularity in this country is because of permitting weather that makes hockey viable to play in certain parts, and thus fosters interest and then development. This is why anyone would laugh at the suggestion that any other sport, especially one like baseball, would overtake hockey in Canada. I like the fact that you're thinking positive, but you're going way out in space and need to come back to Earth and first understand baseball and it's roots here to be able to first make a decent comparison to hockey.

Fair enough - at bare minimum, it could far supplant the NBA and be damn close to MLB in the US and as an overall league in North America (between Canada AND US) be the #2 sport...

Like someone else said, the main thing holding it back, is it's accessibility and representation in schools - this is also something that would need to be changed, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest it... will it happen, almost definitely not, but COULD it happen? Without a doubt given the proper leadership and direction...

That's all I'm driving at...


All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#27 Shoreline

Shoreline

    Panzerfaust

  • HoF Booster
  • 12,817 posts
  • Location:Brampton, ON

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:21 PM

QUOTE (RedSea @ January 21, 2010 - 11:13AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No other reason? Yeah, you didn't read my post. I understand Crosby is a great player (uggh, that hurt), but I'm saying Ovechkin is where the money is at. I see people liking him much easier than Crosby.

But it's moot, because both are being marketed pretty well now I guess.

Where the money is at? Uh, so what about all the money coming the NHL's way because of Crosby? Was that non-existent? There's no doubt Ovy is becoming increasingly marketable as his career has developed. Crosby's persona and actions, not to mention geography and language, helped foster the development of him being marketable well before he ever got to the NHL. If a product goes beyond the shelves, metaphorically, and into people's homes, it has been successful -- that is the essence of brands, whether they are cardboard boxes, other humans, or a chihuahua parroting a "yo quiero taco bell" phrase. By the sheer ratings, attendance, attention, toward Crosby, and the fact that it has indeed spelled more success for the NHL in doing so, it's actually very clear that Crosby is where the money is at, which is evidently not welcoming news to fellow Wing fans who don't like him or are in sore need of understanding how marketing works.

Marketing-wise, Crosby and Ovy are still on entirely different levels.

#28 RedSea

RedSea

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 135 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:25 PM

QUOTE (Shoreline @ January 21, 2010 - 02:21PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Where the money is at? Uh, so what about all the money coming the NHL's way because of Crosby? Was that non-existent? There's no doubt Ovy is becoming increasingly marketable as his career has developed. Crosby's persona and actions, not to mention geography and language, helped foster the development of him being marketable well before he ever got to the NHL. If a product goes beyond the shelves, metaphorically, and into people's homes, it has been successful -- that is the essence of brands, whether they are cardboard boxes, other humans, or a chihuahua parroting a "yo quiero taco bell" phrase. By the sheer ratings, attendance, attention, toward Crosby, and the fact that it has indeed spelled more success for the NHL in doing so, it's actually very clear that Crosby is where the money is at, which is evidently not welcoming news to fellow Wing fans who don't like him or are in sore need of understanding how marketing works.

Marketing-wise, Crosby and Ovy are still on entirely different levels.


I see Crosby as being a good marketing tool. I see Ovechkin as a great, respectable marketing tool. But to each his own. Sure, Crosby has "worked", but I can get a good look at a T-bone by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take a butcher's word for it.

#29 Shoreline

Shoreline

    Panzerfaust

  • HoF Booster
  • 12,817 posts
  • Location:Brampton, ON

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:30 PM

QUOTE (RedSea @ January 21, 2010 - 11:25AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I see Crosby as being a good marketing tool. I see Ovechkin as a great, respectable marketing tool. But to each his own. Sure, Crosby has "worked", but I can get a good look at a T-bone by sticking my head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take a butcher's word for it.

No doubt Ovy is and has become more marketable than he was when he first joined the NHL. It's evident he's trying to promote himself, and in many cases now is getting deserved attention -- he's done a great job at winning over fans and I'm one of 'em. The thing about marketing is it's like the tide. It comes in, it goes out. Crosby's day will be over soon enough perhaps. Part of that is how he deals with the attention. Some superstars shine and relish in the attention, others break down. But really until someone else can take the reins or if he f***s up rather large, Crosby is, for now and the last several years, the NHL's king of marketable players.

#30 ami

ami

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 765 posts
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:50 PM

you guys, marketing gurus, once again proved that marketing is an art of pursuing people to buy exactly what they do not need.

if you think that to promote nhl, it needs to sell pretty english/french-speaking boys over skills and fair competition, there must be something wrong here...

Edited by ami, 21 January 2010 - 02:51 PM.


#31 up2here

up2here

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,127 posts
  • Location:Halifax,Nova Scotia

Posted 21 January 2010 - 02:56 PM

I'm hearing a lot of Bettman bashing on here as usual, so once again I feel I have say this: I am not a Bettman fan but to blame him for thing like this is assinine. He is employed by the owners and does as they tell him to do. If you fire Bettman another puppet/mouthpiece will take his place.

Edited by UP2HERE, 21 January 2010 - 02:56 PM.


#32 mindfly

mindfly

    GRRRRR

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,170 posts
  • Location:The Multiverse

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:00 PM

What are the current ranks?

1. Baseball
2. Football
3. Basketball?
4. Nascar?
5. X
6. Hockey on this spot?

#33 up2here

up2here

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,127 posts
  • Location:Halifax,Nova Scotia

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:13 PM

QUOTE (mindfly @ January 21, 2010 - 04:00PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What are the current ranks?

1. Baseball
2. Football
3. Basketball?
4. Nascar?
5. X
6. Hockey on this spot?



I would say:

1. NFL Football
2. Baseball
3. College Football
4. NASCAR
5.NBA Basketball


#34 RedSea

RedSea

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 135 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:16 PM

QUOTE (UP2HERE @ January 21, 2010 - 03:13PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I would say:

1. NFL Football
2. Baseball
3. College Football
4. NASCAR
5.NBA Basketball



Should college football be excluded? It's not technically a pro sport. I mean, sure lots of businessmen (Ahem BCS supporters) rake in the dough while the football players live off of cafeteria food (unless they go to USC).

I dunno, I guess it counts because it is a sport and is religiously followed. In that case, hockey will never be above #4.

#35 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:18 PM

QUOTE (UP2HERE @ January 21, 2010 - 03:13PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I would say:

1. NFL Football
2. Baseball
3. College Football
4. NASCAR
5.NBA Basketball

Unfortunately, I think right now it's -
1. NFL
2. NCAA Football
3. MLB
4. NCAA Basketball
5. Nascar
6. NBA
7. UFC
8. NHL

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#36 mindfly

mindfly

    GRRRRR

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,170 posts
  • Location:The Multiverse

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:21 PM

Americans you funny youuuu biggrin.gif

Nascar and UFC ahead of NHL.. lol

#37 stevkrause

stevkrause

    Legend

  • Bronze Booster
  • 5,236 posts
  • Location:Detroit, MI

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:25 PM

QUOTE (mindfly @ January 21, 2010 - 03:21PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Americans you funny youuuu biggrin.gif

Nascar and UFC ahead of NHL.. lol

We didn't say we agreed... we said that's where the consensus is... and sadly, it is...

My personal rank is:
1. NHL
2. NFL
.
.
.
.
.
3. MLB
4. NCAA FB
5. UFC
6. everything else... except Nascar... it's not a sport...

Edited by stevkrause, 21 January 2010 - 03:25 PM.

All I have to say about Holland and our off-season:

Here in this thread

Here in this one as well

Here in this one too

and finally

Here


Holland is a damn good GM. period.


#38 Tommy_Like_Wingy

Tommy_Like_Wingy

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 369 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:39 PM

QUOTE (RedSea @ January 21, 2010 - 12:19PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Losing Crysby as the golden child and replacing him with Ovie (already kind of happening) would be a good marketing step.


I don't really see this happening. Ovechkin in all senses of the word is a dirty player and he speaks broken english. Not really the kind of guy they'll want portraying the NHL.

It sucks though because he's much more fun to watch than Crosby and the guy is a risk taker. Easily one of the most talented guys to ever play the game.

#39 RedSea

RedSea

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 135 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:44 PM

QUOTE (Tommy_Like_Wingy @ January 21, 2010 - 03:39PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't really see this happening. Ovechkin in all senses of the word is a dirty player and he speaks broken english. Not really the kind of guy they'll want portraying the NHL.

It sucks though because he's much more fun to watch than Crosby and the guy is a risk taker. Easily one of the most talented guys to ever play the game.


I don't get what you're saying. Do you really think he's a dirty player because of the knee-on-knee hit and some of the runs he takes. Or are you saying he smells funny?


Crosby punches people in the nuts you know...

#40 Tommy_Like_Wingy

Tommy_Like_Wingy

    3rd Line Checker

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 369 posts

Posted 21 January 2010 - 03:47 PM

QUOTE (RedSea @ January 21, 2010 - 02:44PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't get what you're saying. Do you really think he's a dirty player because of the knee-on-knee hit and some of the runs he takes. Or are you saying he smells funny?


Crosby punches people in the nuts you know...


Both.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users