OLN was a major failure and nobody cares about versus. What do you think?
2007-02-01 07:19:11 · 8 answers · asked by zac y 3 in Sports ➔ Hockey
There is No point. NO ONE and I mean NO ONE WANTS THEM. ESPN said they get "higher ratings for bowling over the NHL". They are the only professional sport to pay a network to put them on. .7 for an all-star game stocked with young stars...case and point. Bettman = horrid
2007-02-01 07:28:03 · answer #1 · answered by Cashese 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just grateful to have hockey on ANY channels so I don't have to pay the ridiculous prices for "hockey packages" from cable or dish networks. Hockey obviously isn't a made for TV sport seeing how two channels will be televising the same Wizards game at the same time and no one is showing the Capitals. Guess beggars can't be choosers. The lock out hurt us and the poor time slot for the All-star game wasn't much better.
If OLN was a major failure and OLN is now Versus, does that mean Versus is a major failure?
2007-02-01 23:36:58 · answer #2 · answered by mdwildgirl 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Honestly - I don't know.
First of all, you have to consider the name change. The NHL on the "Outdoor Life Network" just...well you know - doesn't fit, doesn't make sense. Now, if OLN had shown the Heritage Classic from Commonwealth Stadium in Edmonton a few years back - that's something different.
I think OLN was really excited to get off this cycling, shooting, fishing kick that so wonderfully worked for them (sarcasm of course) - and wanting to change the image, they signed the NHL. Only because ESPN was quick to find alternate programming in place of NHL games so that ESPN wouldn't even be considered for the new NHL TV contract. So, they come up with Versus.
I've seen all of about six minutes of one hockey game on Versus. Thank you but I'll stick to my local Fox Sports Net and watch my Minnesota Wild - No Versus for me.
2007-02-01 21:19:27 · answer #3 · answered by luke_r1996 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One answer: money. OLN bid $200 million for the broadcast rights to the NHL and ESPN chose not to match this offer.
2007-02-01 22:58:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its true, no body is willing to spend money to put the NHL on their channel. New uniforms isn't going to bring the people back to hockey. I am sure the money spent on the research could have been better spent some wheres else.
My biggest issue is with the league boasting about parity using Tampa Bay and Calgary as examples. They were part of the Cup finals back before the new rules and new bargaining agreement were in place. So NHL management is full of it.
2007-02-01 15:46:15 · answer #5 · answered by WhoreHey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was Vs because they seem to play the Pens often and I don't see them being played on ESPN. Besides ABC (i think) that plays on Saturdays, no other network plays NHL games. Does ESPN even play NHL games anymore? I would like to watch even more NHL but don't want to subscribe to Time Warner's package. It is expensive.
2007-02-01 15:55:22 · answer #6 · answered by Mbuff00 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the only contract they could get. Besides a few NBC games on the weekend. Sad but true. Something is amiss.
2007-02-01 15:45:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
they went to the high bidder, putting money ahead of viewers, as more people get ESPN than VS.
completely terrible idea that should change ASAP.
2007-02-02 03:42:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋