# NHL, NBC, Versus reach 10-year deal



## digidan (Apr 24, 2006)

Here's some news we all dreaded, get used to seeing NHL on Versus for a long time to come 

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=560238


----------



## davidatl14 (Mar 24, 2006)

Glad to see it. Versus/NBC/Comcast will do a much better Job with the game than ESPN.


Hockey is nothing more than an afterthought for the Mothership.

Never will change.


----------



## blackhawkzone (Nov 30, 2007)

i would rather be 1st priority than 5th on espn2


----------



## anleva (Nov 14, 2007)

Yeah, I really don't get the Versus hate. I get the channel, I get it in HD and they care about hockey. Coverage has been improving. So I punch in 603 rather than 206. Honestly I'd rather watch in on Versus and not be bothered by the ESPN ticker all game. 

I do hope they take advantage of some of the other NBC stations though for overflow, to show other games, etc.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hocke...-signs-10-year-2-billion-deal-with-nbc-versus



> In a joint announcement Tuesday, the NHL and the NBC Sports Group said the new deal will run through the 2020-21 season. *The package is reportedly worth a total of $2 billion.*
> 
> NBC will remain the exclusive network home for the NHL, and Versus is retaining the major cable rights. The NHL had drawn interest from ESPN, Turner and FOX, but decided to stay where it has been for the past six years since the end of the season-long lockout.


----------



## 1980ws (Mar 18, 2008)

Makes sense. Versus needs content. No hate here for them either. I actually rarely watch ESPN anymore - I'm more apt to go right to Channels 212,213,215. Not a fan of basketball or the ESPN brand anymore.


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

digidan said:


> Here's some news we all dreaded...


Who's *we*? The hockey fans I know are happy with this deal (including myself.)

P.S. Why is this in the D* forum?


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

anleva said:


> Yeah, I really don't get the Versus hate. I get the channel, I get it in HD and they care about hockey. Coverage has been improving. So I punch in 603 rather than 206. Honestly I'd rather watch in on Versus and not be bothered by the ESPN ticker all game.
> 
> I do hope they take advantage of some of the other NBC stations though for overflow, to show other games, etc.


but what channels?

Will they pull round 1 and 2 RSN games?

Will VS over flow become temp full time channel for playoff time?

Will cable systems have a VS feed and a VS alt feed?

No way for VS to fit in all the round 2 games.

With they put NHL playoff games on G4? E!? Universal Sports? NHL network ? Syfy? A&E? lifetime? lifetime movie? Chiller? Sleuth? The Weather Channel? USA? CNBC? MSNBC? Bravo? nhl exata on CSN? (but not all areas have a CSN and even them some CSN's don't have the room with the NBA and MLB in the way)

Will ESPN, Turner and FOX now get the olympics as NBC had to pay out big to get the new NHL deal.

the only good thing about pulling round 2 from the RSN is to free up room on indemand for more NBA and MLB games / HD games.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

dsw2112 said:


> Who's *we*? The hockey fans I know are happy with this deal (including myself.)
> 
> P.S. Why is this in the D* forum?


Good question, it has been moved to the Sports Programming Forum.


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

did you read they are renaming versus within 90 days?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/sns-ap-hkn-nhl-tv-contract,0,7969462.story

Any guesses to the new channel name?

Xfinity Sports?
Comcast Sports USA?
NBC Sportschannel?
Cagefighting and Hockey Channel?
ESPN without the dogshows, poker, and X-games? 
Future Contract Dispute with DirecTV Sports?


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

aa9vi said:


> did you read they are renaming versus within 90 days?
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/hockey/blackhawks/sns-ap-hkn-nhl-tv-contract,0,7969462.story
> 
> Any guesses to the new channel name?
> ...


Comcast Sports Net One
merge Universal Sports (dead as a OTA SUB channel)


----------



## anleva (Nov 14, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> but what channels?
> 
> Will they pull round 1 and 2 RSN games?
> 
> ...


Enquiring minds want to know and they want to know now damnit!


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

I don't care so long as the audio for games on Versus will actually be DD 5.1 in the near future.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

I have no hate for Versus either other than the fact that Comcrap owns Versus. If the NHL moved back to ESPN, I am sure they'd be a very low priority since they carry the NFL, MLB, and NBA. As long as Versus continues to do at least 2 NHL games per week, I am happy. I get most of my hockey from NHL CI, however.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

davidatl14 said:


> Glad to see it. Versus/NBC/Comcast will do a much better Job with the game than ESPN. Hockey is nothing more than an afterthought for the Mothership.


+1


----------



## ehren (Aug 3, 2003)

Plus twice as many games (100 I think) between both. Hopefully more doubleheaders on Versus. Also hope that the NHL doesn't schedule alot of games on night's Versus has exclusive rights. Lots of games in the previous years have had no tv during that window. Should be better for the playoffs since NHL CI will have telecasts reduced for those who don't wanna pay for it. Glad ESPN didn't get it back they can take the ticker and shove it. Versus has done a cool job adding extra games during the week from regional sports networks and we also have the NHL Network for even more games!


----------



## slapshot1959 (Jan 24, 2006)

"JoeTheDragon" said:


> but what channels?
> 
> Will they pull round 1 and 2 RSN games?
> 
> ...


You get the award for the most questions asked in one post.

We'll just have to wait and see but this looks like a positive deal for the hockey fan. 
Now all we need is All games in hd. American,Canadian, Mexican whatever!


----------



## la24philly (Mar 9, 2010)

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman said he "couldn't be happier" to renew the relationship and "the promise of what NBC Universal/Comcast is going to be is exciting." He noted the sport of hockey will now be discussed, promoted and celebrated on 20 NBC Universal networks and another 40-plus digital platforms.




the aboe post from the report on nhl.com they state 20 nbc networks doest that mean CSN will be renamed NBC / regional city or something like that


----------



## la24philly (Mar 9, 2010)

when you see the dick ebersol interview, he states 90 days he will rename VS and i think that will include comcast sports net.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

You should completely forget what Versus was before the Comcast/NBCU merger. Comcast put in their own guy as the CEO of NBCU, but NBC Sports is still run by Dick Ebersol, and Comcast merged Versus into the existing NBC Sports group, meaning old Versus is dead and you're basically getting a brand new sports channel managed by old school NBC Sports people. They just happen to get all of Versus' old contracts (IndyCar, NHL, etc).


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

la24philly said:


> when you see the dick ebersol interview, he states 90 days he will rename VS and i think that will include comcast sports net.


it's not that easy fox owns 25% of Bay Area Comcast 45%

SportsNet New York has it's own name part owned by Time Warner Cable comcast has 11%

The Mtn.
Mountain West Conference (30%)
Comcast (30%)
CBS Corporation (40%)

Comcast/Charter Sports Southeast part Charter

Comcast Sports Southwest (CSS) likely to be CSN or NBC sports Houston.

CSN Chicago comcast 20% and with the High number of WGN / WCIU games useing the NBC name may hit some road blocks. Also the teams hear pulled out of fox to get control so any thing can happen hear.
__________________


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

"JosephB" said:


> You should completely forget what Versus was before the Comcast/NBCU merger. Comcast put in their own guy as the CEO of NBCU, but NBC Sports is still run by Dick Ebersol, and Comcast merged Versus into the existing NBC Sports group, meaning old Versus is dead and you're basically getting a brand new sports channel managed by old school NBC Sports people. They just happen to get all of Versus' old contracts (IndyCar, NHL, etc).


Thank god. Maybe the Emmy award winning NBC audio mixer will be an influence and they will upgrade the audio on Versus to true DD 5.1.


----------



## TANK (Feb 16, 2003)

I'm happy they are going to improve the NHL Network. After reading numerous press releases and articles about this deal,it sounds like Comcast is going to try to make VS more like a ESPN Sports channel.( the goal is probably ESPN like rate charges per sub also )


But for the NHL it could be good for Comcast to promote the sport on all it's channels with ads. Building hype can get casual viewers to watch hockey,the Winter Classic is a great example of building the hype for the telecast. 

I hope that the new deal doesn't allow VS another night of exclusive rights-that would suck for all us NHLCI subs


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> it's not that easy fox owns 25% of Bay Area Comcast 45%
> 
> SportsNet New York has it's own name part owned by Time Warner Cable comcast has 11%
> 
> ...


All of that may be true, but as far as naming is concerned, those channels will not have a perpetual right to the Comcast name. They use the Comcast brand under license. When that license is up, if NBCU/Comcast wants to change the names of the RSNs, they can. That wouldn't be the sticking point, though. It all depends on which RSNs Comcast has management control over. Either way, it looks like the NHL deal pushes the RSNs mostly out of it, or, at least they are still free to independently negotiate deals for the games that aren't on Vs. or NBC nationally.


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

The only think I hope Dick does is get rid of those annoying 1/4 screen size advertisements in the middle of play. Do it between plays or between periods... or just make it MUCH MUCH smaller.

I'd also like to see them use VS ALTERNATE more often when exclusive games are going on at the same time. Ebersol could turn around the poor production VS currently has. It's become better over the years, but it still needs work. Maybe I'm biased but Pat Foley does a much better job than the high pitched Emrick calling a game.(Not that I'd want to lose Pat for even 1 Hawks game) I honestly believe he's the best around mixing great play by play and jokes. Too many announcers are as boring as Elmer's paste. Then get rid of Milbury since he's a putz and replace him with Barry Melrose Place. I've actually warmed up to Pierre whatever his name is... that guy knows his stuff and is a pretty good color guy. Get rid of Engblob and throw in some crazy ass ex-defenseman, Bret Hull, or give Roenick a bigger role on the network. Now, that's entertaining.

I just want to see the crew have more spirit and not just be overly cerebral.... Think of how TNT's crew got better with barkley... he's nuts, but funny and entertaining as hell.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

1980ws said:


> I actually rarely watch ESPN anymore - I'm more apt to go right to Channels 212,213,215. Not a fan of basketball or the ESPN brand anymore.


This.

ESPN just grossly overcovers pro basketball. If you took a time study of all major sports and the amount of time they are covered on SC, PTI, ATH, SR, and on the ESPNR shows and held that relative to their ratings and live gate, you would, I am certain, find that ESPN devotes an amount roughly porportional to each sport based on its popularity. Except the NBA. Hundreds, if not thousands of times more coverage than is warrented for a sport that most Americans simply do not follow.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

SamC said:


> This.
> 
> ESPN just grossly overcovers pro basketball. If you took a time study of all major sports and the amount of time they are covered on SC, PTI, ATH, SR, and on the ESPNR shows and held that relative to their ratings and live gate, you would, I am certain, find that ESPN devotes an amount roughly porportional to each sport based on its popularity. Except the NBA. Hundreds, if not thousands of times more coverage than is warrented for a sport that most Americans simply do not follow.


It's 2nd only to the NFL in ratings/popularity.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

That is simply not so.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

SamC said:


> That is simply not so.


Ratings charts say otherwise. The NFL obviously dominated the 2010 ratings for most watched sports events with the NBA clearly outnumbering MLB & NHL.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Actually not. The total poplarity of many sports excedes the NBA. 95% of Americans simiply have no interest in it, despite ESPN telling them to.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

According to the Nielson TV ratings (as determined by numbers of TVs watching a particular sports on average) ranks as follows: 

NFL (National Football League) 
NBA (National Basketball Association) 
MLB (Major League Baseball) 
NCAA football (college football) 
NCAA basketball (college basketball) 
NASCAR (stock car racing) 
WWE (professional wrestling) 
NHL (National Hockey League) 
AFL (Arena Football League) 
WNBA (Women's National Basketball Association) 
MLS (Major League Soccer) 
IRL (Indy Racing League)


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

SamC said:


> Actually not. The total poplarity of many sports excedes the NBA. 95% of Americans simiply have no interest in it, despite ESPN telling them to.


Technically, both you and Sigma1914 are correct.

There are many polls out there which clearly shows that the NBA is not nearly as popular as MLB, NHL, or even NASCAR but when it comes to television ratings, The NBA is a definite second.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

fluffybear said:


> According to the Nielson TV ratings (as determined by numbers of TVs watching a particular sports on average) ranks as follows:
> 
> NFL (National Football League)
> NBA (National Basketball Association)
> ...


The first half of that I believe, but the second half of that I am sure has to do with availability as much as popularity. I find it hard to believe that AFL or WNBA is more popular than IndyCar or soccer. Ratings are probably what they are due to being carried on networks that don't have the penetration as others. (ESPN carries AFL, or at least did at one point, for example)



fluffybear said:


> Technically, both you and Sigma1914 are correct.
> 
> There are many polls out there which clearly shows that the NBA is not nearly as popular as MLB, NHL, or even NASCAR but when it comes to television ratings, The NBA is a definite second.


I'd be highly suspect of those polls, though. Sports are a fickle beast, and you can't just take a random sampling and get a good idea of how they're doing. NBA does really well with urban audiences, NASCAR with more rural and suburban audiences. Comparing some of these things can get kind of tricky.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

JosephB said:


> The first half of that I believe, but the second half of that I am sure has to do with availability as much as popularity. I find it hard to believe that AFL or WNBA is more popular than IndyCar or soccer. Ratings are probably what they are due to being carried on networks that don't have the penetration as others. (ESPN carries AFL, or at least did at one point, for example)


The list I provided was solely based on TV ratings. Naturally, a sport which has a better TV contract and is available in more outlets is going to have a higher viewership then someone who doesn't.



JosephB said:


> I'd be highly suspect of those polls, though. Sports are a fickle beast, and you can't just take a random sampling and get a good idea of how they're doing. NBA does really well with urban audiences, NASCAR with more rural and suburban audiences. Comparing some of these things can get kind of tricky.


Polls always have to be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

under the new deal will NBC games stay on to the end? or will they move to VS or other channels to may way for pre race coverage of a horse race?


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

I know this thread is about the new NHL TV deal starting next season. But what I'm wondering is why aren't all of the Stanley Cup Final games on a national network, NBC? Why are games 3 and 4 on Versus? I could see the first two games being on Versus, then switching over to NBC for the rest, but to start on NBC, then go back to Versus, then back to NBC doesn't make any sense. If the NHL really wants to grow the sport of hockey, which I know is hard to do, then ALL of the SCF games should be on NBC.


----------



## la24philly (Mar 9, 2010)

this current contract with nbc / versus, VS has done 2 stanley cup final games. they usually do first 2 games on VS and finishout with nbc but i was a bit suprised to see the split.

but in any event it should be a great final, we will have for the 2nd st year a team trying to end a 30 year plus drought VAN 0 cups bos last cup i think was 70


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

la24philly said:


> bos last cup i think was 70


1972


----------



## TANK (Feb 16, 2003)

TheRatPatrol said:


> I know this thread is about the new NHL TV deal starting next season. But what I'm wondering is why aren't all of the Stanley Cup Final games on a national network, NBC? Why are games 3 and 4 on Versus? I could see the first two games being on Versus, then switching over to NBC for the rest, but to start on NBC, then go back to Versus, then back to NBC doesn't make any sense. If the NHL really wants to grow the sport of hockey, which I know is hard to do, then ALL of the SCF games should be on NBC.


VS did games 3 and 4 last year also.

VS got those games because of low ratings for Cup Finals on NBC . NBC didn't want all 7 games any more. Finals ratings in 2006,2007 were really embarrassing.NBC finished dead last for those nights with NHL Cup Finals Games


----------

