Winter Classic

Jan 02, 2008 06:03

I know modern sports fans are supposed to be cynical and unhappy and complain about everything that's wrong with their game. Some, like the people who foolishly believe that there was ever a "Golden Age" of Hollywood reigned by nothing but glamour, happiness, and artistic purity, probably even yearn for the imaginary years where sports was just ( Read more... )

hockey

Leave a comment

Comments 14

eagerjimmy January 2 2008, 14:49:29 UTC
It's too bad -- even though it would have been Quixotic to schedule it so -- that it wasn't more towards primetime -- which, obviously, would have been probably foolishness in the face of night time cold -- since the geniuses who put the bowl games together this year -- another double-dashed aside for no reason -- created a bunch of stinkers that would have had channels flipping.

Reply

punishyourma January 2 2008, 15:09:55 UTC
I mentioned in my update - but I've been reading a lot of the response to this game from non-fans, and there are a ton of people who found it while flipping channels that were really impressed, some of whom claim to be permanently hooked, so it appears that it served its purpose.

(I skipped all of the Bowl games yesterday. I was so high on hockey after watching this, I ended up popping in hockey DVDs for the rest of the day)

Reply

eagerjimmy January 2 2008, 15:21:47 UTC
It is very true as you put in your update that ESPN has an anti-hockey slant (and getting anti-baseball because baseball doesn't want to let ESPN do whatever the hell it wants whenever it wants). Unless a sport completely kow-tows (however that's supposed to be spelled) to the network, there is always an editorial slant towards belittling it if they can get away with it. Since FOX bought coverage rights that ABC/ESPN used to have to most of the BCS bowls, I expect it to be even stronger against the BCS, for all the wrong reasons.

I would expect that some people clicked by and realized "Oh yeah...hockey...this can be fun to watch. I need to check it out again.", but I'd worry about the "I wasn't a fan, but now I'm hooked!" line. Sounds too clammish. Then again, I didn't see the comments, so am probably just letting the cold infect my brain.

Reply

punishyourma January 2 2008, 15:43:20 UTC
Most of the comments weren't quite that clammish, at least not in the vein of "I used to hate hockey, but now I'm going to start my own cult devoted to it." I just got the feeling that a lot of those people might look for it where they otherwise might not have.

Even with the ESPN slant aside, that Burnside artcile was an absurd laundry list of negativity that basically said "sure, the whole thing came off pretty well, but here's all the reasons how it couldn't have." The "somebody could have got hurt" line was laughable, given that you could say that for any sport played in any venue at any time of year.

Reply


eagerjimmy January 2 2008, 15:57:57 UTC
Pictures like the one here (this direct link is fine; the site can be work iffy) are a nice sidelight of such a thing, too. Nice spray of ice, snow clearly visible, blurred stadium light and stadium behind.

Oh, and this one is a nice shot, too.

Reply

punishyourma January 2 2008, 16:04:44 UTC
Those are some awesome shots, especially the one from behind Conklin. I also love that both teams wore vintage uniforms. That was pretty cool.

Reply


eagerjimmy January 2 2008, 18:34:41 UTC
Weird....just now, not logged into LiveJournal yet, it made me confirm my age, then hid all your posts behind a "not suitable for minors" link...

Reply

punishyourma January 2 2008, 18:47:56 UTC
I changed the settings a few days ago do have the site listed as "some adult content," since I'm prone to using bad language once in a while. But I changed it back. Fuck the little buggers if they find the place. A few four letter words aren't going to kill them.

Reply

eagerjimmy January 2 2008, 18:50:43 UTC
Goofy. Didn't happen at work, but it did here at home where it is above 50 degrees so I can actually work.

Agreed, though. Fuck the little buggers. It's better they hear it from us than from the produce attendants at the grocery store.

Reply


eagerjimmy January 3 2008, 14:03:21 UTC
Best ratings for a game since '96, which, unfortunately, may have been the glow-puck era.

I'm sorry I scoffed at it when it was first announced. I still think they lucked into something, but, well done. Who would have thought that could be said about the NHL league masters? Unfortunately, I wonder what will happen when those who tuned in for this game try to find another game to watch on TV.

Reply

punishyourma January 3 2008, 14:44:23 UTC
I think it was the All Star game in 1996 when they first used the glow puck.

I scoffed, too, mostly because I didn't think it could stand up to the ratings competition on New Year's Day. I know everybody's got their own ideas about how to "save" the NHL, but I should hope that the league masters take a lesson from this game, that TV is the biggest barrier that's keeping new fans away. NBCs setting to televise a few more regular season games and they'll cover the playoffs and finals for sure, but yeah - you have to be pretty dedicated to take the time to hunt for which cable channel your game is going to be on each time around and hope you're lucky enough to have your provider carry it. No new or casual fan is going to plop down $170 for Center Ice.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up