Why Isnt the Hawks' Record Start a Bigger Story!?!?!

[DMelt36]

This was quite a few years ago before the explosion of shitty shows like first take, SEC Storied, etc etc that took up time. It would be on ESPN 2 quite a bit though as well. ESPN also had Sunday Night Hockey quite a bit too IIRC. ESPN was programmed way different back then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPN_National_Hockey_Night

A (very)brief overview.

I do have vague memories of catching episodes of NHL 2Night on ESPN/ESPN2 back in the late 90s, but I feel like they were always on around 11 p.m.

Hard to do any kind of comparison, though, because the sports media landscape from that time period is almost unrecognizable, compared to today.

I also remember ESPN doing a weekly broadcast of an NHL game each week, but I don't remember what night it was on. Part of me thinks some of those games were on Sunday afternoons, similar to what NBC does now. I'm almost certain that a Hawks/Bruins game around St. Patty's Day was a Sunday afternoon national broadcast on ESPN. Some Hawks fans may remember that game as the Eric Daze/Steve Sullivan double hat trick game.

Also as a side note, whenever the Hawks were on ESPN, it was a national broadcast and the game was carried on TV, home or away. But whenever the Hawks were set to be broadcast on ESPN2 and it was at the United Center, that game was blacked out because of the Hawks' ancient blackout restrictions.

 

[dabynsky]

Couldn't agree more.

Although I've always that baseball is the one that makes the roughest transition to TV. But that's just me.

Obviously, this is all opinion, but to me, baseball is by far the worst transfer from live to television. On tv, its almost as bad as watching paint dry.

Gunz is right, that feels dirty to say, that this is all opinion, but I think you guys misunderstand what I meant by worst transfer to television. I am not refering to what people find the most enjoyable to watch on television, but rather what the cameras are able to capture for fans at home. There is so much going on the ice that is missed on a broadcast of a hockey game due to the limits of the camera. Whereas in baseball the action is relatively confined to a specific area that is easy for cameras to hone in on. Again this is opinion, but it seems like hockey is the sport that has the most stuff cut off from the viewer, football would be the other sport in this conversation for my money and it is debatable between the two which is the most I would guess.

The other factor for watching on hockey on television has been rectified with high definition television. Again opinion, but I think hockey more than any other sport's television experience has been improved by high defintion.

 

[Gunzaan]

Gunz is right, that feels dirty to say, that this is all opinion, but I think you guys misunderstand what I meant by worst transfer to television. I am not refering to what people find the most enjoyable to watch on television, but rather what the cameras are able to capture for fans at home. There is so much going on the ice that is missed on a broadcast of a hockey game due to the limits of the camera. Whereas in baseball the action is relatively confined to a specific area that is easy for cameras to hone in on. Again this is opinion, but it seems like hockey is the sport that has the most stuff cut off from the viewer, football would be the other sport in this conversation for my money and it is debatable between the two which is the most I would guess.

The other factor for watching on hockey on television has been rectified with high definition television. Again opinion, but I think hockey more than any other sport's television experience has been improved by high defintion.

Ahhh, I gotcha now and I completely agree.. the backend of hockey shifts/line changes and the defense does get cut out on the camera, as does the secondary alignments in football... That is a great observation and point!

 

[DMelt36]

Very good points by dabynsky.

I think it's fair to say this story is starting to pick up steam in the national spotlight, no?

 

[nwfisch]

Very good points by dabynsky.

I think it's fair to say this story is starting to pick up steam in the national spotlight, no?

Yeah. ESPN promoted resident idiot Screamin' A. Smith on the story. I guess its better than nothing :shrug:

 

[DMelt36]

Yeah. ESPN promoted resident idiot Screamin' A. Smith on the story. I guess its better than nothing :shrug:

Hahaha yeah. I've avoided any programming with him at all.

Just turned on SportsCenter the last few nights and have seen an early segment dedicated to their highlights.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Article on NBC Chicago

Glad to see more people starting to realize that this streak will mean nothing if they don't win it all.

If some wanna call it a success, despite falling short of the Cup, then so be it.

But, i'd find it to be a massive fail if they don't hoist the Cup in June.

 

[ClydeLee]

Article on NBC Chicago

Glad to see more people starting to realize that this streak will mean nothing if they don't win it all.

If some wanna call it a success, despite falling short of the Cup, then so be it.

But, i'd find it to be a massive fail if they don't hoist the Cup in June.

There's a difference from the season being a fail, which it would be, and the streak having cool meaning.

Sent from Neverwhere using Taptalk

 

[DrGonzo]

Article on NBC Chicago

Glad to see more people starting to realize that this streak will mean nothing if they don't win it all.

If some wanna call it a success, despite falling short of the Cup, then so be it.

But, i'd find it to be a massive fail if they don't hoist the Cup in June.

It's hard to imagine they wont, as long as they stay healthy.

 

[Diehardfan]

Article on NBC Chicago

Glad to see more people starting to realize that this streak will mean nothing if they don't win it all.

If some wanna call it a success, despite falling short of the Cup, then so be it.

But, i'd find it to be a massive fail if they don't hoist the Cup in June.

That is just complete foolishness. What's happening now......is NOW. So much can transpire between NOW and the playoffs that making any long term prognonsis is just ridiculous. Injuries are always a huge difference makers, how do you or anyone else know which players will go down? Plus how things finish plays into it as well. Would the season be a such a "massive fail" if they go down in a great back n forth 7 game Finals series? I think not.

The team has the right attitude. Don't worry about next week, next month or the playoffs......worry about your next game.

 

[brett05]

OP's got a point. if the fugging Indians started their season off 70-0 with 10 wins in Extra Innings, it would be big news....

Of course that's not the same. It's like the Indians going 60-10 with 10 Extra Inning Losses.

 

[brett05]

Gunz is right, that feels dirty to say, that this is all opinion, but I think you guys misunderstand what I meant by worst transfer to television. I am not refering to what people find the most enjoyable to watch on television, but rather what the cameras are able to capture for fans at home. There is so much going on the ice that is missed on a broadcast of a hockey game due to the limits of the camera. Whereas in baseball the action is relatively confined to a specific area that is easy for cameras to hone in on. Again this is opinion, but it seems like hockey is the sport that has the most stuff cut off from the viewer, football would be the other sport in this conversation for my money and it is debatable between the two which is the most I would guess.

The other factor for watching on hockey on television has been rectified with high definition television. Again opinion, but I think hockey more than any other sport's television experience has been improved by high defintion.

Ahhh, I gotcha now and I completely agree.. the backend of hockey shifts/line changes and the defense does get cut out on the camera, as does the secondary alignments in football... That is a great observation and point!

I'd say football makes the best transition. I think Football live is the worst view of the major sports (including the NHL here). Just too big of a field to cover for a fan at the game. On TV you do lose the secondary but you gain so much more in the play than being there live. You get an end zone seat and you are basically good for field goal kicks. Maybe.

 

[DMelt36]

Of course that's not the same. It's like the Indians going 60-10 with 10 Extra Inning Losses.

Not exactly the same. It'd be more like the Indians winning 60 games in 9 innings, winning 4 in extra innings, and going 3-3 in the home run derby that followed after the extra innings ended in another tie.

See how fucking stupid the shootout is?