Solving the TV problem
As MoreJuice pointed out in his recent post, over a dozen Pups games are being blacked out on local TV this season - meanwhile, teams with significantly smaller markets have a local broadcast for every single game.
I'm sure many of you have emailed the league and/or Timberwolves officials; see MJ's post for an excellent template. If you haven't already, please do so!
Beyond that, I was hoping we as a CH community could do the following: in the comments thread below, let's track what's airing on each local broadcast channel (FSN, etc) during blacked-out games. I'd love (no pun intended) to see what mythical creatures get air time over our beloved Unicorns. I will update this post with the tabulated results periodically.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
oye ve'
Do you really want to know that FSN is airing Mighty Ducks 3 instead of your Wolves game?
if you include the my29 programming (or whatever channel had the few free tv games last year)
it’ll get even more disgusting…
They air national FSN programming, or Wild/Gophers games.
All of which probably equal or better Wolves ratings from 2008-2011.
Watch the ratings. If they are good, maybe they’ll add a few games. If they are good enough, they’ll air all of them. I don’t know how much college hockey they will show on BTN, but that might help a little bit in a few years.
The Wild and Gopher hockey teams are their best excuse
But it does not account for every blackout, and it sounds like they gave up the MY29 broadcasts due to them being costly and a pain to schedule. Not good enough for me.
Like I said, it's about ratings.
It costs money to air a Wolves game, and no one watched in recent years. No one. Estimates of under 2,000 households watching Wolves games vs. 250,000+ watching Wild games.
FSN will air the minimum number of games they are obligated to until they can prove to advertisers that more people will watch a Wolves game than a test pattern/college game between Rider and Siena.
by Ray Williams? on Jan 16, 2012 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
The team can get games on TV if it wants too.
I am not saying I don’t believe you, but do you have a link to that 250,000 – 2,000 info? That is staggering. I would be curious to see how the Bucks rate locally, because as I pointed out, they broadcast every game.
It was an old Strib article...
Doubt it is available now.
by Ray Williams? on Jan 16, 2012 4:35 PM CST up reply actions
Here are some averages from a few years ago...
If the average is 17,000 households, you can imagine what happened near the end of some of these abysmal seasons when the Twins were back, and the Wild were playing meaningful hockey.
Here’s something referring to that article I remembered. I guess it’s not 250,000 for the Wild, but it’s not that far off.
by Ray Williams? on Jan 16, 2012 11:14 PM CST up reply actions
I'm always quick to blame the NBA for predatory monopolism
but in the case of FSN, I think a complicating factor is that Minnesota good ol’ boys tend to be hockey fans to the point of disrespecting basketball just because they can. I don’t think it bothers anyone at FSN one little bit that some Wolves’ games are going unbroadcast in Minnesota. Not one bit.
Yo ho ho and a FirstRow stream!
A second local channel needs to step up
my29 used to fill the gap with games that FSN couldn’t (or possibly didn’t want to) cover.
I really think FSN would cover more of the games if they could, because I don’t think the production cost is an issue. They put way more into the game coverage than they really need to, with often 5-6 or more broadcasters/personalities involved in the coverage. They have a post-game and a pre-game show which could both be cut out if cost was the main issue. The my29 game coverage was usually very bare bones with Jim Pete or Hanny often doubling as the sideline reporter for the halftime assistant coach interview. Obviously for that network, cost might have been a factor.

by 













