All this effort to keep fans away from the game baffles me.
I downloaded the NBC sports app, but i have to prove I already subscribe to it through a cable provider to watch it.
If I was subscribing to it, I would be watching it on TV!
My cable provider is AT&T and they refused to negotiate with the NHL for their NHL channel, so I don't get that either. And I'm in an apartment with AT&T as my only choice of cable providers.
How this isn't collusion, i'll never understand. - seedy
It's not collusion. Your complex/ownership just signed a contract with AT&T to be the exclusive provider at a discount. It's pretty common. It is bullpoop however.
Location: you don't need an ignore button to ignore someone., CA Joined: 02.22.2007
Apr 14 @ 12:16 AM ET
It's not collusion. Your complex/ownership just signed a contract with AT&T to be the exclusive provider at a discount. It's pretty common. It is bullpoop however. - Wetbandit1
I actually think its casebook collusion to double dip like that, but I don't have the millions of dollars I would need to take them to court over it, so I lose…..by paying for nothing.
Im just thinking about this now because Im hoping the Sabres are in the playoffs next year.
I actually think its casebook collusion to double dip like that, but I don't have the millions of dollars I would need to take them to court over it, so I lose…..by paying for nothing.
Im just thinking about this now because Im hoping the Sabres are in the playoffs next year. - seedy
Location: you don't need an ignore button to ignore someone., CA Joined: 02.22.2007
Apr 14 @ 12:22 AM ET
How do you mean double dip? - Wetbandit1
I have to pay two different providers for one service.
they purposely divide it up so I have to subscribe to cable and NHL game canter.
I can't get everything under one plan.
I should be able to pay the NHL to see every game they broadcast.
or may be next year, every Sabres game they broadcast.
I physically can't do that through any one provider right now.
I have to pay two different providers for one service.
they purposely divide it up so I have to subscribe to cable and NHL game canter.
I can't get everything under one plan.
I should be able to pay the NHL to see every game they broadcast.
or may be next year, every Sabres game they broadcast.
I physically can't do that through any one provider right now. - seedy
Oh ok, I see what you're saying. I don't think anybody other than pirates can get every game through one service though. There are blackouts for everyone. And even if you had cable they'd charge for Center Ice too. The guy on here who lives in Hawaii has the Ducks and Kings blacked out I believe. Because of the way the local rights work you can't get "local" games on NHLtv/GameCenter or Center Ice most of the time. It's bullpoop, but it's one of the less nefarious things cable/satellite companies do.
Location: you don't need an ignore button to ignore someone., CA Joined: 02.22.2007
Apr 14 @ 12:38 AM ET
Oh ok, I see what you're saying. I don't think anybody other than pirates can get every game through one service though. There are blackouts for everyone. And even if you had cable they'd charge for Center Ice too. The guy on here who lives in Hawaii has the Ducks and Kings blacked out I believe. Because of the way the local rights work you can't get "local" games on NHLtv/GameCenter or Center Ice most of the time. It's bullpoop, but it's one of the less nefarious things cable/satellite companies do. - Wetbandit1
I just think the NHL needs to get it's head out of it's a$$ and wake up to the fact that a lot of people don't even want to pay for cable anymore. Im on a basic cable plan right now and am looking to officially cut the cord and just roll that money over in to better internet service (business class or something)
And I understand those exclusive cable rights make the league money, but do they really need it? it's antiquated and just makes the NHL look like its slow on the draw/behind the times like everything else they do. The example of the person in Hawaii is perfect. It makes absolutely no sense, but thems the rules, so thats all there is to it.
the owners don't need the money the league doesn't need the money and Bettman doesn't need the money, so why not get your product out to more people?
first day of playoff hockey blacked out is inexcusable. I expect the same tomorrow.
I just think the NHL needs to get it's head out of it's a$$ and wake up to the fact that a lot of people don't even want to pay for cable anymore. Im on a basic cable plan right now and am looking to officially cut the cord and just roll that money over in to better internet service (business class or something)
And I understand those exclusive cable rights make the league money, but do they really need it? it's antiquated and just makes the NHL look like its slow on the draw/behind the times like everything else they do. The example of the person in Hawaii is perfect. It makes absolutely no sense, but thems the rules, so thats all there is to it.
the owners don't need the money the league doesn't need the money and Bettman doesn't need the money, so why not get your product out to more people?
first day of playoff hockey blacked out is inexcusable. I expect the same tomorrow. - seedy
The league really does need the money from broadcasting rights that eleventy billion dollar deal with Rogers in Canada is paying a lot of celeries and was the main reason the cap has gone up the past 2 years, or at least didn't go down. And they(Canadians) can watch any Canadian team play, there are no local blackouts for Canadians and Canadian teams.
But I agree, something needs to be done to better accommodate the cord cutters, because even the one team package is way too expensive. Edit: and even then depending on the team a ton of games get blacked out. So very stupid.
To add to my the Warriors and Curry are obscene. They've made 1076 3 pointers this year. Twice what the '96 Bulls did; the team that went 72-10 made half of the 3 pointers of this Warriors team. That is mind boggling.
Edit: I watch about 8 minutes of NBA a season. The last little bit of the championship elimination game.
On October 20 1972 the Buffalo Braves scored 58 points in the 4th quarter good for 1st all-time beating the record by 4 points. The very next night the Braves scored 4 points in the 3rd quarter good for "2nd" place all-time scoring 2 less than the '97 Mavs with 2.
How does that even happen? Did they just rest everyone after the display the night before? Did they just not take any shots?
Location: you don't need an ignore button to ignore someone., CA Joined: 02.22.2007
Apr 14 @ 1:02 AM ET
To add to my the Warriors and Curry are obscene. They've made 1076 3 pointers this year. Twice what the '96 Bulls did; the team that went 72-10 made half of the 3 pointers of this Warriors team. That is mind boggling.
Edit: I watch about 8 minutes of NBA a season. The last little bit of the championship elimination game. - Wetbandit1
I don't pay attention to Basketball either, but it is pretty amazing to live in a town with a team that is just that dominant.
Definitely not used to that.
When you score 82 points in a season you can gloss over a few defensive deficiencies. Also LA is way better defensively as a team than Ottawa.
Karlsson wasn't just a PP specialist either, he was tied for 6th in the league with even strength points with 54. He also led the league in assists. Not among defensemen, among everyone.Tied for 4th overall in the league for scoring. The award hasn't been best defensive-defenseman since 1983 when Rod Langway won it. Like it or not it's the best player who plays defense award.
Just like the Hart should probably go to a goalie every year given the wording of the award. It often goes to the highest scorer. - Wetbandit1
When judging a DEFENSEman's "all around ability" the defense should obviously be 1st & foremost.
I'm not saying ignore the offense, but I'm definitely saying u can't ignore the defense. And to vote Karlsson for the Norris absolutely ignores the defense part of it.
It says "all around"
In no particular order...
Guys that excel on BOTH ends
Doughty
Keith
Hedman
Seabrook
Letang
Weber
Josi
Subban
McDonaugh
Ekblad
Shattenkirk
Ekman-Larsson
Klingberg
Byfuglien
Giordano
Suter
Probably a few I forgot too
And I know that Karlsson has quite a few more points than some of these guys, it is impressive
But I bet a lot of them could be right up there with him if they decided to basically play forward & not pay so much attention to their actual position