Good article in the Globe and Mail

[Allsmokenopancake 0]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto.../TPStory/Sports

The National Hockey League has stopped playing games that matter this week while it puts many of its star players in the spotlight during its annual all-star game, the first in three years. In many ways, the non-contest, which is being held in Dallas tomorrow, is a microcosm of the league itself in its struggles to attract wider audiences to the sport.

Commissioner Gary Bettman typically delivers a state-of-the-game assessment during this break, and as always, it will be a rosy one. But all is not rosy. Attendance is down, TV ratings are abysmal and the league still can't seem to figure out how to market its assets to non-core fans. And it's not only the owners. The players, too, have paid scant attention to the sport's marketing woes.

"It's a bit like pulling teeth during the season," said Calgary defenceman Andrew Ference, one of half-a-dozen player business representatives who are in Dallas to kick around some marketing ideas. "We have to convince guys that it's worth doing."

Based on the number of arenas with empty seats and falling TV ratings, "obviously, their marketing is not working very well," said sports marketing expert Brad Robins, who likes the league's new Internet content ventures, but says it is still not doing enough to expose the game to new audiences.

Its a long article that continues in the link, but an interesting read I thought

[Grinder 2]

It'd be good if they made the All Star game worth something - maybe home ice advantage for the cup final, or some such thing. Add some incentive to create some intensity.

Or, put Bettman into the hardest shot contest by having him stand in front of the net unprotected.

[hockeymom 2]

Interesting that one of the suggestions in this article is to have the young gun like Crosby show more flair and get more involved in self promotion... now wouldn't all the Crosby bashers just LOVE to hate that??!!

I do find the "compelling stories" rather than selling the game to be interesting. Advertising 101 - find the inherent drama in the brand.

[Deerok 3]

It'd be good if they made the All Star game worth something - maybe home ice advantage for the cup final, or some such thing. Add some incentive to create some intensity.

Or, put Bettman into the hardest shot contest by having him stand in front of the net unprotected.

LMAO! You're right Grinder; if he really cares about the league he will do what it takes!

[Chadd 916]

Interesting that one of the suggestions in this article is to have the young gun like Crosby show more flair and get more involved in self promotion... now wouldn't all the Crosby bashers just LOVE to hate that??!!

I do find the "compelling stories" rather than selling the game to be interesting. Advertising 101 - find the inherent drama in the brand.

They should be doing it for more than one player. Crosby, Ovechkin, Forsberg, Sakic, Iginla, Malkin, Afinogenov, etc... are all amazingly skilled players and should be marketed. There is so much potential marketing gold to mine for the NHL, it's absolutely amazing how poorly they have done. I'm not sure they could do much worse if they actually tried.

[hockeymom 2]

Interesting that one of the suggestions in this article is to have the young gun like Crosby show more flair and get more involved in self promotion... now wouldn't all the Crosby bashers just LOVE to hate that??!!

I do find the "compelling stories" rather than selling the game to be interesting. Advertising 101 - find the inherent drama in the brand.

They should be doing it for more than one player. Crosby, Ovechkin, Forsberg, Sakic, Iginla, Malkin, Afinogenov, etc... are all amazingly skilled players and should be marketed. There is so much potential marketing gold to mine for the NHL, it's absolutely amazing how poorly they have done. I'm not sure they could do much worse if they actually tried.

You're right Chadd... sigh... it certainly seems like they sat around a table and very carefully planned how NOT to successfully market the NHL.

The choice is... market the game or market the stars. The stars are compelling, team rivalry is compelling. That is where the sizzle and the story lives. But diehard fans find having stars "shoved down their throats" appalling.

On the other hand, we've sat around in other threads and said market the game... it is fast and exciting. In the absense of ENOUGH dramatic stars that is the only route to go.

Given this, I can see why they have had trouble... plus the emerging stars haven't quite demonstrated that they have the staying power to hang the entire NHL franchise on them quite yet.

[DarkStar50 679]

If any of the NHL front office marketing people had any brains or sense of history they would see the answer to their marketing problem is too simply study a little history of when the NHL was on the radar with the US markets. I will name 3 times: the first was the early and mid 70s. What sold me on hockey then? Simple, the Big, Bad Bruins and then the Broad Street Bullies, the Flyers. Those two teams had juice, they had sizzle, and they had players you could love, hate, and fear. The Bruins: Orr, Esposito, Hodge, Cashman, Bucyk, Sanderson, and Cheevers. Those guys brought energy and excitement when they were in your building. The Flyers: Clarke, Leach, Barber, Parent, Schultz, Kelly, Saleski, and Dupont. Put the kids to bed because here comes trouble. The Flyers were the ultimate drawing card for the NHL, whether you hated their style or not. The second case in point is not NHL related but hockey related. USA Olympic team in Lake Placid. While Brooks won't let the media talk to the team, the team was still the story. Add in the Russian drama and there was everything you needed for a must watch hockey event. Finally, the last time the NHL had anything going for it in terms of marketing with staying power: Wayne Gretzky and the Edmonton Oilers from 1982 to 1988. The Oilers: Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Kurri, Fuhr, Anderson, Tikkanen, and Lowe. Just watching their high speed track meets on ice was a thrill every time. The common denominator in this history lesson is that the NHL had teams and players to market that brought their own level of energy and excitement to your arena every time they were in town. Now, there are simply too many teams that cannot support the product with the same level of enthusiasm for catching the casual fan or the new fan, for that matter. I have the NHL Center Ice TV package. There are certain teams I have no interest in watching at all. The teams have no juice and no excitement. Some even have a high profile vendor endorsed player on their roster. I still won't sit through 3 shifts of scrubs to watch the "superstar" float through his shift every 2-3 minutes.

The idea of trying to get the rivalries going is good. There is a certain amount of excitement when its Rangers/Islanders, Leafs/Habs, and Oilers/Flames. However, the last Battle of Alberta I saw was more like a pre-season scrimmage than any Game 7 war it might have been hyped as. Sometimes you will lay an egg.

On the one hand, I think the NHL needs to look at when the league was popular and exciting and figure out what it had then that it doesn't have now. On the other hand, what the NHL has now is too many damn teams with not enough talent to sustain a high energy product. And I didn't even mention the over-priced tickets to a game. That subject I'll save after catching my breath from this rant.

[MDE3 0]

Bring on the Global Hockey League.... Need some teams from Iran and North Korea in the mix.....and the way things have been going lately in Russia the there is likely to be a major revival of old attitudes with them too.

[hockeymom 2]

So, essentially what you are saying is that the current product sucks.

Hockey is no longer an interesting game to watch and even comitted fans are finding many games a snore. When it is boring for people who know and love hockey, who are capable of amusing themselves by watching the nuance of individual players or plays, it is impossible to draw in new fans.

In this light, Bettman's strategy of "let's fix the game first" and hold our breath through a couple of rebuilding years makes sense.

Biting the bullet with a TV non-network (tongue planted firmly in cheek on that one, because the NHL had no other option IMO) that at least brings in some revenue also makes sense. If you have a product that only "brand-loyal", commited fans will watch, they will be willing to go thru some hoops in order to watch it on TV. Yes, they'll bitch about it, but they will still follow it.

As much as some people around here think it is evil and manipulative....in marketing and advertising you simply can not lie; you can't make something what it is not. Well, ok, you CAN, but it always backfires and bites you in the butt. You might be able to convince someone to try something once, but if it doesn't live up to what you have said it is or does, they will go away and not try it again. It actually goes beyond that because they're turned into comitted non-users who are often very vocal.

[DarkStar50 679]

The Flames/Oilers game lacked juice due to injuries. It was hard to get any passion in the game without the key combatants.

Hockey was strong in the 80s in the US. The 1980s Olympics ride lasted a number of years for hockey momentum. That generation of US players won the the US/Canada battle in 97(?, I think) with Richter in nets and Hull on Team USA. The 80s hockey wave was helped by the Oilers and when Wayne Gretzky brought his team to town. The Oilers on the road were like the Yankees. They always sold out the building. The early 90s were good with the Pens, 66, and 68. Of course, they destroyed Chicago and Minnesota in the Cup Finals so there was no drama there. There was very little momentum ever carried into the next year with hockey. 94 was the pinnacle for hockey with the Rangers but hello lock-out in 95. The door slammed shut and its been a struggle since then. The whole expansion bonanza from 21 to 30 teams sunk the ship. You could complain that it was joke when 16 of 21 made the play-offs but you know what? It was better then.

There are times now when you have to watch the game for moments inside of the game. It is like watching football where you wait for the big play. The end-to-end game is so rare that when it happens the TV guys are pissing in their pants because they are so excited to see this again. They remember the 80s style of fire wagon Western Conference hockey. I'll watch the game forever. It is just that I change what I watch within the game that makes a difference for me. That is just my experience. This method will never catch a new fan for the NHL.

Then again, sometimes I think screw'em! If people don't want to get turned on to hockey, the heck with them!

[DarkStar50 679]

Right on, theo. If 66 and 99 couldn't do it for hockey, don't hold your breath thinking 87 and 8 will!