I don't like sports, but I've come to really like hockey. It helps to watch the games with fans or be in a fan-friendly place. It reminds me of Marshall going to the only Vikings-friendly bar in New York City and forbidding Robin from telling anyone she's from Canada.

What is it with DTV and not paying? They lost the mountian network for a few months this year because they would not pay. Come on, give them what they are due!

What's up with the anti-hockey schtick, Phil? Yeah, it's a niche sport...but there are plenty of us to fill that niche.

This could be a great chance for dishnetwork to get alot of customers back that once fled to directv.

Congrats to Gary Bettman once again for signing with a network that hardly anybody actually GETS on their cable or satellite. Pure genius.

What is up with the anti-hockey bias in your commentary? Hockey is a great sport for television. Just because you're too dull to follow a puck around doesn't mean no one else can. I'm not the biggest hockey fan around, but it is one of the sports I enjoy most on television.

@pecan 3.14159265:
Yeah, it also helps to understand the game. So many people dismiss it because they don't understand what the players are doing aside from attempting to put the puck in the net.

Great show by the way, and great episode. :)

@edicius:

Did any other network want the NHL? :(

You know who owns VERSUS? Comcast.

This is the same company that won't make CSN-Philadelphia (home of Philadelphia Flyers NHL games) available to DirecTV. And guess who also owns the Flyers? Comcast.

Hockey is one of the sports that has benefited most from the advent of HD. To say it's TV-unfriendly is asinine.

@xthexlanternx: I've always been a hockey fan, and since the HD aspect ratio switch (not to mention the resolution... oh wait, I just did), it's about 1000% more watchable. Maybe he's still rocking the CRT in the living room?

@BuzzDar: Except to get Versus on DishNetwork you have to pay for the highest programming tier, so, not so much.

@pecan 3.14159265:

I don't know what part of the US you live in, but if there is a decent (Division I or III) college hockey team near you, check out some of their games. The rules are tougher on bully conduct, so there's less stoppage of the game and more flow, IME. Also, the prices are good, usually $8-10 per adult. (Don't get me going; I'm a total nut about the sport.)

@wishnias: I watched most of this past year's playoffs on pirated streams in my dorm room, and loved every second of it.

The article should DEFINITELY note, as MFfan310 noted in an earlier comment, that Comcast owns Versus. This little tidbit explains the whole ordeal.

Hopefully the FCC's announcement regarding tough enforcement of Net Neutrality (which was only thinly-veiled direct shot at Comcast) will only be the beginning of a new, more intelligent and more consumer-friendly policy for dealing with these bastards.

@pecan 3.14159265: I have been to three live hockey games, to of which were EXCELLENT seats. So much fun.

@Smashville: As a Canadian, it is so bizarre to hear hockey referred to as a niche sport. :)

Also, I don't get the "TV-unfriendly sport" part either. Everyone I know watches games -- even through massive static if, like me, they refuse to get cable -- on television just fine.

I used to like hockey, but the labour strife, and the de-Canadianization by the idiot basketball guy from Queens that runs the NHL has made me not care about hockey any more.

"...meaning hockey fans may be in danger of having their TV-unfriendly sport not showing up much on TV this season."

TV-unfriendly? It's fast-paced and exciting. Unlike baseball, where you have to watch a pitcher scratch his balls for two minutes between pitches with a bored announce mumbling about something, or american football, where you have to watch them take a break every two seconds of play. Plus, it typically fits well within its scheduled timeslot.

It's not popular in the US, that's for sure, but to call it TV-unfriendly is just plain wrong.

@OneBigPear: Agreed. That "TV unfriendly" sport is really naieve, there is no sport better suited for HD than hockey.

@edicius: Um, ratings have risen since it was put on VS and NBC. Instead of sitting at the bottom on ESPN, VS holds hockey as it's biggest contending sport on the network and does a good job at it.

@Vandelay Import Export: I'm not a Bettman supporter by any means, but to say you hate hockey because you hate the commissioner is pretty short-minded.

The opinionated parts of this post are pretty close-minded Phil.

TV Unfriendly? Hockey is one of the best sports that benefit from HD. The arenas and ice look amazing in HD, and the puck is much more visible. Also it's one of the only sports with virtually continuous non-stop play.

VS isn't the only channel that broadcasts hockey. FSN (around the US), NBC, CBC.

I realize this is a blog and blogs can be opinionated, but your statements are kind of dull here.

@pattiesmart: I have been to many (I'm Canadian) and loved each and every one of them. Also, playing outdoor hockey in winter is bliss.

@dragonfire81:
I'm the odd man out here, although a Canadian, I absolutely can't stand watching hockey. These changes will be US only if anything because Canadians are nuts about hockey, once the season starts you can find a game on multiple channels on a basic cable package !

I'm a casual NHL fan - grew up on Caps games and later adopted the Avalanche. But the NHL makes it really hard to love them. Wasn't the last strike partly about TV revenue and broadcast rights? Was putting all their pucks in the Versus basket just the best they could do when NHL games get lower Neilsen ratings than a Lifetime movie rerun with Merideth Baxter Berney(sp?)? It seems like they'd be smart to get control of their broadcasting rights by internalizing them and licensing them to Dish, DTV, Comcast, etc. (for the few people who seem to want to watch the games on TV).

Don Cherry will smite you Phil :p

@pecan 3.14159265: Agreed, I had never bothered with hockey until one of my friends who had season tickets invited me to a few games. Now I'm hooked like crazy, and if I can't see the game live, I'll hit the sports bar and have them put it on.

@jheri curl juice: Not Don Cherry, as he can't get his hands dirty. It would be an animated suit and tie of his that would do it.

Please don't take my Hockey from me, TV Gods.
I need some kind of uniformed, grunty faux-battle action this winter- and I'm not watching Football for moral reasons.

Besides- if Hockey isn't on, My pops will have nothing to scream at but the Cats, and that's not good for anybody.

Hockey as a sport is TV Friendly-- But as a league the NHL has been TV stupid for years. From Chicago refusing to televise local home games in fear of it decreasing stadium revenue to the the current deal that they have with NBC/Versus which allows the networks to mandate the playoff schedule as well as not pay any significant up front fee to the league.

@Moosehawk: Not being a hockey person, I have seen timeouts and whatnot stop play. The term I've heard is icing, IIRC. I don't know the meaning of it, but play gets stopped and they cut to a commercial.

I think the only sport that is non-stop is soccer. And for that reason, it will never be a major tv sport in the US, since there are no natural breaks to put in 2-minute commercials. Sure they show the various Cups, but a regular match is not going to be a Monday Night Soccer game.

I would encourage all Versus viewers (regardless of what they are watching) complain about the extra text that shows up on the screen next to their large logo. To me, the large amount of commercial time and frequency of the breaks in a broadcast is what keeps me from even being a casual viewer of other events (like car racing).

@nybiker: Without icings and offsides, the referee would kill himself. Trust me. I'm a referee.

Considering that Direct TV is not legally allowed to setup Canadian Customers, ice hockey has zero shot at getting people to be picked over College Football.

@lunarworks:

Fast paced eh? I guess that's why Soccer has been a roaring success in the US...

@nybiker: You are incorrect there is no break for icing, not only is there no break, but the offending team cannot substitute players. Which adds to the the non-stop play, players must change while play is still going on, while at the same time never having more than six players on the ice at one time. Just imagine that chaos on a football field or basketball court.

The only breaks in hockey come at predetermined intervals for TV commercials. Someone does have to pay the bills.

One more aspect that makes hockey so enjoyable is every player on the roster plays every night. How many guys are on a football team that never even sniff the field?

@golddog: Actually the strike was about controlling cost not about broadcasts rights. Unfortunately the owners can resist paying obscene amounts to players and then wonder why they don't make any money.

@Collie: I think people are talking about different things with similar words. Icing does create a stoppage in play, but rarely leads to a stoppage in coverage. (Similar thing with the ball going out of bounds in basketball; if a TV timeout is due, you'll get one, otherwise, they just blow the whistle.)

@nybiker: It's probably more important to note now that there are so many alternatives to soccer, even as soccer increases its following (as through ESPN's partial coverage of EPL matches this season), there isn't going to be a lot of people to gain, but rather they may be offsetting people they'd otherwise lose.

Let's not turn this into a sport-vs-sport thread, we can see that all the time on other sites. Everyone has their favorite sport(s) and most people can find fault with certain sports.

Phil, I have to agree with the general critique of your post with respect to TV-friendliness, but would also like to disagree with your interpretation of the situation. For one thing, several networks other than Versus broadcast college football on DirecTV: if you get the Sports Pack with the huge pile of FSN channels, you'll get several games that way (as well as other channels where available, like the Big Ten Network), and of course there is the ESPN PPV package that gives you a ton more games. Vs coverage of NCAA ball is nice, I suppose, but it wasn't around last year as near as I can tell. I doubt I'd miss it this year.

For another, there are many, many NHL games on DirecTV that we'll be seeing regardless of what happens with Versus: the Center Ice package will still be intact. That's the real reason why DirecTV doesn't have to budge. Vs has no leverage and DirecTV knows it. (And frankly, Vs' coverage sucks unmentionables. Blacked-out or partially-covered playoff games, for one thing.)

Yet another example of Gary Bettman's ability to turn wine into water.

I love hockey but couldn't give a toss about Versus. Their broadcasts are amateur and I wouldn't miss them one bit. My beef is with Cablevision and that massive tool Dolan. I have the Center Ice package and cannot get NY Rangers games on MSGHD. I am to the point of canceling my hockey package if this is not resolved this season.