NHL/hockey TV ratings 2024-25

Coinneach

Registered User
Feb 1, 2014
1,299
765
Czech Republic
NHL TV ratings 2024/25
(via @jheaps4)

October:

Blues-Kraken: 348k (ESPN)
Bruins-Panthers: 790k (ESPN, non-exclusive)
Blackhawks-Utah: 522k (ESPN)
Rangers-Penguins: 467k (TNT+truTV)
Avalanche-Golden Knights 315k (TNT+truTV)
Wild-Blues: 417k (ESPN)
Flyers-Oilers: 333k (ESPN)
Sabres-Penguins: 512k (TNT+truTV)
Bruins-Avalanche: 340k (TNT+truTV)
Capitals-Flyers: 477k (ESPN)
Avalanche-Kraken: 422k (ESPN)
Kings-Golden Knights: 245k (ESPN)
Flyers-Capitals: 410k (TNT+truTV)
Rangers-Capitals: 412k (ESPN)
Kings-Sharks: 186k (ESPN)
Golden Knights-Kings: 109k (TNT+truTV)

November:

Red Wings-Blackhawks: 411k (TNT+truTV)
Red Wings-Penguins: 354k (TNT, non-exclusive)
Kings-Avalanche 231k (TNT+truTV)
Hurricanes-Flyers: 237k (TNT, non-exclusive)
 
Last edited:

Reaser

Registered User
May 19, 2021
1,247
2,435

Whenever they don't include HHs or actual #'s or any relevant data it doesn't really tell much. Long history of low viewership markets being up over 100% for a period of time. Panthers have been before, Yotes would always hype things like this up every few years when they had a spike during any multi-week stretch, but in reality the #'s were going from something like 3k HHs to 8k HHs for a handful of games. From pitiful to still pretty bad.

Doesn't mean that's the case here, but we don't know what up 170% means, other than it's up (that's good.) And also, to be up that much suggests a low starting point to be up from.

This is, after all, still a market that had their local affiliate show game shows instead of NHL on ABC national broadcasts as recently as last season.

Regardless, defending cup champs, it SHOULD be up and being up no matter how they got there, is a good thing. Just without any actual data, it doesn't mean much, especially being self-reported. An honest release would show what they're up from, at a minimum.
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
32,561
17,957
Toruń, PL
Whenever they don't include HHs or actual #'s or any relevant data it doesn't really tell much. Long history of low viewership markets being up over 100% for a period of time. Panthers have been before, Yotes would always hype things like this up every few years when they had a spike during any multi-week stretch, but in reality the #'s were going from something like 3k HHs to 8k HHs for a handful of games. From pitiful to still pretty bad.

Doesn't mean that's the case here, but we don't know what up 170% means, other than it's up (that's good.) And also, to be up that much suggests a low starting point to be up from.

This is, after all, still a market that had their local affiliate show game shows instead of NHL on ABC national broadcasts as recently as last season.

Regardless, defending cup champs, it SHOULD be up and being up no matter how they got there, is a good thing. Just without any actual data, it doesn't mean much, especially being self-reported. An honest release would show what they're up from, at a minimum.
Yeah, I don't understand why the article would have the percentage up, but no numbers to collaborate it. It seems to me if that's the case, 170% up is still quite low overall. Good to get more viewership, but I am not expecting anything amazing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reaser

Anisimovs AK

Registered User
Apr 14, 2006
3,444
1,560
Columbus, OH
If we would rank LA market teams the Kings are probably only avobe the Clippers and Changers and below USC and UCLA?
Idk why people still try to compare football ratings to literally any other sport that plays multiple games a week.


And idk if you've seen a UCLA game since 2019, but they are averaging 30k attendance in a 90k stadium. Nobody likes them either
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad