- Nov 15, 2020
- 18,625
- 39,033
Not sure how you can watch the Panthers do what they did to 4 contending teams and say they are not the best team in hockey.
TV Ratings for WC2025
- Thread starter Greatzsky 99
- Start date
Not sure how you can watch the Panthers do what they did to 4 contending teams and say they are not the best team in hockey.
Because they won a tournament.
And where did they finish in the RS?
Even "best" changes depending on your metric.
Still, the NHL plays an uneven schedule (as is common in North American leagues) so that calling the President's Trophy winners the "best team" really isn't all that accurate.
Technically the fairest way to determine a "best team" out of a group of team is to do what European soccer leagues tend to do, which is to have them play a double round robin against each other (once at home and once away). But you can't really get away with that in a North American league with such a huge geographical footprint. At least, not when it's covering a lot of the continent, since in the O6 era they would play 50 games, and I'm pretty sure that was just in the form of 5 home games against each team, then 5 away games against each team. But then they had playoffs afterwards anyway, because it was an opportunity to make more money.
Exactly.
Even IIHF tournaments were round Robin tables but they saw the $$$$ in PO rounds.
And even the tables they use in soccer, yeah, first to worst is going to be clear but once you get the clusters, how much better is first from second? 8th from 9th? At this point random chance is likely as much or more of a factor than one team truly being better than the other- meaning of you replayed the games it's not certain the seedings would remain the same.
I think people want to put more weight into the standings and especially SCPO by thinking it is ascertaining the best team rather than merely being a short tournament (relative to the RS anyway) of which a "champion" is crowned.
2025 WC Ratings have not been released by LTV (Latvia)
But here are total stats for TOP 40 most watched consolidated TV programs of the year 2024.(All TV channels) You can expect 2025 to be very similar. (Population 1.8mil)
As far as I know these stats do not include free internet stream on LTV website and from my personal experience people often do not have TV or TV connected to mainstream TV broadcasting services.
RED = WC or OG qualification game vs France.
But here are total stats for TOP 40 most watched consolidated TV programs of the year 2024.(All TV channels) You can expect 2025 to be very similar. (Population 1.8mil)
As far as I know these stats do not include free internet stream on LTV website and from my personal experience people often do not have TV or TV connected to mainstream TV broadcasting services.
RED = WC or OG qualification game vs France.
Last edited:
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
The playoffs literally determine the best team through 4 rounds best of 7 from 16 teams is. Nobody gives a rats ass about the regular season and it doesnt determine who the best team actually is. My Jets won the PT and yet got bounced in the 2nd round to Dallas, they certainly didnt play like the best team of champions that run either. This isnt EPL soccer, the PT team at the top of the RS standings hasnt even been a Cup winner since the 2013 lockout season, so factually you are wrong.
Nope.
It's just a tournament.
Too much random chance involved for it to determine the best team.
Ergo you are factuslly wrong
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
Its a tournament that determines the Stanley Cup Champion of the league. The best team of 32 teams.
sooooo errrrrr no actually, youre factually wrong and im not. Youre here talking about "too much random chances" in a Best of 7 game series as if a one game knockout isnt exactly that lol. Thats just a baseless opinion from your inflated ego.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 23,912
- 17,077
lol No, that is just a poor take, obviously
4 rounds of 7 determines the best team, not one game elimination.
You said too much random chance in 4x7 series, yet you want more random chance, with one game elimination, make up your mind. Let alone how much revenue is lost, from about 65-70 less games.
If they saw a one gsme knockout round they'd never go back to a series
Nope.
And I never said I don't like random chance. I said there's too much random chance for SCPO tournament ro determine the best team.
In fact, it's just the opposite, I'm perfectly fine with random chance. I like random chance. I am considering getting "Random Chance" tattooed on my personality, to reflect my love and appreciation for the role of random chance in all of life.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 23,912
- 17,077
So put in more random chance lol ok. That’s funny.
How are you making up the 70 games in lost revenue?
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
Yep, it is a poor take.
Youre sitting there saying a 7 game series has "too much random chance" whilst completely ignoring thats what literally all one game knockouts are, random ass games with dumb puck luck. Nah. You get at least 4 games in a series to prove youre a better team, thats not random at all.
Champion and best team are two different things.
Champion is a tournament winner.
Best team is the team that if you minimize the factor of random chance by playing a prolonged schedule is going to win most because they have the most tslent.
And as I told the other guy, I love random chance and therefore am fine wirh increasing it in a one game elimination match. My only point about ransom chance was it's role in determining a champion in a brief tournament and that is why PO tournaments don't determine the best team.
And I'm arrogant? Dude, you were the one who tried to pass off your mere opinion as some kind of fact by simply uttering the words "factually wrong". Surely, you don't lack thst much self awareness?
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
Give me the definition of "Champion" pertaining to sports from the dictionary please. Ill be waiting for it and how much youre going to try and twist the definition. LOL. And you talk about arrogance and self-awareness?
Right, youre getting warmer. A tournament winner amongst the best 16 qualifying teams, who were the best amongst 32 teams through 82 games to get there.
The best team in the regular season clearly wasnt the best team in the league period, other wise they would be Stanley Cup champions. What a ridiculous argument to make.
4 games minimum, 7 games max is more than enough criteria and time to determine who the actual better team is over a lame ass one game knockout round you want, its not as if "random chances" or puck luck completely disappears either. Random chance doesnt determine the best team, the scoreboard does and as of 2025, Florida won the 16 games on the scoreboard they needed. Thats not random chance.
But? In a short tournament in which random chance plays a greater role than even the regular season.
If they played another SCPO do you think the results would play out the exact same?
No. Why? Cause the previous results were heavily influenced by....???
They are two completely different formats.
One is long, mich less intensity and pressure...more of a marathon....the other is brief, much more pressure and intensity....more of a sprint...
It's going to call upon different personality traits, physical capabilities, etc
No. Random chance doesn't determine a winner, I said it's a greater factor in the results.
Again, if you have a second SCPO, do you expecct the results to be rhe same? Nope. Why? ......wait for it......wait for it.......
RANDOM CHANCE!!!
If you haven't done so yet...go research probability and factors in results of games, PO, season results etc. It's fascinating stuff. I love reading about it myself.
And pray tell, why are you so emotional? Your replies are so emotion- laden it's as if you take this all as some kind of personal slight.
We cool! I'm ok with you disagreeing wirh me.
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
What are you even yapping about at this point? All you keep basing your argument off of for a one game knockout format is " mUh random chance" as if thats the ultimate barometer to any of these "probability and factors" to hockey games you keep talking about yet dont seem to understand yourself.But? In a short tournament in which random chance plays a greater role than even the regular season.
If they played another SCPO do you think the results would play out the exact same?
No. Why? Cause the previous results were heavily influenced by....???
They are two completely different formats.
One is long, mich less intensity and pressure...more of a marathon....the other is brief, much more pressure and intensity....more of a sprint...
It's going to call upon different personality traits, physical capabilities, etc
No. Random chance doesn't determine a winner, I said it's a greater factor in the results.
Again, if you have a second SCPO, do you expecct the results to be rhe same? Nope. Why? ......wait for it......wait for it.......
RANDOM CHANCE!!!
If you haven't done so yet...go research probability and factors in results of games, PO, season results etc. It's fascinating stuff. I love reading about it myself.
And pray tell, why are you so emotional? Your replies are so emotion- laden it's as if you take this all as some kind of personal slight.
We cool! I'm ok with you disagreeing wirh me.
Its an inferior format for the Stanley Cup playoffs and thats what me and other posters explained to you. What works for the IIHF does not work for the NHL, they cant even put together a simple 5v5 OT format in one game knockouts in the medal rounds of their tournaments yet somehow thats the best format for a Stanley Cup playoffs? You honestly believe NHL fans want to watch that and "just don't know it yet" and that such a format determines the "actual winner"? Lol, nah.
Last edited:
Uhhhh......what?
I just said I prefer one game knockout and that in rhe long term it would likely generate stronger fan interest (especially casual fans) and lead to even higher revenue.
All that other stuff? Wellllll......that's on you.
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
No, it actually wouldnt. Keep telling yourself and only yourself that tho cause its wrongUhhhh......what?
I just said I prefer one game knockout and that in rhe long term it would likely generate stronger fan interest (especially casual fans) and lead to even higher revenue.
All that other stuff? Wellllll......that's on you.
Sure.No, it actually wouldnt. Keep telling yourself and only yourself that tho cause its wrong
Will do
Y’all got that all out of your system now? Good. Now please get back to talking about the thread’s topic, or we’ll be done here.
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 23,912
- 17,077
How does having 65-70 less games generate more revenue ?Uhhhh......what?
I just said I prefer one game knockout and that in rhe long term it would likely generate stronger fan interest (especially casual fans) and lead to even higher revenue.
All that other stuff? Wellllll......that's on you.
I’ve now asked this 3x, but you keep dodging the question.
My estimate is tv money.
It becomes more of a tv event rather than arena-based event
Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 23,912
- 17,077
Well your idea falls apart then lol.
You’ve lost 65-70 games of gate and event revenue.
No TV broadcaster is paying more money for 15 games vs 85 games.
So they lose out in both.
PerhapsWell your idea falls apart then lol.
You’ve lost 65-70 games of gate and event revenue.
No TV broadcaster is paying more money for 15 games vs 85 games.
So they lose out in both.
But my thought process is the NFL is the highest grossing league in the world and while it's the number 1 league today, I don't think it was predestined.
What set them up nicely for it? One gsme per week and a one and done PO system.
I have no statistical evidence to overwhelm you wirh, just an educated hunch of sorts
This all of course assumes that this format generates more and more fans- as I rhink it did for the NFL- and higher ratings per game, higher ticket prices per game, sponsorship etc
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,900
- 4,356
Why are you still comparing it to the NFL? The NHL has nowhere near the amount of viewers or brand power compared to the NFL on TV to make up for the lost revenue in a terri-bad one game knockout format, and hockey is a niche sport with very little international following compared to something like the NBA. Football and Ice Hockey are not even the same ballpark. Turning the league into a pseudo-NFL with one game knockout playoff games the way you want would be a sure fire way of killing it tho.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
-
Speculation: 2025 Trade/ Free Agency thread (Free Agency is July 1st) (31 Viewers)- Latest: NWWisconsinDuck
-
Biggest mistake the Oilers can make is to sign Bouchard to a big contract (22 Viewers)- Latest: VivaLasVegas
-
