MN Daily Column: Blackout of women’s national title game a travesty

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,716
Reaction score
15,966
Points
113
per the Daily:

A wave of gold jerseys swelled toward the Gophers’ net as the final buzzer sounded on the 2015 women’s NCAA hockey championship game.

The group of players eventually crashed onto junior goaltender Amanda Leveille in celebration of Minnesota’s third national title in four seasons.

The scene looked like something out of a feel-good sports movie, but it was a moment that wasn’t captured by a single television station.

Instead, those who wanted to see this sequence unfold but weren’t in Ridder Arena had to watch the game on a computer screen via NCAA.com.

Suffice it to say, the fact that not one television station picked this game up is pathetic.

It’s a travesty not only to those who played in the game and deserved to be seen but also for both Minnesota and Harvard fans who wanted to watch the teams play.

http://www.mndaily.com/sports/women...blackout-women’s-national-title-game-travesty

Go Gophers!!
 

They honestly should have played the game in Mariucci. Ridder's lighting is absolutely awful for televised games. Everything is tinted yellow.

Plus I bet they would have easily been able to sell a thousand more tickets or so.
 

I disagree with this one. I watched the game on NCAA.com as the author suggested, where it was free and I got it on my TV by plugging the HDMI cable into my laptop. Women's hockey is not a big enough thing to make it on a national network or even ESPN or ESPN2. Putting it on BTN would have been unfair to Harvard fans. So where does the author think it would go? ESPNU? NHL Network? If there was an agreement to broadcast it there, I can assume NCAA wouldn't have been allowed to also stream the game for free as part of the arrangement. I don't get either of those channels, so I would have been unable to watch, and I'm sure many others would have as well. At the end of the day, a lot more people have internet than ESPNU.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I disagree with this one. I watched the game on NCAA.com as the author suggested, where it was free and I got it on my TV by plugging the HDMI cable into my laptop. Women's hockey is not a big enough thing to make it on a national network or even ESPN or ESPN2. Putting it on BTN would have been unfair to Harvard fans. So where does the author think it would go? ESPNU? NHL Network? If there was an agreement to broadcast it there, I can assume NCAA wouldn't have been allowed to also stream the game for free as part of the arrangement. I don't get either of those channels, so I would have been unable to watch, and I'm sure many others would have as well. At the end of the day, a lot more people have internet than ESPNU.
Click to expand...

I think he's saying it's sad no locals picked up the game or even gave it the option. I mean we show the state HS hockey tourney statewide, there's no reason to not show this game either and Harvard could've tapped into our broadcast. It's just a bummer for those who wanted to follow the game who aren't as net savvy as some of us younger people
 

What we should have is a local station cover the game, and offer the feed on the internet - we do have lots of channels and subchannels.

But a lot of TV is moving to the internet. I'd like to see apps made for it, so we can watch on our TV sets using our Roku, Amazon, Chromecast etc, instead of plugging in a laptop. The U sells streaming access to non-revenue sports, if they offered this through an app, they would probably sell more subscriptions.
 


Like I said before, they could have possibly sell out the Excel.
 

I doubt a local station would pay money to Turner Sports for the rights to the game. Turner hold the right to the Women Frozen Four.

That Turner Sports.
 

Then the NCAA needs a "use it or lose it" clause.

Sent from my LG-L38C using Tapatalk 2
 

RodentRampage said:
What we should have is a local station cover the game, and offer the feed on the internet - we do have lots of channels and subchannels.

But a lot of TV is moving to the internet. I'd like to see apps made for it, so we can watch on our TV sets using our Roku, Amazon, Chromecast etc, instead of plugging in a laptop. The U sells streaming access to non-revenue sports, if they offered this through an app, they would probably sell more subscriptions.
Click to expand...

Used my Chromecast to watch it with my brother-in-law. We sucked some suds and cheered them on. (does suck that it wasn't on "real" TV).
 



I watched it on the iPad. No big deal. Reality is that hockey is a niche sport and women's hockey is that squared. They should hold it earlier so it does not compete with the men's and women's NCAA basketball. Only so many channels and most people don't care about women's hockey.
 

gophersfan said:
I doubt a local station would pay money to Turner Sports for the rights to the game. Turner hold the right to the Women Frozen Four.

That Turner Sports.
Click to expand...

BTN tried to buy rights to the Championship game a couple years ago at Ridder and Turner priced it too high for BTN to make any money or even cover costs(per an insider I know). Seems live ESPNW would've been a good place (my cable package has this channel), just wish Turner and the NCAA would do right by women's hockey and televise the championship game (especially a historic undefeated season). I watched it online and it was ok. Shoot, I think the NCAA bowling championship is televised!!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom