It's not just the polarization, there are a large number of people who don't want to see their sports politicized. That's why they watch sports, to get away from politics.

Do people think this before or after they stand for the anthem, or do they do it before or after they enter the stadium their tax dollars paid for? Surely they didn't mind police or military engagement nights, right?

People just don't want to hear politics they don't agree with. If people have a tough time with athletes asking for basic human rights that's on them to take a long look in the mirror.

Sports are inherently and intrinsically tied to politics. Believing anything else borders on ridiculous.

Does "basic human rights" support rioting and the ambush of police officers?

I actually was going to post this before I saw your post: I am all for supporting our military and police but I don't think the athletic fields are the place to do it. I grew up in a time when they played the national anthem at many public gatherings ie theaters but long before these present troubles I thought the act had outlived its time.

When the need to insult begins perhaps the one doing the insulting should look in the mirror and see their intolerance.

I guess when we clap for military personnel we're all just saying we are okay with war crimes, given that an athlete kneeling for what they support is obviously promoting rioting and destruction.

True that!

I at least wasn't even talking about growth scenarios. I was talking about retaining the demographics it won over long ago.

Baseball is a pretty good case study for why focusing on retaining isn't necessarily a good strategy for survival.

If Goodell's recent hollow "nothing" apologies are any indication, I think the NFL is coming around to the fact that they may take a small immediate hit now, but they're going to be better off in the long run by at least putting on a progressive face.

More good antenna info

Attic TV Antenna vs. Outdoor TV Antenna Setup

I support the ending of playing of the National Anthems at sporting events. It serves no purpose and I've had this opinion years before the latest waves of protests.

Ditto. In most non-North American leagues, when it's time to start the game, they start the game. It's refreshing.

That's a question I would love to ask the CRTC. I think I read an explanation once but I've forgotten what it was, must have been a very lame excuse for me not to remember. Maybe I'll see if I can find out again, complaint letters to the CRTC wouldn't hurt.

Sounds like you're a cord cutter, I'm always interested in what kind of setup people have

It's not necessarily an either/or. The smart money does both.

This applies to any form of business though if we're talking about pro sports, the NHL in Canada vs. the U.S. is a good example.

NHL fandom is still big in Canada but the NHL's neglect of this country has at the very least led to a relative decline in interest in the sport. It's very noticeable to anyone who grew up in the 70s, 80s or 90s, how the impact and presence of the league in overall society is visibly diminished.

The NFL has grown its brand into a juggernaut to the point where sports bars in places far away from an NFL team and with no local club like Anchorage Alaska are packed on Thursday nights with people watching games featuring teams from far away places.

The NHL was headed towards that kind of fandom in Canada (the early stages of it were there) and if you follow the evolution of countries' main national sports worldwide, *should* have been like that. But they squandered that opportunity.

It kind of is an either/or in this instance when you're talking about about something as mutually exclusive as either allowing athlete's to express their beliefs on your stage or not.

We've had this discussion before, but the idea that the NHL squandered anything (purely from a business standpoint) in regards their overall strategy over the last two decades is nothing but nationalistic egotism. No NHL owner will think that the opportunity to bring hockey from say 75% domination of the national sports landscape to 90% is better than collecting franchise fees from two new teams that are already more valuable than half their Canadian counterparts. It also assumes the league is the sole reason for any rise or decline in interest/viewership and ignores the underlying demographic changes that are fueling the growth of basketball, soccer, and others. There's a good chance the massive cohort of second generation immigrants would still be bigger basketball fans even if we stuck a team in every city of 500,000 people.

The NFL is unique because their best business case is to completely saturate the one market they operate in. There is no giant neighbour that presents a sizable opportunity cost for every decision to keep the NFL local. The better analogy for hockey is the NBA, and to say that the league has squandered the opportunity to grow the game in Indiana as China fuels the most rapid growth any modern sports league has seen.

The NBA is a pretty good case study in this with their progressivism (except for when it comes to China...). They crush every other league in most metrics for fans under 30, including the NFL.

It's essentially just Canadians moaning that the NHL doesn't praise them as fans at every turn and breath, despite there being fewer of them with their money being worth 25% less.

As i've said what feels like a thousand times on this forum: it's not the NHL's prerogative to grow the game of hockey, at least not initially. Their main goal is to maximize profits for their owners. That's it. If people have an issue with a decline of the sport of hockey in Canada they should look towards Hockey Canada. The NHL goes where the money and growth is and for the past thirty years that hasn't been in Canada.

Agreed, and this is a good analogy.

It was quite literally the only game in town. Canadians had no choice really when it came to sports in Canada at that time (50s-70s) on a broad, national scale. It was the NHL or, like, the CFL maybe? I'm sure somebody over 40 will be quick to correct me on this. Either way, the options at that time, even leading up to the 90s, were far less than they are today.

The NHL's diminishment in Canada is less to do with the NHL and more to do with every other sport and league entering the country.

And I think it would be appalling to expect athletes to sit on their hands in a time of such turmoil when people like them are murdered and discriminated against on a daily basis in their cities and neighbourhoods. I guess Tommie Smith and John Carlos should have stuck to sports and kept their heads down. I guess Muhammad Ali should have shut his mouth and gone to Vietnam. I guess Carlos Delgado should have stood during every seventh inning as God Bless America blasted over the speakers. I guess Canada should have gone to Moscow '80.

Related:

NaomiOsaka大坂なおみ @naomiosaka
All the people that were telling me to “keep politics out of sports”, (which it wasn’t political at all), really inspired me to win. You better believe I’m gonna try to be on your tv for as long as possible.

Yeah, I am and I'm not at the same time.

I was sans-cord for a few years when I was internet-only (using antenna + streaming).
Rogers contract was up and it was cheaper to get an internet/cable/landline package than an internet-only deal (obviously done purposely - shouldn't have to spend $100 for just internet)... so I have an HD cable box with basic cable package and an unused land-line. I work from home (long before covid) and require reliable and fast internet service - and Rogers offers the best service in my area.

The cable box is hooked up to my TV downstairs and antenna is hooked up upstairs.

I used to have an outdoor antenna (cheapish one) and it didn't do any better than my indoor one (Terk) - so I stuck with the indoor one and took down the outdoor one (which was a bit of an eyesore where it was sitting). Basically it gets pointed in one of two directions depending on the channels I want to watch at the time. I'd like to try the Antennas Direct ClearStream 2MAX antenna to see if I can get all the channels pointing in just one direction, and possibly getting a few more (like some Buffalo channels). I hate to spend $100 on it to find out that it doesn't do any better in my current living space.

The SOBs at Bell do the same thing, they offer a cheaper package to get you hooked you into "cable" than just Internet and phone (in my case). They've even told me that I don't have to hook the "cable" up, but I have have to cut off my nose to spite my face and I tell them to stick it. I figure I'll cancel and they'll get someone from retention to call me two days later and see if we can work out a deal. I'm gonna try and see if I can get into a trial of Starlink.

I bought a Mohu Curve antenna (for the looks) and it gets the few channels that are available to me. If you are in Hamilton you might have a rough time getting Buffalo without a decent setup.

As I said before I have a laptop hooked up to the TV with Kodi installed on Windows. I have a bunch of legal addons CBC GEM, Internet Archive, Crackle, Pluto TV, Xumo, and YouTube (for starters) I also have the IPTV from my previous post installed on Kodi with channels like Buzzr, Knowledge Network, several News Channels, FreeSports, EdgeSports and Bein Sports Xtra. There are some really good Pluto channels like History and Biography which seem to be the library from the old A&E Network (before it sucked)

Interestingly, if you are French you can get almost every major French speaking channel. ICI RDI, ICI, Noovo, TVA, Tele-Quebec, Canal Savoir, CPAC and stuff from France.

It's actually not that difficult to get going. I had to learn everything on my own but now that I know what to do and what not to do (illegal addons) it's fairly easy. But if a person doesn't want to put a little work into it or have everything at 1080p and instantaneous it isn't for them. For me it's a hobby to see what I can get for nuthin'. I probably spend more time playing with it than watching the programs. Not maintaining to keep it going but trying to make it better.

The black population of the U.S. is only 13.5% and not even the second largest group as that is Latinos and I am amazed how little sports leagues bother to even try and garner more latino support compared to BLM support. The latino population is growing at an incredible pace in the U.S. and no one seems to target them in outreach, commercials ect...

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...he-next-decade

I describe my self as a "cord-never-haver". We only had antenna when I grew up. My parents got satellite after I went to college. (We watched a lot of DVD box sets). Got Netflix when I was in college, and when I moved home for a few years we were somewhat evenly split between watching TV or Netflix using the Playstation.

Now I've moved out and me and my fiancee have added Disney+, Amazon Prime and Crave. So I guess we're technically up to a ~$40 a month in those costs, but the Netflix is her mom's account, I offloaded my account to my parents, and we'd have prime anyway for shopping/shipping. We don't make good use of them though, if we were tighter for money I'd try to stick to 1 or two and rotate which one we're signed up for. The problem is we run them by telling the Google Home what to play on the Chromecast, and that means I'm not actually browsing and seeing what's available. (She's the one who's into all the technology, I'd be happy with just netflix, a game controller and a radio...)

I pay TSN Direct out of my personal budget, choosing either day-pass or monthly based on which works out better for me - I really only watch Toronto Arrows and Hamilton Tiger-Cats. I find "illegal" streams for European rugby, mostly because time zones make it so that I rarely watch. I did sign up for TSN to watch Super Rugby when it started back up this June, but couldn't keep up with the 3am kickoffs and got out of the habit. Trying DAZN and NFL and we'll see if I stick with that. NFL is almost the opposite problem from Super Rugby, 1pm is TOO much in the middle of day. Great for attendign live, not as great if I want to get other stuff done and also catch a game on TV.

Thanks!


I really agree with this. It comes up in rugby, especially rugby league a lot. Many English fas are critical of the Toronto Wolfpack not doing more to develop the game in Canada. But they are not the CRLA, and their purpose is to win titles and make money, like any pro team.

I never made any pronouncements on this stuff.

Ten Advantages (Facts) of OTA TV
ATSC 3.0 Next Gen TV - The Future of OTA Antenna TV
ATSC 3.0 Deployments: Where and When Will NextGen TV be Available?
Ten Ways to Improve OTA TV Reception from an Installer

https://3downnation.com/2020/09/17/s...ngs-in-canada/

Strong start, fading finish for NFL Week 1 TV ratings in Canada

The NFL kicked off with a bang, but ended Week 1 with a whimper on Canadian television.

The rematch of the thrilling AFC Divisional round matchup from last season’s playoffs, which was part of Kansas City’s Super Bowl title run, produced a record for TSN. It set the mark for the most-watched Thursday Night Football season opener attracting an average audience of 903,800 viewers to CTV and TSN, an increase of 15 percent over last year. 4.5 million unique Canadian viewers tuned in to watch some part of the Chiefs’ 34-20 victory against the Houston Texans.

However, the other primetime games saw substantial ratings declines. The Los Angeles Rams opened $5-billion SoFi Stadium against Dallas to an average Canadian audience of 621,800. It was a tight game the whole way through with LA earning a 20-17 win over the Cowboys. New England blew out Pittsburgh 33-3 in the same window last year to an average viewership of 955,600. That makes Sunday’s number a 35 percent drop year-over-year.

The annual Monday Night Football doubleheader for Week 1 took a nosedive on TV sets. Pittsburgh handling the New York Giants 26-16, including rookie Canadian Chase Claypool’s dazzling NFL debut, brought in 386,200 viewers, falling 44 percent. Claypool has a marketing deal with DAZN Canada, a direct competitor for live NFL games in our home and native land. The Saints edged Houston 30-28 in a thriller in New Orleans in the same slot one year ago with 698,800 viewers.

For the final contest of Week 1, Tennessee kicked a last-minute field goal to escape Denver with a 16-14 win. 376,700 viewers watched the game, compared to 556,770 who tuned into the Raiders and Broncos last season. That marked a 32 percent drop from one year to the next.

Despite the downturns, there was one other area of increase: Tom Brady’s debut with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. It was a 4:25 p.m. ET kick-off and matched the six-time Super Bowl champion against Drew Brees and the NFC South rival Saints. Coast to coast in Canada, New Orleans’ 34-23 victory had an average audience of 894,700, recording a 30 percent jump.

For what it’s worth, the top five ratings for any TV show in the United States were NFL games, the Bucs and Saints ranked No. 1 with 25.8 million viewers.

Week 1 Canadian NFL TV ratings:

Thursday
Houston at Kansas City: 903,800

Sunday
1 p.m. ET games: 798,200
4 p.m. ET games: 894,700

Sunday Night Football
Dallas at Los Angeles Rams: 621,800

Monday Night Football
Pittsburgh at New York Giants: 386,200
Tennessee at Denver: 376,700

Total Week 1 average: 663,566

The 2021 IIHF U20s will be hosted in December 2020 in Edmonton under a bubble scenario. The 2022 edition will be hosted in Edmonton and Red Deer if fans are permitted in attendance.

https://www.iihf.com/en/events/2021/...s-taking-shape

https://mediaprocanada.tv/en/news/CP...ries_worldwide

CPL’s Island Games Final to reach 135m households in 65 territories worldwide

Live coverage of the CPL Final, featuring Forge FC v HFX Wanderers FC, will air live on Saturday September 19th on Onesoccer, FS2, DirecTV Latin America and Tigo Sports at 2pm EDT / 18:00 GMT, with delayed coverage on 1Sports [India/Sri Lanka/Maldives/Nepal], StarTimes [Sub-Saharan Africa] and Premier Football [Philippines].

Can someone shed a little light on this? Is there that much interest in the CPL, or is the world starved for soccer on TV regardless of where it comes from? I was under the impression that the CPL wouldn't be of all that much interest outside Canadian borders, it's pleasantly surprising to see the exposure it's getting.

Also, if it's doing this well, what are the chances that we see the CPL moving off the niche One Soccer platform and to a TV broadcaster?

It's MEDIAPRO actively selling the rights of the CPL to outside parties. Part of the upside of CPL/CSA partnering their media rights to a billion-dollar foreign enterprise is that they can in turn sell their product more quickly to interested international buyers, whereas a domestic carrier would have less incentive to do so as long as they're making revenues.

The CPL's ability to get on sets around the world so quickly is a good comparator to CFL 2.0 in that footy is already easily marketable around the world and the CPL already has international players to sell in those markets, however small and insignificant they may be. There's value in seeing HFX games in Trinidad & Tobago, as one example, if there's three or four players from there on HFX's roster (and their former national coach). Likewise, when CPL teams compete in CONCACAF, it makes sense for foreign viewers to want to be able to view that league and team before playing against them.

I doubt there's many watching in India or the Philippines but ten people watching CPL in India is better than zero people watching CPL in India.

It'll be on OneSoccer for at least the next decade as its media partner, MEDIAPRO, was key in creating OS in the first place. Having OS means the CPL can control all of its visual and marketing properties in one place and be able to air documentaries, info programs, and just about anything else they wish on it.

Just this year they've been able to heavily bolster their lineup by adding a lot of former Score footy analysts onto their programming (Sharman, Forrest, Dunlop, etc.)

CPL games have been broadcast pretty frequently on CBC this year, with the final included with that on Saturday.

^ Thank you. Just having games on CBC is a huge plus for the CPL... I'm assuming One Soccer is a very niche product, so having games on a major broadcaster, even if it's only a game a week, gets the product in front of so many eyeballs.

I'm impressed that things appear to be working out well so far for the CPL.

I think their games have only been on the CBC Gem Streaming Services. But even that is a huge plus. If U-Sports had their ducks in a row they could show their sports on there as well.

CPL has had games on both CBC TV national and CBC Gem.

I don't go on or have any of those special streaming services and have definitely seen CPL games on the main old-fashioned CBC network.

CBC Gem is free, you only have to pay for Newsworld.

They promote CPL games regularly during NHL playoff games that are aired on CBC.

Yes, I saw a game on late night on the network. Funny how I used to read Variety way back in the day and in the slick Hollywood speak they used to called a TV network a web. ie CPL soccer on the web. Means a different thing now.

I realize what they say on their webpage but I think that stream is still open (and that's all I'll say on the matter)

CBC Sports becomes digital broadcast home of Canada's 2020 U Sports champions
Watch championship finals for free across CBC Sports platforms and Gem
CBC Sports Feb 13, 2020

Shows just how cursed USPORTS/CBC is, given the fact that half of these were cancelled due to COVID.

Interesting that USPORTS would move its men's hockey championship away from Sportsnet. Either way, showing one weekend of championship finals doesn't really give the sport the exposure it needs over a longer period of time.

USports need to show all their games on TV to get people interested in their players. I've watched USports Bowl games and have been impressed with the quality of play but this is the first time I've seen or heard of any of these players. Not a good strategy to get more financial support for their programs.

That's probably better than they would have got from Rogers, where Canadian sports go to die (excepting hockey...so far)

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/tv-n...outdraws-kawhi

The Raptors’ Game 7 loss to the Boston Celtics on Friday drew an average audience of 2.65 million on TSN and RDS, with at least 6.043 million tuning in for at least some of the game.

Overall, Raptors postseason viewership is up by 26% year-over-year in Canada on TSN/Sportsnet/RDS.

NFL ratings this week in Canada

Week 2 Canadian NFL TV ratings:

Thursday
Cincinnati at Cleveland: 596,500

Sunday
1 p.m. ET games: 530,300
4 p.m. ET games: 537,200

Sunday Night Football
New England at Seattle: 864,500

Monday Night Football
New Orleans at Las Vegas: 400,500

Total Week 2 average: 585,500 (11 percent decrease from Week 1)

https://3downnation.com/2020/09/23/l...-tv-in-week-2/

SCF Game 1: 1.081M (SN)
SCF Game 2: 841K (SN)

I don't think these numbers include CBC/TVA but I could be wrong...means SN had double the audience that CTV/TSN had going head to head against Monday Night Football which is ok I suppose.

I know in the US the US Open golf (lowest ever rating in 30+ years of metering) and NASCAR race (lowest rated at Bristol in 22 years) this past weekend were both obliterated by NFL and other properties this past weekend so I assume something similar happened north of the border.

shows how far hockey has fallen in Canada just a while back an average November HNIC game on Saturday with the Leafs would draw 1.2 to 1.6 million viewers a night now the Stanley Cup finals has similar ratings to a CFL labour classic game between the Riders and Bombers. I think with the 27 year stanley cup drought in Canada and no Canadian team even in the finals in almost a decade when the Canucks were in 2011 fans have given up on their local Canadian teams ever having a chance and have moved on to Basketball Football and Soccer.

The SCF doesn't usually compete with NFL or a Blue Jays playoff race either. I don't think there is any info to be gained with hockey TV ratings right now.

Blue Jays bahaha are they even still playing I have not seen anyone watch their games or ask to see them displayed or even seen them displayed at any pub/restaurant or gym here in Winnipeg since their 2015 playoff run. And baseball expanded their playoffs to 16 teams this year of course the Jays and most clubs have a shot at a playoff spot this year baseball playoff spots used to be coveted and extremely hard to get as only 4 clubs made the playoffs now it is watered down participation ribbon playoffs.

Your run-on ramblings are difficult to decipher at times but i'll try my best.

You're a bit high on both accounts.

The most recent samples we have for normal HNIC prime east (so, Leafs) from November 2019 have those windows hitting around 1M viewers on just CBC. I'm pretty certain that CBC & Sportsnet splitting viewers is the cause of lower viewer totals on HNIC but i'd have to do some digging to figure that out. I've posted previously outlining how Sportsnet's Wednesday games have been getting bigger audiences than the HNIC Saturday window in recent years.

As for the CFL figures, here's recent Labour Day SSK/WPG games:
849K (2019)
838K (2018)
818K (2017)
889K (2016)

Comparing this SCF to a November Leafs game probably isn't very fair given the, you know, Canadian team taking part in the latter. The last time a Canadian team made the SCF, CBC was easily attracting 5M+ for games, with Game 7 VAN/BOS hitting 8.5M average. Difficult to say that hockey has fallen off in Canada during a *checks notes*...Dallas/Tampa Bay final. I recall a similar sentiment during the LAK/NJ final from 2014. This doesn't even take into account the NFL/NBA/MLB competition the NHL is currently facing which it normally wouldn't during your typical SCF or playoff runs.

Select Leafs, Jets/Flames, and Habs games from the recent Playoff Qualifying rounds were garnering average audiences of 1.6-1.8M, which IMO are pretty good figures for hockey in August. These numbers are similar to what the Raptors were getting during their recent series against Boston.

Your offish post about the Jays actually took me back to some of the ratings the Jays were getting in their 2015/2016 peak. In 2016 the Jays averaged over 1M per game for the entire season. 78 games over 1M viewers! (link)

AFAIK the highest rated Jays game during that time was ALCS Game 6 v. Kansas City which landed at 5.12M average on SN. That's Canadian team-in-Stanley Cup Final territory. World Cup Final territory. :haha:

Stanley Cup Finals - Game 2 - 834K (387K Sportsnet / 447K CBC)
Stanley Cup Finals - Game 3 - 937K (564K Sportsnet / 363K CBC)
Stanley Cup Finals - Game 4 - 1.0M (482K Sportsnet / 527K CBC)
Stanley Cup Finals - Game 6 - 1.3M (784K Sportsnet / 525K CBC)

https://brioux.tv/blog/2020/09/30/st...un-put-on-ice/

As noted in the article, the final Leafs game two months ago garnered an average audience of 2.5M, or roughly double & triple what the SCF fetched. At this point, as Tom Mayenknecht pointed out on TSN Radio, these SCF ratings are better than no ratings at all.

The Canadian sports landscape is far more diverse than it was even 20 years ago. Itt's much better having options but it will be interesting to see what viewership is like when a Canadian NHL team makes the Stanley Cup Finals. Will it be similar to what we saw when Vancouver made it, will it be higher, or will it fall short of that? Despite the slow gradual decline of hockey I suspect the numbers will still be good. The question for me is how the numbers will compare to Raptors viewership during the 2019 NBA Finals.

Those Stanley Cup ratings point to what I've been saying about Canada no longer being "an NHL country no matter who is playing". We're more a "local NHL team country" or maybe a "Canadian NHL team country" at this point. Unlike as I like to say where no matter who is playing, in non-pandemic times "the boys" still pack the sports bars to watch NFL football because they're fans of the league.

For reference:
Vancouver Stanley Cup Finals (2011): between 5.4M and 8.5M
Raptors Finals (2019): between ~3M and 7.7M
Jays ALDS & ALCS (2015): between ~3M and 5.1M

The only events to outdraw a Canadian SCF is Olympics. If Toronto made the SCF you'd probably see numbers approaching 11M or higher and the Habs would probably get a fair shake at 9-10M or higher. Perhaps i'm underestimating on both accounts. The Men's Hockey Gold Medal Game from 2010 was north of 16.5M. If the Raptors Finals series went seven games i'd imagine it would have outdrawn the Vancouver SCF final on the backend but drawn less on the front end.

I think that's more due to the nature of the NFL and football in general. Football has the highest proportion of non-local fans watching each game due to both the importance of each game once a week, and the fact they're all on one day (the big ones anyway). It's a lot easier to get a guy in Seattle to tune into the one 8:30 game on Sunday night between Dallas and Philadelphia than it is to get the guy in Vancouver to care about the Leafs vs. Sens playing 1/82nd of their season on a Tuesday night. The NFL is a perfect marketing machine built to capture the entire national audience. Watching NFL redzone on Sunday is almost like a caricature of what sports has become.

I don't even think many die-hard football fans in Manchester really care to tune into a random Chelsea or Arsenal games as a comparison.