From: terry@garfieldI.Stanford.EDU (Terry Wong)
Subject: Re: NHL in the Olympics
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 01:52:56 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.154852.7736@adobe.com>, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug11.235505.22439@leland.Stanford.EDU> terry@garfield.Stanford.EDU (Terry Wong) writes:
|> >greater coverage.  For example, after a 49'ers game, a newspaper will have
|> >about 6 pages of coverage.  A Shark's game will rate maybe 1/4 page.
|> 
|> That's not a fair comparison.  Football games happen very seldom, relative
|> to hockey games.  If hockey only played 17 games a year, each individual
|> game would be more important, and would get larger coverage (not that
|> playing only 17 games a year would be a good thing, mind you).  Hockey
|> coverage in the San Jose Mercury News is comparable to baseball coverage. 
|> 

This is also hardly a fair comparison, since the Sharks are the only team
that San Jose can rightfully call its own. Also, the 49'ers coverage is
so extensive, because that is what the public wants.  The San Francisco
Chronicle finds that its biggest sale days are the days after a 49'ers
game. 

The big difference in the
Bay Area from a Canadian city like Toronto is that in Toronto there
are three major sports teams - the Leafs, the Blue Jays, and the Argos.
In the Bay Area, there are 10 teams that get major coverage --
the 49'ers, the Giants, the A's, the Warriors, the Raiders (those Raider
fans are really loyal), Stanford football, Cal football, Stanford basketball,
Cal basketball, and of course the Sharks. 
In addition, there are national broadcasts of other
football, baseball, pro basketball, college football, college basketball,
golf, bowling, and tennis.  There are another half-dozen college football
and basketball programs.  Thus, there is only so much coverage each sport
can receive, and the Sharks when you look at all the television, radio, and
newspapers as a total package get the lowest coverage of all the ten major
teams.  Of course, the other teams have been in the area a lot longer,
and it takes time to build fan loyalty.  

Shark's coverage is improving.  Next year, the Sharks will make a huge
leap forward by having a major TV station broadcast 6 of its games.
However, this station has not in the past been involved in any sports
broadcasting of its own (other than national feeds) so its a big jump for
this station too.  The rights to all the other major sports teams are already
tied up by other stations.  If the Sharks can start winning and if the NHL
as a whole becomes more popular, we may expect to see more extensive coverage.

|> >Another way you can judge the popularity of a sport is by conversations
|> >around the water cooler or on the sports talk-lines.  While many people
|> >want to talk football, basketball, or baseball, it is hard to find someone
|> >who wants to talk hockey.  Maybe I'm just not hanging around the right
|> >people :).
|> 
|> Maybe.  Among the people I hang around with who discuss any sports at all,
|> I hear more about the Sharks than I do about the 49'ers.  Maybe I'm just
|> hanging around with the right people :-).
|> 
|> Sherri Nichols
|> snichols@adobe.com
|> 

My point of view may differ than yours for two reasons.  One is that I'm
a huge sports fan and follow all sports, (although hockey is a particular
favorite because I grew up in Canada), and I hang around other people who
are huge sports fans.  That means we all have very strong loyalties to
various local teams, and the Sharks as a Johnny Come Lately just have not
been embraced as affectionately yet.  I spend a lot of time in sports bars and
listening to sports call in shows, and I get a good idea of what is on
the minds of sports fans in the area.  Comparatively, Sharks interest is
pretty low on the totem pole.  Of course, hockey does not have much of
a traditional fan base in the area compared to other sports.

The second reason I have a different perspective is that I have lived most
of my life in Canada.  There, the performance of a city's hockey team is
the number one topic of conversation for almost everybody, to the point
where it is almost obsessive.   By comparison, the level of interest here
is of a much lower level of intensity, but then again, the relationship
between Canadian fans and hockey is incomparable.

Thanks for your post, Sheri.  
I do enjoy hearing from other Sharks fans and it's good to know that 
there are other hockey fans in the Bay Area.  I'd like to thank the fan
with the user name of pbhya from PacBell for his mail.  He pointed out
to me that a lot of Sharks season tickets are partial tickets, so that
there are a lot more season ticket holders than the 10,000 seat
capacity (10,888 he points out!) of the Cow Palace.  He estimates that
there may be as many as 30,000 season ticket holders, which bodes well
for the Sharks success in the area.

					Terry Wong
					terry@garfield.Stanford.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey