This is a piece I have been sitting on for some time. Actually, it has been three years to be precise. In March 2021, the NHL announced that it would return to ESPN under a seven-year contract. At the time, I did not give this much thought. NHL coverage in the United States had not been the same since Mike “Doc” Emerick retired prior to the 2020-21 season. NBC did its best to fill the gaping hole left by the legendary announcer, and the likes of Kenny Albert, Eddie Olyczyk, Brian Boucher, Liam McGugh, and Keith Jones did (and continue to do) an admirable job. NHL coverage was stable, entertaining, and attended to by people who knew the game.
Little did I know that ESPN was about to deploy the opposite strategy.
During the 2021-22 season, the first under ESPN’s responsibility, it quickly became apparent that NHL broadcasting took significant backward strides. However, I told myself to be patient. It was the first season (if we all conveniently forget that ESPN had covered the NHL for five years from 1999-2004), and there surely were kinks to iron out. “Patience, Nick, patience. It will improve,” I unconvincingly told myself.
It did not improve. In fact, I am convinced that in three seasons it has only worsened. From a lack of enthusiasm from the broadcast teams to technical issues, ESPN’s coverage of the NHL is embarrassing. And it is not going unnoticed, particularly during this Stanley Cup Final.
A Look at From Where We Came
Before I list all my grievances against ESPN, I want to sketch a brief history of national broadcasting for the NHL, specifically since the 2005-06 season. This will provide us the context to understand why the NHL joined forces with the Dark Side, I mean ESPN, and give us something against which we can compare ESPN’s handiwork.
After the 2004-05 lockout, the NHL partnered with a few networks to showcase the new and improved sport (there were quite a few changes made after the lockout). Most notably, NBC secured the rights to televise the NHL nationally. Coverage evolved over the next few years as NBC found its footing. New shows were introduced and additional partnerships were reached. Nonetheless, NBC remained the primary network.
In 2010, the NHL and NBC agreed to a 10-year, $2 billion contract that ran through the 2020-21 season. A golden era of NHL coverage ensued that I am sure I have only over glorified slightly. It was not without its hiccups, but if you tuned into an NHL game on NBC, you were sure to see and hear coverage that matched the thrill of the sport.
Emerick’s voice defined this period. His unique tenor, vast vocabulary, descriptive verbs, and precise pacing never took away from the sport but complemented and elevated it. Many, many pieces have been written about him (deservedly so), so I will not go into too much detail on what makes him one of the best ever. Simply listen to a few of his calls in the clip below, and he will give you goosebumps.
Nonetheless, we must mention Doc because he exemplifies how committed NBC was to capturing the spirit of the NHL, particularly the Stanley Cup Playoffs. He was surrounded by a fantastic crew who let their love and knowledge of hockey flow into their broadcasting careers. Olcyzk and Ray Ferraro brought insight from their playing careers. Albert’s and John Forslund’s passion for hockey was evident. McHugh’s polished approach guided conversations between periods. Pierre McGuire, love him or hate him, at the very least, added entertainment value.
These personalities blended seamlessly together to create an electrified air around the game. Do you remember the Stanley Cup Playoff pregame shows during this time? These talents would hype me up so much that I was ready to run through a wall. They laid out what was at stake, highlighted who was playing well and who needed to step up, and broke down the game in a digestible manner for all fans. Most importantly, this worked because each of them cared about the sport and their craft. They loved hockey, and that love effused into their jobs. They could not stop it if they wanted to.
When the NHL’s contract with NBC ended after the 2020-21 season, the league had an opportunity to maintain all the momentum generated by the partnership. Instead, money, under the guise of growing the game, drove the NHL into ESPN’s arms.
What ESPN Promised
My last line may be a tad cynical. But I would argue only a tad. When the NHL joined forces with ESPN, sources said the league would receive $400 million annually. However, a repeated argument touted by the NHL and media outlets in favor of the deal was that it would “grow the game.”
Take this subheading from a New York Times piece announcing the deal: “The agreement assures hockey a higher profile on SportsCenter and gives ESPN the perfect sport for its streaming ambitions” (from ‘N.H.L. Returns to ESPN in a 7-Year Deal With an Emphasis on Streaming,’ The New York Times, March 2021).
The 2023-24 NHL regular season was the league’s most-watched since 2015-16. Across all networks, games averaged about 504,000 viewers, with ESPN averaging about 486,000. The first three rounds of the playoffs are up in viewership by 36% across North America compared to last season. This all appears impressive, but NHL viewership has fluctuated quite a bit since the shortened 2019-20 season.
Let us use the Stanley Cup Final as a basis for comparison. After all, it is the pinnacle of the NHL and should be the most watched. Between 2011 and 2021 under NBC, the Stanley Cup Final drew more than 5 million viewers three times and more than 4.5 million viewers three times. The two lowest viewership years came during 2020 and 2021, both of which were shortened, irregular seasons.
Related: A Stanley Cup Final Sweep Will Spark Real Roster Changes for Oilers
Since the new deal, ESPN has only broadcasted the Final once in 2022. Viewership amassed to about 4.6 million—fairly consistent with prior years. In 2023, numbers tanked with the Final airing on TNT, only clocking about 2.6 million viewers. This year, we are being told viewership is up 36% compared to last year. That may sound impressive, but considering that last year was a dud, that only brings the number up to about 3.5 million. We will have to see what the final count is after the series concludes. All in all, though, nothing screams that this formula is working.
Perhaps, just maybe, the viewership does not reflect the exponential growth promised because the production quality does not showcase the on-ice product as well as it could. Could it be that all the glitches and gaffes make potential fans think, “If this is how they treat the game, why should I care?”
How ESPN Fails
How then does ESPN treat hockey? The NHL is to ESPN what that family member you sort of know and sort of get along with is to you. You know who I am describing: that person in your broader family who you do not have anything against but you also do not have anything in common with. You are bound together by mutual happenstance (“Hey, we were just both born into it, am I right?”) and enjoy each other’s company under mutual obligation. But you will always have your favorite cousins and aunts and uncles.
The NHL is the former to ESPN, and the NFL, MLB, and NBA are the latter.
Here, we arrive at the heart of the matter: the mistakes that ESPN makes covering the NHL would be inexcusable in its coverage of any of the other leagues. Indulge me, if you will, to compile a lenghty list of errors that I and many others have observed in this postseason and regular season.
Nonexistent Enthusiasm From Play-by-Play Announcers
I will simply leave the clip below for you. Tell me if you notice any difference.
Cameras Unsynchronized
If you watch closely during Game 4 on Saturday, you will notice that when ESPN switches camera angles, the broadcast is not synchronized, meaning the play after the cut is either behind or before the play prior the cut. Once you see it, you will not be able to unsee it. This has happened all season.
Broadcast Cuts to Black
Multiple times throughout the season, the broadcast simply ceased, showing a black screen with only audio. This happened in Round 1 when the Dallas Stars played the Vegas Golden Knights, the 2023 Stanley Cup champions. But rest assured, ESPN cares.
Audio Quality
Before I listed this issue, I ensured it was not a problem with my setup or my ears. It is not. I have watched games at friends’ houses, restaurants, bars, in living rooms, and on my phone. ESPN’s audio quality is, shall we say, suboptimal. The announcers can barely be heard over the crowd or the buzz of the game.
No Stanley Cup Final Pregame Show
Please tell me I have been missing this. I hope I am. Before every Stanley Cup Final game this season, I tune into ESPN or ABC to catch the pregame show. Instead, I find either Wheel of Fortune or highlights from the postseason so far. NHL Network is the only place I have found analysts preparing for the game. But do not worry, ESPN, I am sure, has its best on the case!
Cameras Miss Key Action
In 2022, when the Colorado Avalanche’s Cale Makar was about to lift the Stanley Cup, ESPN cut to an interview with a teammate. It is fine, I did not want to see one of the best defensemen in the league and future Norris Trophy winner lift the Cup. How about in Round 2 of this year’s playoffs when ESPN continued to show an interview well into an Oilers’ power play at a key point against the Stars? In the same round, ESPN switched coverage from a Carolina Hurricanes overtime game against the New York Rangers without any warning in the middle of play. How is this acceptable?
Flashy Features Distract
This may be more of a personal preference, but here is my case for why player names hovering over skaters’ heads is unnecessary. It distracts fans from what that player is doing. How difficult is it to learn who that player is without a hovering nameplate? The announcer is most likely saying it. His jersey spells it out. If that fails, you can ask the person sitting next to you. ESPN feels the need to hold viewers’ hands. Maybe it helps new fans, but hockey has never done well with too much happening on the screen (remember the infamous puck shadow?).
Storytelling Is Gone
This ties into my first point. ESPN’s announcers do little to weave together a narrative during a game. Instead, I am constantly bombarded with facts. If I have to hear, “the 31-year-old out of Saskatoon” or “the former-first-round pick” one more time with no other context or color, I might watch ESPN on mute. These facts are not bad per se, but they do little to draw a viewer into the game. Tell me more about this player than his hometown and draft selection. What made someone like Emerick or Bob Cole extraordinary talents is that they told you a story. A picture was painted in your imagination to accompany what was unfolding on the ice. ESPN simply wants to prove to you they know hockey too.
Why This Matters
There are many, many more issues with ESPN (shots on goal displayed at random times, players’ limbs and sticks lost in the boards because of digital advertisements, etc.), but I rest my case. Maybe I have let my dislike for ESPN fester for too long. I will concede that to some degree.
However, I will not back down from my belief that these details matter. If we wish to introduce the best sport in the world to more people, then how we display and communicate about that sport is our first impression. Sloppy mistakes, dispassionate play-by-play announcing, and an overall feeling of apathy will convince no one new to invest any time in hockey. The NHL will always remain fourth fiddle to the other major sports leagues in the United States.
