The Sicatoka Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 One thing that should help hockey viewership in the future: High-Definition broadcasts. I struggle to watch hockey not in HD now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 One thing that should help hockey viewership in the future: High-Definition broadcasts. I struggle to watch hockey not in HD now. Agreed....of all the sports, hockey and golf are the ones I struggle to watch without HD now. Call us spoiled I guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Agreed....of all the sports, hockey and golf are the ones I struggle to watch without HD now. Call us spoiled I guess... Golf Channel in HD is sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I struggle to watch any hockey in anything since CableOne is a bunch of buttwrinkles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'm sorry, but I just don't understand that way of thinking. I've been watching hockey not in HD since the 70's ane never considered it a struggle. People also didn't have cell phones in the 70's. If you have one now, it would be a struggle to go back to life without a cell phone. Times change, Dave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodak hockey fanatic Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'm sorry, but I just don't understand that way of thinking. I've been watching hockey not in HD since the 70's ane never considered it a struggle. ok, that is just another example of something that is just plain silly, but you know it will get a reaction. sure watching hockey in regular def is still fine, but you would have to be off your rocker a bit if you can't see how HD has made watching it on tv a million times better. heck, some sports your better off sitting in your lazy boy watching in HD on your big screen than sitting in the nosebleeds, although i would take live hockey any day of the week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 but HD really isn't all that much different than regular TV. I've never met anyone that isn't blown away with the quality of HD over SD, especially for sports, until you. You may need an eye exam. Hockey-close up of a stop seeing the individual ice crystals spray rather than just a white blob Football, Golf-blades of grass rather than a green blob Seeing the creases in people's faces rather than just a face colored blob Golf again, actually seeing the ball against the sky rather than looking at a picture of the sky (not that seeing the ball in the sky tells you anything about the shot) If you haven't seen Planet Earth in HD, or with a bluray disk on a bluray player, you haven't seen Planet Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 The only times that I have ever seen these blobs that you speak of are on 4th and 5th generation VHS to VHS recordings. No blobs on my digital satellite reception. I have satellite also, with both SD and HD channels. I can put them up side by side by splitting my big screen. It would be impossible for anyone to NOT tell the difference side by side. We realize you will forever refuse to see any difference in HD. That will save you some money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Sounds like you're watching the SD channels on an HD TV. It's a pretty big difference but I'm like you...my 10-yr-old Sony big screen works fine and I see no reason to drop the coin for anything different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Sounds like you're watching the SD channels on an HD TV. While some HDTVs do not render SD well, mine does, I have a good quality CRT also, and the HDTV shows SD as good or better than the CRT. Neither, however, compares favorably to HD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I'm that picture is somewhat clearer, but my picture is already so clear that making it even clearer just doesn't do much for me. I guess the analogy is like comparing 10 million dollars to 20 million dollars. There isn't all that much you can do with 20 million that you can't do with 10 million. But getting back to the point, what hockey fan is going to make a choice to not watch a game based solely on the fact that the broadcast is not in HD? You must have the best TV in the history of the world! You should be the spokesman for that TV company. I don't think anyone said that they would only watch hockey in HD but would not watch it in SD, did they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I flop my Midco between Versus and VersusHD: No. Contest. And it's the most dramatic for sports. I can watch an HD or a non-HD program on TNT or USA and I can't see the difference as dramatically as I see it for things like hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I flop my Midco between Versus and VersusHD: No. Contest. And it's the most dramatic for sports. I can watch an HD or a non-HD program on TNT or USA and I can't see the difference as dramatically as I see it for things like hockey. Day football is great on HD too. You can see the blades of grass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxweet Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I apologize if this has been discussed already. but what was the nhl thinking scheduling game 4 tonight right up against game 1 of the nba finals. why would they want to go head to head with the nba? it's a lost battle before it even begins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 I was referring to the suggestion made on the previous page of this thread that more HD broadcasts would increase viewership. I can't envision non-fans watching just because the broadcast is HD, and at the same time I can't envision fans not watching just because it isn't HD. Hockey is one of the more difficult sports to follow on television. That is especially true for non-fans. If HD is better and makes it easier to follow the puck, than more non-fans may start to watch. And they may become fans. So HD broadcasts will probably help increase viewership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted June 4, 2009 Share Posted June 4, 2009 Lord Stanley, Lord Stanley....get me the brandy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Well, Detroit fans have to be happy with the effort put on by Detroit tonight... oh wait. 2 chances in the last 10 minutes of play for Detroit down two. 5-7 for Pittsburgh. Seriously? No desperation at all shown by Detroit. I understand the rules and realized McDreary could have given Pittsburgh a goal for Kronvall's hook, but what would have been the point? By that time, Detroit had already conceded the game. That's the one thing I've noticed that Detroit needs to start getting into gear for: Being down goals. Pittsburgh got desperate in Games 1 and 2 and, though they lost, they really put the heat on. Detroit lost the lead in Games 3 and 4 and still, for the most part, didn't play with any desperation. They took a few chances here and there, but they still skated lackadaisically. Folks, Game 5 is going to say a lot. I'll guarantee this: If Pittsburgh wins Game 5, there is NO WAY IN HADES DETROIT WINS THE CUP. Jim Dahl and all the Caps fans must be rolling in the aisles right now because Detroit is just as overconfident as the Caps were after Game 2 and now... well... we'll see. Detroit needs to start playing with desperation. And seriously, Cleary and Maltby have been nothing but disappointments for the most part. Especially Cleary. A complete non factor. I love the insertion of Draper into the lineup, but I think whoever sat for Draper needs to come in for Maltby or Cleary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Jim Dahl and all the Caps fans must be rolling in the aisles right now because Detroit is just as overconfident as the Caps were after Game 2 and now... well... we'll see. Eerily similar, isn't it? No one ever thought the Pens would be a gimme, but as well as the Caps managed to handle them in the regular season, the 2-0 start felt pretty solid. It turned out to be a great series, I hope this one does too. Detroit has better goaltending than the Caps (excepting last night) and has been getting more balanced scoring. I also wonder how much being back on home ice is going to help make it easier to shut Crosby back off. My biggest question for Detroit is exactly what you said... why on earth did they give up with 8 minutes to go? Other than that, I'd still feel ok if I were a Detroit fan, they've overall played a better series to date. Affiliation disclaimer: none needed, I'm on record in this very thread as disliking each of the remaining teams Edit, oh, and on HD vs. SD... screen caps from Blade Runner Blu Ray vs. DVD. To me, the little points of light being sharp little points instead of blurs is very obvious when I'm watching t.v. (similarly with the crisp edges). However, for whatever reason about the way they see, some people just don't see it or think it matters that much. To each his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I was referring to the suggestion made on the previous page of this thread that more HD broadcasts would increase viewership. I can't envision non-fans watching just because the broadcast is HD, and at the same time I can't envision fans not watching just because it isn't HD. I can tell you that there are many NHL games I did not watch this year because they were only available in SD. I spent my time watching the games shown in HD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I can tell you that there are many NHL games I did not watch this year because they were only available in SD. I spent my time watching the games shown in HD. I agree, I do the same, even when there are teams I'd rather watch but the game is in SD. They are not comparable, not even close. Fortunately, FSSN, although it's in SD, is much better (with a KU system) than the highly compressed SD from directtv and dish, as well as cable FSSN, almost as good as HD broadcasts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redneksioux Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Then I guess you're more of an HD fan than hockey fan. Incorrect. Rather than watching the Devils play in SD, I have watched the Blackhawks play in HD. And for the record, I am just as much of a Devils fan as I am a Hawks fan. Maybe I've been spoiled by the HD....but I wouldn't be without it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 I guess if it makes you happy that's what's really important. I personally just don't get what so many people see in it, but each to their own. Dave, I get the feeling that I could show you a jet black cat and you'd say that the thing is albino. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 Dave, I get the feeling that I could show you a jet black cat and you'd say that the thing is albino. You may be right, or you may have been duped by successful marketing into believing the cat is jet black, while it's actually albino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 If you think HD is to SD what jet black is to albino, then I think you need to have your vision checked. The difference between HD and SD is more like the difference between white and off white. HD fans may not want to admit it, but I see all of the same blades of grass on my TV that they see on theirs. Only difference is I'm not overpaying for mine. But again, each to their own. If it makes you happy, spend your money on whatever you want to spend it on. Just don't try to tell me what I'm seeing or not seeing. Yep, you're right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 5, 2009 Share Posted June 5, 2009 If you think HD is to SD what jet black is to albino, then I think you need to have your vision checked. The difference between HD and SD is more like the difference between white and off white. HD fans may not want to admit it, but I see all of the same blades of grass on my TV that they see on theirs. Only difference is I'm not overpaying for mine. But again, each to their own. If it makes you happy, spend your money on whatever you want to spend it on. Just don't try to tell me what I'm seeing or not seeing. While you continue to tell us what we are seeing. You have a good imagination that allows you to see what really isn't there with SD. You don't get it, and never will; glad you're satisfied. Arguing is a way of life with you. You are far from the norm when it comes to hockey fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.