In this edition of the hotstove we discuss whether the NHL should schedule fewer outdoor games on a yearly basis.
Todd Cordell
I don't think so. Personally, I don't really care if the game is outdoors or not, but local markets certainly do. If I'm living in, say, Minnesota and they're hosting an outdoor game I'd probably be pretty excited about it.
From the NHL's perspective, these games seem like no-brainers. If you have an opportunity to sell double, triple, quadruple the amount of tickets for a game than you otherwise would, you have to take it.
I also think the big stage adds some flare to the games and gives casual observers, or new fans, more reason to tune in.
If these games continue to pull in money, and can help attract new fans, I don't see the downside to having a handful every year.
Peter Tessier Yes, yes and YES.
It's not that the efforts are great, or that the event is not well produced or anything like that. They've done a bang-up job of all of this. The games are just not special. They don't bring anything unique because they are no longer unique.
Have one a year, like the all-star game and really hype it. Find a certain anniversary to celebrate, milestone between two teams and make that the focus, but simply one a year. That is all that's needed.
James Tanner If people want to buy tickets, then I say have as many as possible. I used to think it was a bit overdone, but really, who cares? If they entertain people, then it's all good by me.
Recent posts: Should the NHL change its point system?