Red Mosquito

@SkitchP wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Dear Boston Fans complaining about how late the game went....

Try playing in the Western Conf. for a few years.

Try living west coast and following the Bruins. 60 or so times a year I make an excuse to duck out of work to head home and watch them on tv. I'd much rather be up late.

Bullshit. The game starts at 4, you miss the first period. No big deal.

Living in the eastern time zone, and having half your playoff games for the last 20 years start after 10 at night, not over until 1:00 without overtime, and having to be up for work at 5:30.


The west coast has it so easy for sports its not even funny. No super late nights. Time to get drunk after the super bowl ends. NFL Games from 10 am until you go to bed.

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

@SkitchP wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Dear Boston Fans complaining about how late the game went....

Try playing in the Western Conf. for a few years.

Try living west coast and following the Bruins. 60 or so times a year I make an excuse to duck out of work to head home and watch them on tv. I'd much rather be up late.

Bullshit. The game starts at 4, you miss the first period. No big deal.

Living in the eastern time zone, and having half your playoff games for the last 20 years start after 10 at night, not over until 1:00 without overtime, and having to be up for work at 5:30.


The west coast has it so easy for sports its not even funny. No super late nights. Time to get drunk after the super bowl ends. NFL Games from 10 am until you go to bed.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

elliseamos wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:

surfndestroy wrote:

@SkitchP wrote:Dear Boston Fans complaining about how late the game went....

Try playing in the Western Conf. for a few years.

Try living west coast and following the Bruins. 60 or so times a year I make an excuse to duck out of work to head home and watch them on tv. I'd much rather be up late.

Bullshit. The game starts at 4, you miss the first period. No big deal.

Living in the eastern time zone, and having half your playoff games for the last 20 years start after 10 at night, not over until 1:00 without overtime, and having to be up for work at 5:30.


The west coast has it so easy for sports its not even funny. No super late nights. Time to get drunk after the super bowl ends. NFL Games from 10 am until you go to bed.

I leave work early just to catch the second period. Games start 4pm here. between commute and shower you'd have me leaving work at 3:15.

If you're on the west coast and getting drunk after the super bowl you're doing it wrong. A good party starts early with beverages flowing.

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

MattA75 wrote:

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

for game 1, the ratings were 28.1 for Boston and 25.1 for Chicago (which was a marked increase over Chicago's game 1 vs Philly a few years ago)...I'd say both markets going down considerably for game 2 had an awful lot to do with Saturday night, not just from going out/gathering with friends to watch the game (be it at a house or a bar), but the fact that it's Saturday night in June and there's plenty else to do for the casual follower who doesn't view this as MUCH WATCH VIEWING in both of those cities on Saturday night

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

for game 1, the ratings were 28.1 for Boston and 25.1 for Chicago (which was a marked increase over Chicago's game 1 vs Philly a few years ago)...I'd say both markets going down considerably for game 2 had an awful lot to do with Saturday night, not just from going out/gathering with friends to watch the game (be it at a house or a bar), but the fact that it's Saturday night in June and there's plenty else to do for the casual follower who doesn't view this as MUCH WATCH VIEWING in both of those cities on Saturday night

Agreed there...still doesn't change the fact that Boston had a much higher viewership than Chicago, the main point I was making.

MattA75 wrote:

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

for game 1, the ratings were 28.1 for Boston and 25.1 for Chicago (which was a marked increase over Chicago's game 1 vs Philly a few years ago)...I'd say both markets going down considerably for game 2 had an awful lot to do with Saturday night, not just from going out/gathering with friends to watch the game (be it at a house or a bar), but the fact that it's Saturday night in June and there's plenty else to do for the casual follower who doesn't view this as MUCH WATCH VIEWING in both of those cities on Saturday night

shinkdew wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

for game 1, the ratings were 28.1 for Boston and 25.1 for Chicago (which was a marked increase over Chicago's game 1 vs Philly a few years ago)...I'd say both markets going down considerably for game 2 had an awful lot to do with Saturday night, not just from going out/gathering with friends to watch the game (be it at a house or a bar), but the fact that it's Saturday night in June and there's plenty else to do for the casual follower who doesn't view this as MUCH WATCH VIEWING in both of those cities on Saturday night

The decrease in both cities is also due to Game 1 being on NBC and Game 2 being on NBCSN.

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

shinkdew wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

sportsfreakpete6 wrote:

Coach wrote:

MattA75 wrote:

Coach wrote:I thought that Chicago was a good sports town....
From ‏@NBCSportsPR via Twitter:

Local ratings for last night's Stanley Cup Final on NBC Sports Network: Boston 22.5, Chicago 15.6. Final nationals avail tomorrow.

Saturday night = going out to watch the game

So only people in Chicago go out to watch the game and Boston fans stay at home?

As an unbiased (I hate both teams) and fan from a true sports crazed town:

Boston fans>Chicago fans

Both good, but Boston beats 'em by a smidge.

It's pretty ridiculous (and stupid) to think that a 7 point (large) difference in ratings can be attributed to people going out to watch a game. There is no data to suggest that Chicagoans go to bars that much more than Bostonians.

Not only that, but saying that it's attributed to bars is also basically saying that at least 7% of the population of Chicago went to a bar to watch the hockey game instead of watching it at home. That's pretty absurd.

for game 1, the ratings were 28.1 for Boston and 25.1 for Chicago (which was a marked increase over Chicago's game 1 vs Philly a few years ago)...I'd say both markets going down considerably for game 2 had an awful lot to do with Saturday night, not just from going out/gathering with friends to watch the game (be it at a house or a bar), but the fact that it's Saturday night in June and there's plenty else to do for the casual follower who doesn't view this as MUCH WATCH VIEWING in both of those cities on Saturday night

The decrease in both cities is also due to Game 1 being on NBC and Game 2 being on NBCSN.

yeah took me a while to find the game. And not all cable carriers in Chicago carry that.