Sweatred

Penalties and Lack of Power Plays

575 posts in this topic

For years I have suggested that the Senators get the short side of calls which came to a peak in the Stanley Cup finals against the Ducks. Several have suggested to me that Sens should just work harder and not whine about the subjective nature of calls. Anyway I thought I would break down the first ten games to exploit any disadvantage we might have.

PP in first period 12. PK in first Period 20. Minus - 8

PP in second period. 16. PK in second 17.5. minus - 1.5

PP in third period. 14. PK in third. 21. minus - 7

Now if I remove calls where the goal differential is over 3 ( out of reach) the numbers get worse.

PP in first period 11 PK in first Period 20. minus - 9

PP in second period. 10 PK in second 17.5. minus - 7.5

PP in third period. 5 PK in third. 21. minus - 16

So basically over 10 games when the game is close we have had 32.5 extra penalties below even or a minus 65 minutes on the PK. We have only has 2.6 power plays per game when the game is within 3 goals.

We have had two games where we had more time on the PP and one where we had more PP time in the first period. Keep in mind that the majority of teams to score first win. We also received a measly 5 PP in ten games in the third period of close games.

Humor yourself and compare the Leafs PP's and when they occur during the game. Their quantity of 5 on 3 stats are fun to also follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what you want to prove, but an arbitrary collection of numbers isn't really evidence. You should use statistics, normalize the factors and give standard deviations from the league.

With those values your numbers because much more significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?

Becareful with the slinging around of 'you guys', these types of generalizations are why a lot of people think you are attacking them.

I told him to normalize the data with league standard deviations, I bet if he did that he will find that comparatively the Sens take a normal amount of penalties in relation to the league/themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Becareful with the slinging around of 'you guys', these types of generalizations are why a lot of people think you are attacking them.

I told him to normalize the data with league standard deviations, I bet if he did that he will find that comparatively the Sens take a normal amount of penalties in relation to the league/themselves.

sorry dell i wasnt referring to you.

the people who buy into the conspiracy theories know who they are. i was not trying to offend anyone else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am equally frustrated as you are about " those guys" who ramble on about conspiracy theories as people with your belief that the number penalties and the time of penalties is insignificant. When the Ducks turned into the cleanest team in the playoffs against the Sens and the Sens turned into the dirtiest I understand you would suggest the Sens were outplayed and had to take penalties to slow the better team down. I respectfully disagree.

There are penalties on nearly every shift by the book in the NHL.. Referees do not call all penalties. I rarely have a problem with most calls against the Sens and I realize that many others go uncalled. They do tend to have some phantom calls that the broadcast crews fail to find (such as the Neil hit last game and Gonchar's first slash/hook). My main problem is with the timing of the calls against the Sens and the quantity of non calls that go the other way. In the third period of close games we have had a total of 5 power plays to help us cushion a lead or catch up. Opposing teams have had 21 PP's during the same time to do the same. I do not need to calculate SD to know that puts us in a disadvantaged position.

The Sens have the most number of penalties against them and the fewest power plays. MacLean has yet to complain publicly for obvious reasons but he will at some point. Clouston and Murray have complained publicly in the past about the lack of PP chances Interfering with their "PP rhythm" which is their indirect way of complaining about the calls.

uote name='23sens23' timestamp='1320205821' post='311621']

man i absolutely despise these ridiculous conspiracy theories

do you guys watch the games???? the sens are taking penalties. this is what happens with a young team they get running around and end up taking penalties which is what is happening. do you notice 95% percent of the penalties the sens take are when they are in the defensive zone and closer to 100% of that 95% is when the sens get running around or hemmed in the zone for a bit.

yes it sucks but get over it. it is not like the refs are making up phantom calls. in the bruins game tonight every single penalty the sens took was a legit penalty. do i chalk this up to the fact some people do not understand the rules fully? or do you guys actually think there is a conspiracy against the senators???

and for the final reason why there is no conspiracy. if there was this bias towards the leafs with all the extra help with power plays do you not think they would of won a cup by now or atleast made the playoffs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am equally frustrated as you are about " those guys" who ramble on about conspiracy theories as people with your belief that the number penalties and the time of penalties is insignificant. When the Ducks turned into the cleanest team in the playoffs against the Sens and the Sens turned into the dirtiest I understand you would suggest the Sens were outplayed and had to take penalties to slow the better team down. I respectfully disagree.

There are penalties on nearly every shift by the book in the NHL.. Referees do not call all penalties. I rarely have a problem with most calls against the Sens and I realize that many others go uncalled. They do tend to have some phantom calls that the broadcast crews fail to find (such as the Neil hit last game and Gonchar's first slash/hook). My main problem is with the timing of the calls against the Sens and the quantity of non calls that go the other way. In the third period of close games we have had a total of 5 power plays to help us cushion a lead or catch up. Opposing teams have had 21 PP's during the same time to do the same. I do not need to calculate SD to know that puts us in a disadvantaged position.

The Sens have the most number of penalties against them and the fewest power plays. MacLean has yet to complain publicly for obvious reasons but he will at some point. Clouston and Murray have complained publicly in the past about the lack of PP chances Interfering with their "PP rhythm" which is their indirect way of complaining about the calls.

the sens have to earn those PP's when they are trying to cushion a lead. when the sens have a lead they have been known for years as a team that tries to sit on it rather then keep the pedal to the metal and strive for a blow out. when teams do this that means they are not hard on the forecheck and not making it tough for opposing teams dmen to make plays and cause them to create turnovers which leads teams to take penalties to prevent goals. looking at it from the otehr side when the sens sit back and sit on a lead they allow the otehr team to break out and get in the sens zone and work it around and with a young team like the sens they end up taking a panalty to make up for them losing positioning. this isnt rocket science

as for the two calls you referenced. both of gonchars hooking penalties he had he stick parallel to the icce and in on a players hands that is a penalty 100% of the time. and i dont know which neil penalty you are talking about the because all 3 that he took were legitimate penalties. the slash he came down on lucics stick and took away a scoring chance=penalty, the goalie interference he ran into the goalie = penalty every time, and the boarding he hit someone violently into the boards = you guessed it......penalty

and your first paragraph you mean to say the refs were out to get the sens is a more likely explanation then the fact a younger, smaller senators team could not keep up to the bigger, faster, stronger ducks team? did you actually expect a d core that contained preissing, corvo, meszaros (age 21) and redden to be able to contain getzlaf, perry, penner(when he was a beast) and selanne over a 7 game series without having to take penalties to slow them down? yeah you are right it must of been a conspiracy.....good grief people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have no problems with most the calls made against the Sens, they take way to much silly undisciplined penalties. I also can see that they are missed calls both ways. My frustration is with the inconsistency of the calls. If the refs are going to be strict they need to the whole game. Most recent example is the Rangers game with the call on Konopka and then the Alphy hit. These type of calls are game changers and would be no problem for me if they could maintain consistency. It may be because I am biased to the sens but I do get the impression that more often than not the Sens are at the short end of this stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at NHL ice level to know, but might any beaking from player towards ref calls have an influence as to what is called thereafter?

Whereby the unsportsman isn't called outright, but the "take your number and see you next period" low key is?

These refs have got to have thick skin by the time they reach the NHL level, but I wonder if their egos don't allow for a subliminal "questionable" call now and again.

With the extra ref on the ice now you do however expect a bit more consistency of calls made, regardless of how many or to which team. They should set the standard for the game early as to what is going to be tolerated and leave it up to the players/coaches to continue in the same vain they know will be called or not for that contest.

A league standard in theory is sought but doesn't occur always in practice. Hits, hooks, etc., seem to be called at various levels of intensity from game to game, but should be at least on par during the SAME game, IMHO.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have no problems with most the calls made against the Sens, they take way to much silly undisciplined penalties. I also can see that they are missed calls both ways. My frustration is with the inconsistency of the calls. If the refs are going to be strict they need to the whole game. Most recent example is the Rangers game with the call on Konopka and then the Alphy hit. These type of calls are game changers and would be no problem for me if they could maintain consistency. It may be because I am biased to the sens but I do get the impression that more often than not the Sens are at the short end of this stick.

your post started off so promising then byt the end you contradicted what you said in the beginning

i dont understand why you are upset about the calls in the rangers game. in that game the right calls were made. konopka has a history and when they saw anisimov was staying down the refs assessed a major penalty. I can guarantee you that if a guy like greening made the hit it wouldnt of been 5 minutes.

and on the alfie play the refs got it right during the geam by assessing wolski with a 2 minute penalty. there was no way that was worth a 5 minute major.

where the ball was dropped was after the game during the review by the disciplinary board. but lets not side track this topic into one that we are already discussing in depth in the hockey talk tab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey 23,

I probably used a bad example. I chose it because it was fresh in people’s minds.

To me the refs made a good call initially (as you pointed out) by 2 minutes for boarding. Then on review of the replay they changed it to a Major + 10 misconduct. To me this is where they where inconsistent. They should not have taken similar action on review of the hit on Alphy?

I understand the point on who is was also, However is it not the leagues roll to make that decision when evaluating suspensions. The refs (again in my opinion) should be calling the game consistently based on the hit not the person.

is being a physical player the same as a dirty or malicious player? Granted I don’t know much about him so correct me if he is, I didn’t know much about him before the Sens.

Again sorry for using that example, I am trying to point out the consistency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a person uses the "stats cruncher" on the main NHL.com site, there isn't anything too significant on there about who gets what PP opportunities, PP time, PKs and PK time, whatever.

A lot of this probably just has to do with varying coaching systems, styles of play, skill, aggressiveness, experience levels of players, etc.

I agree though that consistent refereeing is important.

The Columbus Blue Jackets lead the league in PPs and time on the PP and their PP goals are ironically the lowest in the league. Carolina leads the league with 5-on-3 opportunities. Nothing too exciting here. Ottawa seems to be middle of the pack in a lot of areas relative to other teams, except in one area.

Ottawa is tied with Vancouver for the league lead with 13 PP Goals! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a person uses the "stats cruncher" on the main NHL.com site, there isn't anything too significant on there about who gets what PP opportunities, PP time, PKs and PK time, whatever.

A lot of this probably just has to do with varying coaching systems, styles of play, skill, aggressiveness, experience levels of players, etc.

I agree though that consistent refereeing is important.

The Columbus Blue Jackets lead the league in PPs and time on the PP and their PP goals are ironically the lowest in the league. Carolina leads the league with 5-on-3 opportunities. Nothing too exciting here. Ottawa seems to be middle of the pack in a lot of areas relative to other teams, except in one area.

Ottawa is tied with Vancouver for the league lead with 13 PP Goals! :)

Wait a minute Westy, just wait one minute. are you telling me that after you actually looked at the stats there isnt a conspiracy against the Ottawa Senators?????? How can that be????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey 23,

I probably used a bad example. I chose it because it was fresh in people’s minds.

To me the refs made a good call initially (as you pointed out) by 2 minutes for boarding. Then on review of the replay they changed it to a Major + 10 misconduct. To me this is where they where inconsistent. They should not have taken similar action on review of the hit on Alphy?

I understand the point on who is was also, However is it not the leagues roll to make that decision when evaluating suspensions. The refs (again in my opinion) should be calling the game consistently based on the hit not the person.

is being a physical player the same as a dirty or malicious player? Granted I don’t know much about him so correct me if he is, I didn’t know much about him before the Sens.

Again sorry for using that example, I am trying to point out the consistency.

konopka isnt necessarily a dirty player but he does play physical and has received suspensions in the past for some of his questionable decisions on the ice.

i know you are trying to make a consistency point but comparing a boarding penalty to a check to the head penalty on consistency is a tough comparison to make. now comparing apples to apples. if you look at similar plays that happened to alfie like when ference hit halpern in the playoffs last year. he was only assessed a two minute penalty for almost the exact same play. so that is pretty consistent if you ask me (ference was not suspended either). the boarding call on konopka i think if you asked a 10 refs i bet 5 would say 2 minutes and 5 would say major penalty. it was a penalty no doubt but bordered on the 2 minute or 5 minute penalty. throw in the fact konopka was the one who threw the hit and the fact anisimov sold it like a pro it resulted in 5 minutes

but refs notice that sort of thing that anisimov did more then anything else. he made the refs look bad and i can guarantee the next time he gets ran into the boards the refs will not be as willing to call a penalty on him let alone a 5 minute major

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, Anisimov made it look like he was near death and couldn't move, get the stretcher boys. And then once they've got the power play he's on his feet on the power play less than a minute later.

I think they should carry over the quite time rule to things like that, if you're so injured on a hit from behind that you're on the ice for a minute, you have to go sit in the quite room with a Doctor for 10 to be sure you're OK to play.

Under no circumstances should we see a player so injured that a major was needed to be called out on the ice within a minute of the event occurring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the sens have to earn those PP's when they are trying to cushion a lead. when the sens have a lead they have been known for years as a team that tries to sit on it rather then keep the pedal to the metal and strive for a blow out. when teams do this that means they are not hard on the forecheck and not making it tough for opposing teams dmen to make plays and cause them to create turnovers which leads teams to take penalties to prevent goals. looking at it from the otehr side when the sens sit back and sit on a lead they allow the otehr team to break out and get in the sens zone and work it around and with a young team like the sens they end up taking a panalty to make up for them losing positioning. this isnt rocket science

as for the two calls you referenced. both of gonchars hooking penalties he had he stick parallel to the icce and in on a players hands that is a penalty 100% of the time. and i dont know which neil penalty you are talking about the because all 3 that he took were legitimate penalties. the slash he came down on lucics stick and took away a scoring chance=penalty, the goalie interference he ran into the goalie = penalty every time, and the boarding he hit someone violently into the boards = you guessed it......penalty

and your first paragraph you mean to say the refs were out to get the sens is a more likely explanation then the fact a younger, smaller senators team could not keep up to the bigger, faster, stronger ducks team? did you actually expect a d core that contained preissing, corvo, meszaros (age 21) and redden to be able to contain getzlaf, perry, penner(when he was a beast) and selanne over a 7 game series without having to take penalties to slow them down? yeah you are right it must of been a conspiracy.....good grief people

i realize that there are always gonna be weak and questionable calls by the refs, but do you seriously think neil deserved that goalie interference penalty?, from what i saw he was shoved into thomas by a boston player, if he wasnt shoved there by that player i doubt he wouldve made contact, maybe you saw somthing different but thats what i saw and beleive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i realize that there are always gonna be weak and questionable calls by the refs, but do you seriously think neil deserved that goalie interference penalty?, from what i saw he was shoved into thomas by a boston player, if he wasnt shoved there by that player i doubt he wouldve made contact, maybe you saw somthing different but thats what i saw and beleive

from how i saw it neil was tangled up with a bruins player and yes he was pushed but the rule on that states the player has to make an effort to get out of the way of the goalie. especially when the goalie is in the blue paint. which in this case neil did not do. and not knocking neil because i love when he does the same thing and gets away with it which he has done on a few occasions where he is tangled up with a player and ends up on top of the goalie. but this time it did not work out and it is a penalty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hear what your saying about the rule, i guess it depends on the ref and their interpretation of the rule because like u said ive seen that happen countless times before with no penalty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, Anisimov made it look like he was near death and couldn't move, get the stretcher boys. And then once they've got the power play he's on his feet on the power play less than a minute later.

I think they should carry over the quite time rule to things like that, if you're so injured on a hit from behind that you're on the ice for a minute, you have to go sit in the quite room with a Doctor for 10 to be sure you're OK to play.

Under no circumstances should we see a player so injured that a major was needed to be called out on the ice within a minute of the event occurring.

That is ludicris. Drives me nuts.

I agree with you 100% Clark on the quiet time rule. It makes perfect sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman works for the owners and his most significant responsbility is to increase the bottom line of the league. He has pubically stated that the league's primiary goal is to pursue and expand a national televesion contract in the US (Versus / NBC / Comcast etc).

The CBC's contract with the NHL is lucrative and heavily driven by the large fan base of the Maple Leafs and to a lesser extent Montreal, Vancouver, etc. etc.... with Ottawa contributing the smallest fan base (not sure about Winnipeg). Bettman does not care if the Leafs win the Stanley Cup. He only cares if people who start watching CBC and/or Leafs broadcast are still watching close to the end of the game. That ensure AD revenues remain high which allows the NHL to maintain/demand their lucrative contract with the CBC for games shown in Canada.

Ottawa's hockey market is close to saturated and our national television exposure and financial contribution to the NHL's pocket is limited. This is the first year that most Sens games are shown on a Saturday night (CBC). The last 10 years most of our Saturday games were against a team that was already plaing (TOR, MON, VAN, PITT, BUFF etc.) The potential for growth in Ottawa's television market is limited. For the most part most of us will remain fans through the good and bad and we do not require a "fantastic playoff experience" to generate new fans.

Bettman's best way to sell tickets in cities where sucess if financially needed to maintain revenue or provide growth is to ensure that fans have a good experience and the only thing that guarentees that is winning. A good power play can score around 30% of the time so if one team has 10 extra PP's over a 10 game stretch that results in 3 extra goals which likely translate to any etra tie/win etc or more is they are timed appropiately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman works for the owners and his most significant responsbility is to increase the bottom line of the league. He has pubically stated that the league's primiary goal is to pursue and expand a national televesion contract in the US (Versus / NBC / Comcast etc).

The CBC's contract with the NHL is lucrative and heavily driven by the large fan base of the Maple Leafs and to a lesser extent Montreal, Vancouver, etc. etc.... with Ottawa contributing the smallest fan base (not sure about Winnipeg). Bettman does not care if the Leafs win the Stanley Cup. He only cares if people who start watching CBC and/or Leafs broadcast are still watching close to the end of the game. That ensure AD revenues remain high which allows the NHL to maintain/demand their lucrative contract with the CBC for games shown in Canada.

Ottawa's hockey market is close to saturated and our national television exposure and financial contribution to the NHL's pocket is limited. This is the first year that most Sens games are shown on a Saturday night (CBC). The last 10 years most of our Saturday games were against a team that was already plaing (TOR, MON, VAN, PITT, BUFF etc.) The potential for growth in Ottawa's television market is limited. For the most part most of us will remain fans through the good and bad and we do not require a "fantastic playoff experience" to generate new fans.

Bettman's best way to sell tickets in cities where sucess if financially needed to maintain revenue or provide growth is to ensure that fans have a good experience and the only thing that guarentees that is winning. A good power play can score around 30% of the time so if one team has 10 extra PP's over a 10 game stretch that results in 3 extra goals which likely translate to any etra tie/win etc or more is they are timed appropiately.

you just proved yourself wrong with this post i will explain but first hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahaahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha you make me laugh with your ridiculousness

so yuo are saying the NHL is trying to grow the sport by giving teams more power plays that are in struggling markets lets look at the teams in the top 6 in pp's 1. columbus i agree they need to build a fan base there but then why is columbus have the 3rd worst pp percentage and is the worst team in the league by your logic they should be scoring more goals and getting more fans. 2, vancouver do they really need to build a bigger fan base? 3 . philidelphia same response as vancouver. 4. carolina, ,decent fan base but again with all those extra pp's why do they rank in the bottom portion for pp goals. 5. pittsburgh moving on one of the biggest fan bases in the NHL. and 6. the leafs again the ACC is sold out year round why would giving the leafs more pp's help with ticket revenue. oh and by the way ottawa is 13 on the list for total pp's

and your conspiracy theories get wackier and wackier, now you are claiming that tv rights have something to do with power plays and that ottawa gets less pp's because they have a smaller market becasue they cannot make as much in advertising. i got news for you pal when you are dealing with cbc, tsn, sportsnet they do not sell their advertising to people as you get slots during leaf games only. they sell it as you get a slot on hockey night in canada, or wednesday day night hockey or whatever and then who ever is playing it doesnt matter the same ads run. now hockey night in canada may show more leaf games because of fanbase and geographical region but tht has nothing to do with advertising dollars i can guarantee you thata much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I have seen there are calls made against look totally rubbish. First of all, it has nothing got to do with TEAM, but it is a ignorance of the referees. I dont want to go on the conspiracy theory because I want be able to disapprove it. Therefore, I have refrain on it.

We got some issues couple of years because refs got annoyed with our bench, who were constantly yapping and whining (geez! I miss Crosby). It came back to bite on calls. This year there were some stupid decision by our veteran players (Gonchar, Neil, Spezza & Karlson) and some rookie mistakes by other.

The saddest part is many veteran guys from other teams are doing the same and cleverly avoiding being penalized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I think the opposite.

so yuo are saying the NHL is trying to grow the sport by giving teams more power plays that are in struggling markets lets look at the teams in the top 6 in pp's 1.

Great

columbus i agree they need to build a fan base there but then why is columbus have the 3rd worst pp percentage and is the worst team in the league by your logic they should be scoring more goals and getting more fans.

A very poor example. They are getting lots of chance. 20% of 10 chances is more goals than 20% of 5 chances. Bettman can't put the puck in net. Just direct/influence the calls.

2, vancouver do they really need to build a bigger fan base? 3 .

Current CBC darling most likely to generate playoff add revenue in Canada with the CBC and HNIC.

philidelphia same response as vancouver.

A strong team ....no doubt they draw their fair share. They are also owned by Comcast who is in one form or another associated with new the US national television deal with the NHL. They own some or part of versus ... or one of the NBC branches... or something along those lines.

4. carolina, ,decent fan base but again with all those extra pp's why do they rank in the bottom portion for pp goals.

No, they are not considered a well supported team. See Columbus.

5. pittsburgh moving on one of the biggest fan bases in the NHL.

The epitome of what Betman is trying to do. Support struggling US teams. They almost dies a few years back. No Crosby, no Stall, a little Malkin ... and all those PP chances ???

and 6. the leafs again the ACC is sold out year round why would giving the leafs more pp's help with ticket revenue. oh and by the way ottawa is 13 on the list for total pp's

Leafs are always in the top 3-10 with PP and 5 on 3's. Nothing new here. They are the single most lucrative element of any TV contract in the league.

and your conspiracy theories get wackier and wackier, now you are claiming that tv rights have something to do with power plays and that ottawa gets less pp's because they have a smaller market becasue they cannot make as much in advertising.

Yes. In a way to direct / ensure positive experiences are had by paying fans and/or those watching TV broadcasts.

i got news for you pal when you are dealing with cbc, tsn, sportsnet they do not sell their advertising to people as you get slots during leaf games only. they sell it as you get a slot on hockey night in canada, or wednesday day night hockey or whatever and then who ever is playing it doesnt matter the same ads run. now hockey night in canada may show more leaf games because of fanbase and geographical region but tht has nothing to do with advertising dollars i can guarantee you thata much

Yes, I know. Those that purchase slots with the CBC have national interests. MOLSON sells beer nationwide, GM etc. etc. All of those companies have a vested interest in selling their products and they are proportional to population which in Canada is led by Southern Ontario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now