h a l f b a k e r yYou could have thought of that.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Unless you're a fan of hockey, you've probably noticed that it is a stiflingly boring sport to watch on TV.
An hour can go by without anyone scoring. The ref stops the action about every 30 seconds due to some violation most of us never even saw. It's close to impossible to see the puck.
The fan
base of hockey has gotten smaller, because, due to these problems, new fans to the sport are not being attracted.
So how to improve this, without actually changing the game itself?
Answer: The NHL, which will soon resume after it's year hiatus, should take a page from NASCAR's book: the presentation of NASCAR races today are far more exciting than a few years ago, with the introduction of helmet cameras and microphones.
Due to these, a formerly boring sport in which you watched a bunch of tightly packed cars drive a lap, then another, than another, until you were ready to see what the PBA tour was up to, became thrilling, because the viewpoints were constantly changing.
You could see how first one driver, and then another, were viewing the race, and each other. And you could hear them giving the pit crews information, and being given advice.
Similarly, if hockey players were given, in their helmets, microphones, speakers, and cameras, you could see:
What it looks like when you're about to give (or get) a check.
The view of first the goalie, than the forward, as a shot is made.
And a constantly shifting viewpoint, which could be alternated with the traditional overhead view, which would be used to place and get perspective on the previous eye view of the player.
This, combined with sounds, and audible coaching through head speakers, would make the game exciting to people who are not familiar with the intricacies of the game, which is what's need to attract NEW fans.
As Hockey's fan base has dwindled, NASCAR's has climbed steadily, and I believe it's largely due to the improved televised presentation I have just described. Hockey, if it sticks to the old format when it resumes, will be missing a major chance to reinvigorate the televised sport.
If you really want to cross ice hockey with Nascar...
http://www.whitetra...ving_experience.htm
try ice driving. [DrCurry, Aug 16 2005]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
I wonder if we've been watching the same game. Hockey is the fastest, most exciting team sport I've ever seen. The only thing that comes close is polo. |
|
| |
(Of course, I only watch it live, not on TV, which may make a difference.) |
|
| |
I have motion sickness just reading the description. |
|
| |
Hey! - if you like Hockey lemme tell ya that they play it on the 'other side of the Pond'. But get this!. They play it on an Ice Rink!!. I'tll never catch on... mimble ...mumble. |
|
| |
You, that could be another thing, maybe you have special cars on a slippery, larger rink, and you push-pass a rolling puck the size of a beach ball. It could then be a combination ice hockey/crash 'em up derby! |
|
| |
I like it. First person hockey would be exciting. I wonder if it would be possible to switch back and forth from overhead to first person view with a button on the remote, the way I switch closed captioning on and off? |
|
| |
First, it is exciting on TV. Additionally, several years ago Fox introduced a chip-puck which dynamically highlighted on the screen. |
|
| |
Exciting is apparently a relative term. |
|
| |
So if a hockey game doesn't have any action for 30 minutes, I would have to say it's the soccer games that need the livening up :) |
|
| |
NASCAR and hockey in the same sentence pains my Canadian heart. We have CBC's Hockey Night in Canada here and most people here enjoy the broadcast, but were also brought up on it for the last million years. |
|
| |
The rule of thumb is a 27 inch TV is required to see the puck. |
|
| |
This year with the obstruction apparently being hammered out, plus less offsides through delayed offside calls, should increase the pace of the game, scoring chances, and lessen whistles. |
|
| |
The glowing puck thing was done, but looked too silly even for uninitiated viewers. |
|
| |
Nice idea. You should change the title to "First Person Hockey" to make it more descriptive and less critical. |
|
| |
It should be done in a PIP, or side-by-side, manner IMO, because that way you get to see some of the stuff that goes on away from the puck. |
|
| |
Bungston, I'll go you one better: NHL could sell a special subscription that would let you switch from any helmet view that was currently on the rink. The game would get more exciting to watch, and NFL could start pulling in more $. |
|
| |
I like shapu's idea too, if you could have an overhead view with a cursor (requiring, I suppose, this being integrated with a computer), each time you clicked on a player, you could open up a mini window off on the side of the main screen. |
|
| |
[Earlyspring] but you just know you'd miss all the best angles through watching the wrong camera... |
|
| |
Puck for hockey? Ahhh, you're describing *ice* hockey, not the real thing. |
|
| |
Or one could back-project hockey puck trails on the ice from below. |
|
| |