ShareThis Page
Penguins

As Capitals creep closer to Cup, Pittsburgh tunes out

Jonathan Bombulie
| Tuesday, June 5, 2018, 12:27 p.m.
Capitals winger Alex Ovechkin skates against the Vegas Golden Knights during the first period in Game One of the Stanley Cup Final at T-Mobile Arena.
Getty Images
Capitals winger Alex Ovechkin skates against the Vegas Golden Knights during the first period in Game One of the Stanley Cup Final at T-Mobile Arena.

As the Washington Capitals have taken a stranglehold on the Stanley Cup Final, local hockey fans have begun to tune out.

Pittsburgh was the sixth-highest rated market in the country for Monday night's broadcast of Game 4 of the final series between Washington and the Vegas Golden Knights, drawing a 6.92 rating.

For Game 1 last week – probably not coincidentally, the only game goalie Marc-Andre Fleury and the Golden Knights have won so far in the series – Pittsburgh was third in the country with a 10.31 rating, the market's highest rating ever for a finals game on NBC that didn't involve the Penguins.

As the series has gone on, Pittsburgh has been passed by Buffalo, Baltimore and Richmond, with the latter two markets no doubt jumping on the Capitals championship bandwagon.

The Capitals lead the series, 3-1, and can claim the franchise's first Stanley Cup championship in Game 5 Thursday night.

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at jbombulie@tribweb.com or via Twitter @BombulieTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me