Comments on: This Just In: D.C. Not a Baseball Town

By: Larry

Larry — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:00:41 +0000

Two big mistakes were made, one by MLB and one by the politicians in DC.

(1) Despite two previous franchaise failures, and a thriving baseball team only 30 miles away in Baltimore, MLB wrongly believed that a team would also thrive in the DC area. This was Selig's desire, and he should be strung up for encouraging the other owners to go along with such an incredibly bad decision.

(2) The political powers that be in DC refused to swallow their pride and demanded a new stadium be built within the city. And then to compound there mistake, they chose one of the most horrid sections of DC for the location. This is a prime example of building a palace in the middle of a slum. A majority of people will not go there. A stadium built in No. VA would have at least given the team a better chance to survive.

By: Mike Licht

Mike Licht — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:29:24 +0000

The weather has been cold, and DC baseball fans are wimps. Maybe the Nats could play in the Newseum -- I hear there's lot of empty space there. Oh wait; those tickets are over-priced, too.

By: JT

JT — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:30:42 +0000

Let's not forget DC United, I suspect a new reasonably sized stadium (in DC, VA, MD, wherever) would do quite well in the first game, second game and beyond. Like the Skins, they have some very loyal and dedicated fans (it could be argued that their initial success had a lot to do with that). Though a week of games hardly constitutes the success or failure of the Nats new park, it seems like it wouldn't take a rocket surgeon to predict sub-40k attendance on average. What was the rationale for such a huge park? Seems ambitious, no?

By: Big Mike

Big Mike — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:26:47 +0000

I think that the whole situation with the National isn't being handled that well, but that doesn't mean DC isn't a baseball town. There was a lot of enthusiasm for bringing the Nats here, but I think the ownership overestimated what people were willing to pay and endure to see baseball. Attendance is down for baseball pretty much everywhere, but it certainly doesn't help that the new stadium's pricing tends to alienate the casual fan. I think DC might in fact be a good town for baseball. The problem is that we don't have a stadium and franchise that's designed to cater to baseball fans.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:17:18 +0000

Expensive tickets, food and beer for a losing team? No thanks. DC was never a baseball town and never will be a baseball town.

The only team that DC natives love are the Skins. And if the history of winning didn't exist from the 80's, I don't think people would even love the Skins.

The Caps, Wizards, Skins and Orioles all are garbage teams that have a long history of being losers. Now we can add a big waste of money to that equation with the Nationals.

By: WFY

WFY — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:08:05 +0000

It's not a hockey town either.

It seems odd that so many people are assuming (rooting for?) failure based on a sample size of a week.