12/18/24
January 03, 2006
Washington Nationals Face Washington Locals: "The D.C. Council is trying to walk away from the agreement that brought the team here," Major League President Bob DuPuy writes in today's Washington Post. A battle over paying cost overruns on the new Anacostia River stadium could be the third strike for baseball in the nation's capitol.
I hope MLB gets royally screwed by this. They rushed to move the Expos after doing everything they could to kill the team. MLB haven't had a clue what to do for years other than: "Get the public to pay for the stadium!" I wouldn't be suprised if they sell the Nationals to Jeffrey Loria and fold the Marlins. Then move them to Las Vegas.
posted by ?! at 02:34 PM on January 03, 2006
Its Because the arguement of alfonso soriano,thats why they are getting all the attention
posted by Alfonso12 at 02:50 PM on January 03, 2006
The idea of folding the Marlins and selling the Nats to Loria, then moving them to Vegas is something that is very much possible. However, let me present the scenario that will happen in all liklihood. There is a tug of war between Vegas and Portland for the Marlins. Vegas will probaby win. and get the Marlins. Anyways, the loser of the Marlins sweepstakes get the Nats. This will probably be Portland. Anyway, both Vegas and Portland will get a team, soon. This will come at the expense of Montreal, D.C., and the Miami- South Florida area.
posted by Joe88 at 06:09 PM on January 03, 2006
Another city that could really use an MLB franchise is Charlotte. The Carolinas need a baseball franchise. There's actually even enough population in some of the larger cities in South Carolina also to support a team, then, just refer to this team as the Carolina such & such and have them be a North and South Carolina team like the Panthers or the Hurricanes. Charlotte is definitely large enough to support a team though. I'm surprised it's not a city getting suggested for a relocated team. Do any of my Carolina brethren agree with me?
posted by garnet&blackattack at 08:22 PM on January 03, 2006
Those are all very interesting scenarios, but none are likely to happen… The reality is that the Nats are worth FAR too much to the MLB owners – right where they are – in Washington DC. They want their $450 million, and they want it sooner rather than later. The DC area proved this past season that they are a more viable MLB market than 11 current teams in terms of attendance – and that’s at old rickety RFK. With a new stadium, and a resolution to the TV contract issue, there’s no telling how high attendance can go. The team’s prospective buyers know this, and so does MLB. This standoff will most likely end in compromise. Never underestimate the power of greed… If you’re interested in how it’s really most likely to play out, read this article by respected baseball mind Thomas Boswell. He’s hit the nail right on the head…
posted by karlo16 at 10:09 PM on January 03, 2006
There's actually even enough population in some of the larger cities in South Carolina also to support a team Columbia couldn't hang on to their A-level South Atlantic League franchise (stadium issues and weak attendance), but they're about 90 min. from Charlotte. I know there are Columbians who make weekend trips to see Braves games, so it's not unreasonable to assume a few would make a run up I-77 to catch a game or two.
posted by alumshubby at 05:22 AM on January 04, 2006
The majority in the DC Council are voting against me --a suburban season ticket holder benefiting from DC's $millions to build a stadium. I rarely go into Washington, except the zoo, museums and monuments (all free). Looking around the stadium and talking to my neighbors at the park, the majority of the fans are like me, otherwise untapped revenue for both the city and Major League Baseball. My tax $ paid for baseball and football stadiums in Baltimore whose teams I have about as much interest in as the Cincinnati Bengals or Reds. But both have done wonders for inner city Baltimore and this will do the same for Southeast DC. But this deal stinks! The stadium, not the team, makes the Nats worth the difference between the $450M asking price and the $120M MLB paid. That’s $330M going to line the pockets of wealthy monopolists. I’d like to see somebody like Virginia Congressman Tom Davis slip a nice little tax rider into the next budget bill to take a bite out of that transfer of wealth. Maybe MLB would realize that they or the new owners should pony up at least $150M.
posted by bobolink at 11:33 AM on January 04, 2006
I know what you're saying alumshubby about Columbia. But a guy can dream about a pro team in Columbia can't he. I was thinking more of a greenville-spartanburg area anyway. Their population is about 320,000. Still though, the best scenario for a pro team in the Carolinas would be Charlotte.
posted by garnet&blackattack at 03:14 PM on January 04, 2006
And, of course, MLB is without fault in this whole situation. The fact that they have repeatedly failed to meet their own deadlines to pick an owner has everyone in Washington nervous. Where is the team without an owner? The deal that Washington agreed to was a terrible one. Washington is forced to deal with MLB because there is no owner to deal with on these issues. I think Washington should cut their losses. MLB has to realize now that Washington is a great place to have a team. If they don't, then they can keep shopping & find a city that is willing to give them the ridiculous deal that they want with no guarantees of local ownership or good ownership or ownership with a desire to win!