|
|
Post by HOYAinDC on Apr 9, 2004 7:49:08 GMT -5
Does anyone else strongly dislike Peter Angelos and all his efforts to prohibit DC (5th largest Metro area in the US) from getting a professional baseball team? I love going to games, but the commute to Baltimore isn't worth it, especially on weeknights.
Would anyone disagree that a team in downtown DC would be more than successful?
|
|
|
|
Post by showcase on Apr 9, 2004 9:09:42 GMT -5
I would. DC's a much different place than when it was home to the Rangers, nee Senators, but I still think there's too much going against it to be home to a successful franchise.
Where do you put it? The Convention Center went where it was supposed to go. Build it north or east of there? Replace RFK? It will help gentrify those neighborhoods, but...
What kind of fan base is there? DC's always struck me as a football town in Redskins' country. There are a few baseball fans, but my feeling is you need a really large pool of die hard baseball fans to make a team successful. The season's just too long and the cost of going to a game regularly is almost prohibitively expensive. People in DC will shell out the big bucks for a chance to attend one of eight home dates in any given Redskins season, no matter how bad they are. But look at the Caps & Wizards. My understanding is that they have a much harder time selling tickets. It would only get exponentially harder for a new team that would have to steal fans of the sport from another team to sell a meaningful proportion of tickets for each game over the course of 81 home dates. I just don't think the economics are there, but you're the trained specialist...
As a minor concern, there's traffic and parking. Unless the future stadium's going to go right over a Metro stop a la MCI Centre, I would imagine a downtown stadium would require a lot of new infrastructure. I would think that would be a tough sell to the voters of DC and Congress, given all the other areas that need money. Plus, while there's a return of people to the District, you'd still have to draw substantial numbers from Northern Virginia - and I don't think people are going to brave the Beltway an extra 81 times a year in high-traffic conditions for anything less than the Yankees.
Hey, a successful franchise can be a boone to the local economy, but I think the barriers to success for a new franchise in DC are staggering. I always thought DC should have a team, but I think it's proven that baseball isn't in the hearts and minds of DC's citizens.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,749
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Apr 9, 2004 10:26:14 GMT -5
You may have seen the Washington Times story today proposing a publicly funded stadium on the grounds of RFK. Good for Metro, good for lower land costs, good for the neighborhood.
Name a metro area more deserving of a franchise right now: Portland? Tucson? Buffalo? Washington would outdraw every one of them.
Angelos is looking out for himself, plain and simple. If New York, Chicago, LA, and the Bay Area can support two teams, so can DC and Baltimore.
|
|
|
|
Post by showcase on Apr 9, 2004 10:57:45 GMT -5
You may have seen the Washington Times story today proposing a publicly funded stadium on the grounds of RFK. Good for Metro, good for lower land costs, good for the neighborhood. Name a metro area more deserving of a franchise right now: Portland? Tucson? Buffalo? Washington would outdraw every one of them. Angelos is looking out for himself, plain and simple. If New York, Chicago, LA, and the Bay Area can support two teams, so can DC and Baltimore. Oh, I agree Angelos is looking out for himself, but I'm not sure how well those major markets are "supporting" both teams. In each of those two-team markets, there's a clear runt, from a fan and consequently financial perspective. The Mets don't draw like the Yanks, the Sox do worse than the Cubs (as much as it pains me to admit it), the Dodgers have a better fanbase than Anaheim (or so I'd imagine), and Oakland clearly finds itself as the avatar of making do with less. In each case, I think the viability of the "red-headed stepchild" team stems from the fact that these teams were able to establish a following in an era when attending games was more affordable. A new or relocated team in a new park in DC will draw for a while, and certainly provide a boost to whatever depressed neighborhood its facility gets built in, but I can't help but think that the cost and hassle of attending a game at a facility in or near the District will keep if from being a viable franchise over the long term. Just my $.02. |
|
|
|
Post by HOYAinDC on Apr 9, 2004 13:29:47 GMT -5
|
|
