Anyone following the logic here? First Selig says that MLB, for its economic health, MUST contract two teams. After running a public gauntlet for 2 months, he now says that in the near future -- "and I don' t know when the near future is" -- Washington DC is "the prime candidate" for getting a relocated team!

The Expos, I presume. Moving the Twins back to DC after 41 years might baseball look, y'know, clueless.

Is he saying that DC should get one of the two teams that are set to be cut, or is he saying that after the two are eliminated, the next team in trouble goes to DC?

Hi, Joe - I think he was saying the latter. Like Bill W, I was floored. For years baseball turned a deaf ear to people exhorting for a return to Washington. Now, baseball is in hot water with contraction, a Congressional hearing where Bud Lite is practically accused of perjuring himself, and there's talk of revoking the game's antitrust exemption in Congress. Now, suddenly, Selig is saying there's a team for DC on the horizon. Either this guy is incredibly transparent or I've become very cynical on my dotage.

I hate to say this ... but ... I love ya Bud! Mr. Selig saved baseball in Milwaukee (well, sure, along with the taxpayers of Wisconsin) ... and now he may bring baseball back to my current home in DC.

I believe the idea is to move the Expos to Washington. What bothers me is that they should move the Expos now and not wait until next year. Look at what the Expos are facing this year. The won't have an owner; they'll be run by MLB. Everyone in Montreal knows that this is the last year, so what is already-bad attendance going to be like?

Baseball in Montreal in 2002 is going to be an even bigger disgrace than it is usually.

I agree with you PCC....not only should the Expos be relocated to DC/Northern Virginia (the FIRST intelligent statement that Selig has made in months) but the move should be made for THIS season, not wait until 2003....as you properly stated, the attendance and support for the lame-duck Expos in Montreal is undoubtedly going to be atrocious and a season-long black eye for MLB....not to mention having the other 29 owners "run" the Expos for the 2002 season has got to be one of the biggest jokes I've ever heard in sports....the management at RFK Stadium (where the team would temporarily play until a new park was built either in DC or, better yet, Northern Virginia) said they can have the stadium completely ready for baseball within SIX WEEKS.....this leaves ample time for relocation arrangements, ticket sales, scheduling, etc. to be completed.

While I am ecstatic that the DC area will FINALLY be getting their own MLB team after a thirty year wait (and not have to claim Peter Angelos' team up the highway as "our own") there is NO reason why this move should not take place immediately!....just keep Bud Selig and his cronies away from the decision-making and the process will go along quite smoothly, I'm sure.

[ January 19, 2002: Message edited by: gamecock ]

Where would the Expos/DC team play? RFK? IIRC, it's a mutlipurpose stadium, one that can be configured for baseball without having a 250 foot left field line that some baseball-in-football-stadiums have had.

What would the name be? The Senators?

I'm sure the players want to move now to avoid paying dual taxes. Maybe they can keep some of them now?

And Ted, I don't think you're cynical on this issue, what you wrote is right on I think. For a guy who's supposed to be such a good "politician" within baseball, he sure isn't in the outside world.

Jim Allen, the plan is for the "Expos" to play two seasons at RFK Stadium in DC until a new stadium is built at an undetermined site either in DC or Northern Virginia (the latter is a better option IMHO)....although the DC Stadium Authority (who runs RFK) have said they can have the stadium completely ready for baseball within six weeks it appears HIGHLY unlikely that the Expos will move here for the 2002 season.

Based upon this weekend's articles in The Washington Post Selig and MLB have two plans in place, with the former being SELIG's preference: (1) they are successful in contracting two teams (Expos and Twins?) following the 2002 season in which case the Florida Marlins, now owned by Jeffrey Loria (former owner of Montreal) would move to DC assuming the Miami voters turn down (again) a publicly financed new stadium in South Florida; or (2) there is NO contraction in which case the other 29 owners will run the Expos in Montreal this season (talk about low attendance figures -- will they even draw 1000 fans per game to see a lame duck team?) and then sell the team to one of the two ownership groups bidding to move the team to DC/NoVa for 2003....I personally hope the latter option comes to fruition since I don't feel that Minnesota should be eliminated (Tampa Bay maybe, but not the Twins) and, secondly, after what the DC area went thru with poor ownership groups running the Senators (like Clark Griffith who moved the team to Minnesota in 1961 after 60 years in DC and the awful Bob Short who moved the expansion Senators to Texas in 1971) we don't need another potential "carpetbagger" like Luria who has no ties to the area and a questionable ownership history....in either event, it will be great to see MLB back in the DC area.

I'm sure that Selig and MLB will have to "compensate" that idiot Peter Angelos up the highway since he has been whining about the loss of revenue his Orioles will suffer if DC gets a team.....the truth of the matter is the reason for the loss of revenue and decline in attendance in Baltimore is solely due to Angelos' inept management as he has turned a once proud and successful franchise into a near-joke with his history of atrocious personnel decisions....I know I used to drive the 45 miles to Baltimore to see about 20 O's games per year but will probably only go to 5 this year -- I'd rather drive much longer distances to Philly or New York to see a decent team play rather than give Angelos my hard-earned money.

Don't mean to get too far off topic, though....as for the team name, Jim, I certainly hope and expect they don't keep the Expos name (sounds too ridiculous like Utah keeping the Jazz name from New Orleans or Calgary keeping the Flames name from Atlanta)....I think it will either be the Senators (my preference based upon past history) or the Nationals (i.e., Nats) according to stories in local papers.

Based upon the fact that the DC/Northern Virginia area now has several of the most affluent counties in the country, there is no doubt in my mind that the franchise will prosper here, especially if Angelos continues to "cut his own throat" too....and word is that Cal Ripken (who has a desire to get into Senior Management as long as it is not while working for Peter Angelos, who he privately despises) would be the GM/VP for the new team....another somewhat selfish reason for wanting the Expos over the Marlins is their roster of impressive young talent, most notably Guerrero, Vidro, Vazquez, and Armas Jr, among others -- hardly the equivalent of a first year expansion team roster.

If Selig follows through with this "promise" I may even begin to partially forgive him for his countless past transgressions that have set the game back decades.

One of the times, years ago, when Northern Virginia was close to getting a team, there was a contest and the chosen name was the Virginia Nationals.

Gamecock and PCC, thanks for the info.

I'm not sure about the "Nationals". It'll get shortened to the "Nats" which is too close to "Nits" (the egg of a parasite) for me. Yeah, I have cleaniness issues!

Nats? Egads. I thought I got away from those flying insects when I left the South. Ohhh, wait...those are gnats. They are, however, pronounced the same.
Personally, I think they should go for an actual mascot-entity, rather than one of these amorphous/neuterized "conceptual" names like "Liberty," "United," or even "Nationals."
What the bloody hell is a National? What does it look like? Or is it like Sasquatch; elusive, existing only in theory.

[quote]Originally posted by gamecock:
I'm sure that Selig and MLB will have to "compensate" that idiot Peter Angelos up the highway since he has been whining about the loss of revenue his Orioles will suffer if DC gets a team.....the truth of the matter is the reason for the loss of revenue and decline in attendance in Baltimore is solely due to Angelos' inept management as he has turned a once proud and successful franchise into a near-joke with his history of atrocious personnel decisions....I know I used to drive the 45 miles to Baltimore to see about 20 O's games per year but will probably only go to 5 this year -- I'd rather drive much longer distances to Philly or New York to see a decent team play rather than give Angelos my hard-earned money.

---

This is ironic because a lot of people here would rather watch a game in Camden Yards, regardless of how well the Phils are doing. But hey, if you ever do decide to drive up here for a game, let me know.

[quote]Based upon the fact that the DC/Northern Virginia area now has several of the most affluent counties in the country, there is no doubt in my mind that the franchise will prosper here, especially if Angelos continues to "cut his own throat" too....

---

And what happens to the Orioles if this comes to pass? Are they then going to move somewhere? Hard to imagine Camden Yards without a team.

[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

Expos fiasco will only get worse

I am curious about one thing regarding Washington baseball. DC has had two teams in the past which are now the Minnesota Twins and, I believe, the Texas Rangers. Why did these two franchises leave DC? I ask because it seems unlikely a city the size of DC couldn't support baseball. But also, if they couldn't, and if they've already had two shots, why not give another city a try? New Orleans, Charlotte, Nashville/Memphis, Portland are all untapped markets for major league baseball. I'm not saying DC doesn't deserve a team, just asking if they are most deserving.

I always love hearing all the arguments over which cities "deserve" a franchise. Here are the 2000 Census results of metro populations:
1. New York--North NJ, Long Island, 21,199,865
2. Los Angeles--Riverside, Orange Co, 16,373,645
3. Chicago--Gary--Kenosha, 9,157,540
4. Washington DC--Baltimore, 7,608,070
5. San Francisco--Oakland--San Jose, 7,039,362
6. Philadelphia--Wilmington--Atlantic City, 6,188,463
7. Boston--Worcester--Lawrence, 5,819,100
8. Detroit--Ann Arbor--Flint, 5,456,428
9. Dallas--Fort Worth, 5,221,801
10. Houston--Galveston--Brazoria, 4,669,571
11. Atlanta, GA 4,112,198
12. Miami--Fort Lauderdale, 3,876,380
13. Seattle--Tacoma--Bremerton, 3,554,760
14. Phoenix--Mesa, 3,251,876
15. Minneapolis--St. Paul, 2,968,806
16. Cleveland--Akron, 2,945,831
17. San Diego, CA 2,813,833
18. St. Louis, 2,603,607
19. Denver--Boulder--Greeley, 2,581,506
20. San Juan--Puerto Rico, 2,450,292
21. Tampa--St. Petersburg--Clearwater, 2,395,997
22. Pittsburgh, 2,358,695
23. Portland--Salem, 2,265,223
24. Cincinnati--Hamilton, 1,979,202
25. Sacramento--Yolo, 1,796,857
26. Kansas City, 1,776,062
27. Milwaukee--Racine, 1,689,572
28. Orlando, 1,644,561
29. Indianapolis, 1,607,486
30. San Antonio, 1,592,383
31. Norfolk--Virginia Beach--Newport 1,569,541
32. Las Vegas, 1,563,282
33. Columbus, OH, 1,540,157
34. Charlotte--Gastonia--Rock Hill, 1,499,293
35. New Orleans, 1,337,726
36. Salt Lake City--Ogden, 1,333,914

I especially love hearing all the justifications for cities like Porland, Memphis and New Orleans. Like it or not, MLB is a numbers game. You have 81 home games, and you have to fill all those seats. There is an understanding that MLB cannot survive in markets below a certain population threshold.
Look at the two cities that Portland OR trails...Pittsburgh and Tampa. Both of those cities have horrendous small market issues. How the Hell would Portland overcome the exact same market issues after the "newness" factor wears off and the team fills 5,000 seats a night, and loses 90 games?
And where's New Orleans? I almost didn't even bother to include the city, as it is so far back in the pack. There is no way a financial advisor could ever justify the proposition of moving a team to that swamp. The South is football country. They can support an 8-game home schedule (which is usually where the Aints stop...at 8 home games). But 81 baseball games? In that heat? With a metro population of 1.3 million?
Such a decision would be suicide.

And then there's Memphis...not even on the map.
And then there's Nashville...not even on the map.

I SAY THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN; MOVE THE MONTREAL EXPOS TO SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO...AND TAKE MLB TO THE CARIBBEAN. I mean, isn't MLB already made up of 20% plus South American and Caribbean players?
And look at where San Juan falls on the list above.

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: AU Tiger in LA ]

George, Washington is a completely different city than it was 30 years ago, when the most recent Senators moved.

First, Washington is the highest per capita metropolitan area in the country. Not just the highest without a team; the highest, period. Northern Virginia has a huge technology sector. Suburban Maryland has a large bio technology sector. And this is in addition to the federal government and all of the spinoff business that the federal government produces.

Those other cities have much smaller populations and are far less wealthy than Washington. Why would MLB want to add another small market team that can't fully compete? What's worst is that most of these teams have exsisting professional franchises. How many pro teams can a metro area with only a million (as some of these cities have) support? Usually just one.

And those Senators teams didn't have local ownership. This time Washington will have local ownership that's committed to this area, not some carpetbagger.

sorry, but I don't understand ... highest per capita of what? income?

Don't get me wrong. I never understood why DC didn't have a team and was really surprised at the most recent expansions when Miami, Denver, Phoenix and Tampa all got teams and DC didn't. I only posed NO, Memphis and Portland as examples. I guess I misplaced my census!

I guess I was more curious as to why both Senator franchises left. If it was due to fan apathy, then what would be different today? But if local ownership and a new stadium (eventually)will make the difference, then DC is the place.

Also, I had heard that the Orioles might be able to throw a wrench in the works. Does Baltimore have a say in whether DC gets a team or not?

Highest per capita income. Sorry, I should check my posts more carefully.

Hi, AuTiger - I agree completely. I don't understand why baseball, which was willing to expand to Canada more than twenty years ago, still doesn't seriously entertain the notion of expanding to the Caribbean, especially San Juan. The Spanish-speaking Caribbean islands are baseball hotbeds - kids play almost as soon as they can walk, and they play year-round, which I think explains why Puerto Rican and the Dominican Republic have such disproportional representation among MLB players. San Juan also has Hiram Bithorne Stadium, which is specifically configured for baseball. Puerto Rico uses the US dollar as its currency, so players wouldn't be subject to exchange rate fluctuations as they are in Canada, and the population is quite bilingual, as English is taught in the public schools from grade schhol on. Also, travel time for teams, except for those on the West Coast, would be less than they currently are for teams traveling from the Northeast to California.

The Caribbean and Puerto Rico seem like good ideas. But the average income of the people of these markets has to be taken into account as well. Not sure how they'd afford tickets. There is obviously money in these places, but is it in the pockets of the baseball fans? Also many teams rely heavily on money from corporate sponsors to buy/rent luxury boxes. I don't see the Caribbean corporate world being able to support a team. There would have to be complete revenue sharing and a salary cap before the Caribbean could be considered a viable market.

Georgie boy...have you ever slept with a Riqueno? Aye Papi! So passionate. And the people in the islands are also psychotically entralled with soccer and baseball. They make Yankee fans look sedated!
Believe me...if they put a team in the islands, they will have NO problem filling the seats! As for corporate sponsorship, Coke, Budweiser, Visa and blah blah blah are not idiots. Much to be gained in that market!
And the TV rights would be huge, as a team in the islands would become the "Carribean's Team."

George_vf, I know this is a late reply but to address your recent questions about DC losing the Senators (twice) and why the area would support a team now, there are two main differences between 2002 and 1971 (when the expansion Senators moved to Texas)....fyi, despite the fact that they were two "separate" franchises, there was NO gap between the conclusion of the 1960 season when Clark Griffith moved the "original" Senators to Minnesota and 1961 when the "new" Washington Senators (owned by Bob Short) and the Los Angeles Angels (as they were then known) were added to the A.L. as expansion teams.

The most significant difference, as PCC mentioned, is the tremendous growth in the Northern Virginia and Maryland suburbs that has taken place during the past 20+ years escalating the per capita income to one of the highest in the nation, which was no where near that level thirty years ago....the second, and probably most important reason, was the greed of the non-locally based owners of both Senators teams (which is why I so vehemently oppose Jeffrey Luria moving the Marlins here in 2003 as has been suggested if the Expos and Twins are contracted) who did nothing to field competitive teams (see details below) and immediately moved to "greener pastures" when the midwest beckoned, especially Bob Short.

As for the attendance figures in DC during that era, while neither team led the league in fan support, considering the product that Griffith and Short put on the field, their support was more than respectable for its time....to give you an idea of the LONG history of horrible Senator teams that played in Griffith Stadium and later DC/RFK Stadium, note the following:

"Expansion" Senators (1961-1971)----
(note: they played in the 10 team A.L. for 8 years prior to expansion in 1969):
10th place: 3 times
9th place: 2 times
8th place: 2 times
6th place: 1 time
(note: they played in the 6 team A.L. East for the final 3 years from 1969-71):
6th place: 1 time
5th place: 1 time
4th place: 1 time

Anyone who can defend Bob Short for moving the Senators to Texas following the 1971 season after eleven consecutive seasons where they were a last place team EVERY year or close to it (and received average fan support based upon league attendance figures then) is beyond me.

Even the "original" Senators during the 60 years they played in DC from 1901-1960 could hardly be described as a consistent winner....between 1947 and 1960 they NEVER even finished among the top 4 in the then 8-team American League and if it wasn't for Walter Johnson's dominance between 1910 and 1926 (when he won 20 games or more 12 times, 25 or more 7 times, and led the league in victories 6 times they would be even more attrocious)....the futility of the Griffith owned Senators is as follows:

8th place: 10 times
7th place: 14 times
6th place: 9 times
5th place: 7 times
4th place: 7 times (0 times between 1946-60)
3rd place: 5 times (0 times between 1932-60)
2nd place: 5 times (0 times between 1945-60)
1st place: 3 times (0 times between 1933-60)

I'm not trying to bore you with stats but if anyone looks at ALL the factors objectively, there is no way they could come to the conclusion that the present DC/NoVa market does not deserve and would not support a MLB team and the "loss" of the two previous franchises is certainly due to no fault of the populus in the DC area then.

btw, Joe in Philly, I was not suggesting that the Orioles would ever leave Baltimore but simply that, despite Peter Angelos' assertions, the decline in attendance at Camden Yards (which remains one of the best ballparks to see a game in despite the ownership) will be due more to his inept managerial history more than another team playing 50 miles away, as he claims....I believe Selig will end up compensating Angelos significantly in an attempt to "appease" him and keep the attorney from trying to file suit to prevent a team from moving to DC/NoVa -- although recent stories indicate that according to MLB bylaws Angelos has NO authority beyond a 30 mile radius of Baltimore, which eliminates this area anyway.