Elktonnick

In efect that was what Lucchino said. So why is Ben crying poor mouth and trying to save 3 million dllrs to maintain "flexibility" by trading Scuturo prematurely?

The important question is whether their progeny will grow up to play baseball or football or both:D

Apropos of this discussion, I came across an interesting article written by the legendary Boston Sports writer John Gillhooy, the late uncle of current Providence Journel writer with the same name. In the 1950's Ted Williams wanted to ban the writers from the locker room after the game because of the negative comments being written. Gillhooy and Williams had a longstanding feud. Jackie Jensen spoke up for the writers in the team meeting and prevented the ban from being implimented. What is interesting is that Jensen himself was not immune from vicious criticicsm from what were then called the "werewolves" of right field. The John Gillhooy award for Boston sportwriter of the year is named after him. The point is that negative speculation is a birthright of Red Sox fans. It is who we are. Which is why the September collapse, Buckner's error and Bucky ---- Dent's home run will never be forgotten no matter how many titles they win. In one way it is the reverse psycjhology we play on ourselves to ward off the evil eye of optimism.

Interesting observation about Ortiz and the 100th anniversary, I confess I hadn't thought of that link. I think Mazz was more animated then Felger today. I only saw about 45 minutes of the discussion. The big rap on Ortiz is his sense of entitlement and the lack of commitment that he and the others had towards winning over individual achievement if I can paraphrase their discussion.

It wasn't posted here but Felger and Mazz got off the Patriots long enough today to say something to the effect that Beckett and Ortiz were at the center of the cultural problem on the team which needed to be addressed.

The question now becomes who does?

The O's draw from Northern Va will go to DC maybe. The O's draw from the Maryland suburbs will stay with the O's. There are several problems the NATS have that the O's didn't and don't. When I went to a Nats game, if saw few very few African Americans in the stands. The NAts have to attract the City's African American population. Who are their African American stars. If they hadn't gotten Fielder that would have been a start, a very good start. Second while Nats ballpark is a great ballpark it is on the wrong side of town to attract from the Northern Va suburbs. Parking is expensive and the Metro is notoriously slow in non rush hour. Baseball plays everyday unlike football. The Washington commute starts very early 5:30 am to 6 to beat the worst of it. When I worked in DC ot would take two hours to get to work if I left at 6:30 and I lived less than twenty five miles from my office. One of baseball's biggest problems in DC is whether the DC suburban fans will go to night games during the week. Traffic is worse today then ever IMHO. These aren't small issues to overcome

Washington is a great football town, a great hockey town, a great college basketball town, and so so pro basketball town, it is a crappy Major League baseball town.

While Washingtonshould be considered a large market based on population and wealth, the problem for the NATs and O's is they share the market, just like the Braves and Red Sox did in Boston 60 years ago. The Baltimore Washington area has been through this before. Every time the Washington team folded and had to move. Why should this be any different

I used to read Boswell when I read the Post everyday but the Post sports page isn't very good except for football. The insiders and Boswell are painting an overly rosy picture. The DCTV website which follows the Baltimore Washington Media market is the authoratative source on this area's media market. They reported that NATs ratings declined by 4% this year and are the worst in MLB. Washington has potential but it isn't a baseball town. Again read what their fans are saying on the Nats forum.

The NATS have the worst TV ratings in MLB. That amount of money is insignificant when others get over 100 million a year. The potential market may be bigger but that includes the northern suburbs who are O's fans. The Nats have potential but the question is whether they achieve it. The track record is against them. Spin it any way you want but until they do they are a small market team hoping to expand their market. That is the accurate picture.

The NAts are a small market team with hopes to become a mid sized market team. They are the Gerbil who wants to become a Hamster.

The point is there is no local market for the NATS TV broadcast. They have the worst ratings in all of MLB. It don't matter the size of their market if no one watches. And no one is watching NATS baseball unless it is a fan of the visiting team.

This is from the NATS fan forum To further illustrate my point: Re: Nats Marketing « Reply #8: January 26, 2012, 02:22:00 PM » Quote from: Lintyfresh85 on January 26, 2012, 02:17:47 PM Bullcrap. They've done everything they can to make fans not interested in this team. From no proper fan fest to the very minimum on marketing the team and its players, the Nationals have done nothing to build a baseball culture in DC. Do you really think that's a whole baseball culture is built? A baseball culture is built when kids grow up going to ballgames with dad and mom, with getting cards signed by players, by catching foul balls, and by living and dying with every win and loss. They grow up loving a team and sharing that love with their children. And that can only happen over generations. A baseball culture is not "marketed." It is much more organic. Logged

Welcome to Natstown! This illustrates the problem: Nats' TV ratings lowest in baseball « Topic Start: October 04, 2011, 10:05:44 PM » From dcrtv.com: Despite a surge at the beginning of the season, the Nationals attracted the smallest average regional sports network audience in MLB. SportsBusiness Journal reports that Nats games on MASN and MASN2 in 2011 averaged a 1.22 share in the Washington market this season, down 4.7% from 2010.