Congrats to all you Nats fans (Jester I think you're the only one). By all accounts, it seems that the Nats have replaced the O's as the Beltway's favorite team. Question for the DC folk, Is the Nats' overwhelming fan support & popularity simply due to people being in the newlywed phase of having a home town team or are they genuine fans?
Put another way, do you think fan support will dwindle in a year or two and / or once the Nats have a few losing seasons?
5 comments:
To be honest, the numbers are already down a lot from last year. But I don't think this means that the honeymoon is over. I think this has more to do with the fact that the DC City Council, MLB, and the pissing contest between MASN & Comcast have been doing their best to run the team into the ground. Now that we finally have a stadium deal (there is no way around it--RKF sucks) and a real owner (maybe we can actually try to acquire players in the off-season) I think the ship will right itself quickly. Though the limited number of games on local TV is killing us, I think this will be resolved before too much time has past (there is already talk of Congressional hearings and FCC inquiries).
In the long-term the Nats will be a great franchise. The area has changed dramatically since the Senators bailed (twice). DC is the sixth largest media market in the country. And it is also one of the most educated. Now, this may be my biases as a baseball fan coming to the fore, but I think the education factor definitely helps the club. I've always thought of baseball as more of a thinking-person's game. I think its pace and its history are appealing to a more cerebral lot. It's not like football or basketball where the best physical athletes normally win. It's a lot more deliberate--somewhere between those purely physical sports and golf.
I don't think the Nats are even half as popular as they will be in a few years.
Yes, I think the Nats will soon cement their place as "DC's team" but the honeymoon phase will end (it already has a bit this season) unless the Nats build a winner. Let's face--people like to see/support/root for winning teams. If ten years from now-- during the 2016 season--the Nats are the worst team in baseball and the Orioles are vying for a World Series, there are going to be a lot more people, including those who live in DC, clammoring to see an Orioles game. This is why I think the fan support for Baltimore has dwindled over the years. Pete Angelos consistently griped that the DC metro area could not support two teams. That's bs--people will support his team if it is a good team, plain and simple.
Jester, I agree. Baseball definitely appeals more to the thinking person crowd, especially these days. With the bigger & sexier images elsewhere, I feel like baseball is sorting of returning to the strategical game that it was during the 1980s. No longer is the team with the biggest & strongest dude the best team.
Having said that, having an Owner should help give the team a direction and view for the future and decide things like Will the Nats become a home-grown team or seek to buy a dynasty (like another team out there).
I think it'll take a few losing seasons to flush out the true Nats fans from the DC baseball fans. Speaking from experience in a 2 team town, it took much of the last 5 years to sort out the true Mets fans. People always run to see Yankees games, but now as a Mets fan, its interesting to see wayward Mets fans making their way out to Flushing because they smell a winning team in the making (among other things that one can smell in Flushing).
With some of the young talent on the Nats, like a Soriano, Johnson, and Vidro, all that is needed to make a winner is the guidance of a fiscally interested owner.
I agree with what Jester has said. I'll also add that baseball in D.C. will be a huge success because, not only is there a lot of disposable income, but lobbyists and law firms will all be investing in luxury boxes and buying lots of tickets to entertain clients and recruits. And that's not even considering the tourists. The Nats will easily be one of the ten most profitable franchises in baseball -- maybe even top 5.
The carping about the old Senators leaving is also misplaced. They left (twice) because they had owners who struck better deals elsewhere, not because they were significantly less profitable than other franchises of that era. Those were the days when teams moved around much more freely. The Lerners will be good stewards of the team and hopefully get us a stadium that doesn't look like the convention center!!!!
I wouldn't get to excited about changes to the stadium. I heard on WTOP this morning that while the Lerners might want to make a few minor changes, they are generally happy with the stadium design.
Speaking of which...Stallion I saw the concept drawing for the new Mets' stadium in Flushing. I love the way its facae looks like Ebbetts Field. Now that's what I call a stadium design! It has that classic look, but it isn't a cookie cutter. Very nice.
Post a Comment