Reported by WTOP:
My own opinion of the matter is that it would serve the Lords of Baseball right if their latest scheme to extract tribute from the taxpayers fell through now that they’re well and truly stuck with DC. 
(There’s mention of a threat to move to Virginia instead; they don’t have a viable site there.)
MLB would move the Nats to another city for 2006 in a heartbeat.
Some other city will fall victim to MLB’s extortion.
Las Vegas wants a team, Nashville wants a team, New Orleans wants a team. . .
Extort away, MLB.
Make that 2005! DC has until the 31st to agree to MLBs demands. (Which might happen but not so likely. Even Pete Rose would bet against it.) Among the cities being considered for 2005 play: Montreal.
Ergo, we should revert to calling them “The Expos” until some (other) city is officially lined up.
Does this mean that Washington has now lost 3 baseball teams?
The problem is that they don’t have any other remotely comparable market available, and Cropp knows it. This puts her in a position to declare, “I have altered the deal. Pray that I do not alter it further.”
adam yax:
Four, if you want to count the aborted move of the Padres in 1974. (ref: Topps “Washington N.L.” baseball cards)
D.C. is already a diamond-shaped piece of land infested with drugs and self-important blowhards. We don’t need another, and the City Council are fools to go kissing MLB’s collective ass. We’re the biggest major market without a team, and they know it – and we’d be happy to stick to the O’s. The success of the Skins and Ravens as commercial ventures proves that DC-Baltimore sports make viable (and profitable!) cross-town rivals.
D.C. has other problems, like the fact that they get their funding from Congress but don’t have any (effective) voice in it. This has led to Congress recently overruling the DC Council’s decision to implement a commuter tax on persons who work in the District but live outside it. Unsurprising, given that Congress is specifically composed of such workers. :smack:
The Council is a toothless governing body until we also have a U.S. Senator or a Representative.
[/soapbox]
:shrug: It’s another negotiating ploy, and so is MLB’s response. They’ll work something out; both sides are too committed. There’s too much value to DC in having a team, and there is no other promising market available to MLB - even DC is questionable. Meanwhile, they’re just alienating their prospective fan base with this crap.
Why doesn’t MLB just pick a new owner, rake in the cash, and let it all be his problem instead? Are they just too used to having a franchise to fuck over?
The franchise suffers no matter what - the team used to be named after a world’s fair, now it’s named after an airport.
gosh I hope so. Last thing the area needs is a baseball team and attendant traffic and crime problems
gosh I hope so. Last thing the area needs is a baseball team and attendant traffic and crime problems
…Because if there are two things DC is known for, its the low crime rate and traffic free commutes. 
I don’t see there being a perceptable increase in crime (unless your talking about steroids or scalping) because a stadium is built. The traffic may be an issue, but for 81 times per year, a couple hours before and after the game, it can be dealt with.
I don’t think that cities should be bullied (press war) or leveraged against one another into financing stadium deals that give the owners riches and don’t return money to the community, but geting baseball out of Montreal and into DC would be good for the game. A 50/50 split on construction costs isn’t unraesonable, but would lower the selling price that MLB gets for the team. They’ll say and do a lot of things to attempt to get the most money for the new team, but ultimately DC is the best option.
And from ESPN.com, contraction is now an option again should this really fall through…
And New Orleans already has a stadium. The Superdome was specifically bulit to attract a baseball team.
Feh, New Orleans can barely support the Hornets. And MLB wants new stadiums, not renovated old ones. The Superdome won’t fly except as a very temporary measure.
Let’s face it, DC is the only viable city here. The only other proposed location to have the population to support a team is NoVA, and NoVa has even more financing issues than DC.
Only two things prevent me from stating unequivocally that MLB will fold. 1) The whole contraction thing, and (2) MLB’s utter willingness to cut off its nose to spite its face and keep the Expos in purgatory until they get exactly what they want.
If MLB folds the 'Spos/Nats, they’d have to fold another team too. Who’d it be, and how can they do it in time for spring training? No, that’s not an immediate option. Maybe in 2-3 years.
Other cities have partially or wholly privately funded parks already. MLB will have to be less greedy and take the DC deal as it is, or nearly so. Yeah, they’ll fold; they’ll have to.
Well, they can’t do it until 2006 anyway. But they’d be more than willing to eat the expenses for the Expos and then fold them after next season, I bet. Who else would they fold? There’s any number of filthy owners who would kill their team in exchange for a lucrative buy-out. I’m willing to bet Pohlad’s still up for it. and Loria’s a skunk, too.
The entire situation is pathetic; MLB has screwed this up for five years.
The team’s stuck with Washington and RFK Stadium. They may be playing in RFK for ten years or more.
Pohlad’s counting on getting a stadium deal if/when the Vikings move. He’s not gonna sell now, I wouldn’t think.
Loria might try to sell the Marlins out, especially since the Dolphins are kicking them out in 2010, stadium deal or no.
I think the most likely target would be the Marlins, as eliminating two NL teams gives you two 14 team leagues. The only AL team that would even potentially be a target is the Tampa Bay Devil Dogs.
Worse, they don’t have a viable site – I described their feckless attempts to set up shop in Arlington on an earlier DC baseball thread, and their last-ditch effort to obtain a site out near Dulles Airport just sort of sputtered to a halt.