Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:01 pm EDT
I think stories about television ratings and sporting events tend to be mind-numbingly boring with the exception of one instance ... when they make like the NHL and measure at embarrassingly minuscule (ie: smaller than the WNBA) levels.
The news from Sports Business Journal (subscription) then, that the not-so-good Nationals are averaging only 9,000 households per telecast, less than a third of the next lowest-rated team, the Kansas City Royals, qualifies for a mocking mention here on the Stew.
Nine thousand people? A 0.39 overall score? Really? I know Nats baseball isn't as exciting or riveting as C-SPAN or Wolf Blitzer, but you figure the Nats would have scored a higher rating just by the people leaving their televisions on after a Skins minicamp update on MASN or having to go somewhere else for their irrelevancy now that The Boss has left Blog Show.
Dan Steinberg sent this story along to me — the Yankees have the highest viewership at an average of 325K households a game — and he checks in with the same "how the hell could they even measure that small of a number?" incredulity as me, albeit from a local perspective.
Seriously, what the heck is going on here? Why do we have a baseball team? Is this just yet another example of Washingtonians being front-runners? Will the numbers spike when the Nats start winning? Does it just require time, no matter what the W-L record is? Was Peter Angelos actually correct about the lack of D.C. baseball fans? Is it really that hard to find MASN2? Or is it just that, in general, with one notable exception, Washington is to pro sports what Billings is to high culture?
You know, I used to laugh when I heard local Washingtonians predict that Nats Park would be without a tenant after this current D.C. baseball squad showed it couldn't succeed in the nation's capital. Now I'm starting to see a reason for their cynicism.
Big League Stew is an MLB blog edited by Kevin Kaduk. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Posted Nov 18 2009
Scioscia gets top manager honors
Posted Nov 18 2009
Rockies skipper is NL manager of the year
Posted Nov 18 2009
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by E. Brennan
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Andy Behrens
18 Comments
1 - 18 of 18
Report Abuse
I think the Nats' outfield may be one of the worst of all time. How can you blame fans?
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
I can't be bothered with registering for the subscription.
Report Abuse
so, was "less than 1/3 of" not clear enough?
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Instead, the Nats are living the dream, err, nightmare that was the Montreal Expos. Low ratings, low attendance, low chance of going anywhere but to contraction depot.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Everyone commenting at the Sports Bog seems to blame the network, but if you're a fan, you'll watch your team.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
they do show Nats games on my20 usually on thurs/fri/sat telecasts.
Furthermore,it is Kasten's AND Bowden's fault that they cannot evaluate "talent" or make the "smart moves" when it comes to baseball players. Certainly purging the Cincinnati Reds didn't help either but saying the Nationals are in trouble is an understatement.
Report Abuse
1) It isn't like the Nats were drawing like wildfire in their first season in DC. They tried for decades to get a team here and when they finally did, the first game at RFK sold out and the second game was less than half full. You can look that up. Even when the Nats were 51-30 at the halfway mark, in first place, in the first year of a city supposedly starving for baseball, they still were only drawing an average of just under 30,000 fans.
2) The team was crippled by MLB ownership that didn't spend on anything.
3) The new owners are worse than MLB was. They refuse to sign any free agents (except Paul Lo Duca--what was that?!?) and their trades, extensions and signings have been awful.
4) The new lobbying laws stopped a lot of expensive tickets being purchased--and DC doesn't have many corporations, the team was relying on lobbying expenses.
5) The new owners rubbed a LOT of fans the wrong way by screwing them on season tickets in the new stadium. Conservatively, about 5000 of the best seats were taken by the owners and reserved for cronies. I, and many others, got kicked out of their prime seats.
6) The whole MASN dispute held the Nats back from getting a foothold for the first years, as did lack of marketing by MLB.
7) MASN is indeed hard to find and not in all DC area homes.
8) The team stinks.
9) DC is a town of transients, so there is less of a home town feel and many locals still follow the teams from where they came from.
10) The Redskins dominate all news and thoughts and for some reason other sports can't get the love like they can in other cities.
There's probably 10 more reasons, but not many of them are going away any time soon.
Report Abuse
12) the food and beer is supremely overpriced and not that delicious.
13) also considered overpriced are the various souvenirs.
14) the nats attempt to catter to the casual fans but fail miserably due to the product on the field and (lack of) management running the team.
15) at this point, failure to seek trades for our entire roster and starting over by bringing up prospects.
Report Abuse
17) hyper inflation of ticket prices and forcing the casual fan all the way up to the nosebleeds will not help the team grow.
18) the park has a alcoholic license with miller and budweiser, two awfully tasting "beer" companies.
19) too many cincinnati retreads.
20) general moron jim bowden doesn't have a clue on how to perform being a successful gm.
21) as the day pass, the nationals are bleeding money and as with the losses piling up, that's not helping either.
1 - 18 of 18