it's official baseball in DC

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

the expos will move to wash. dc next year---i hope they rename them the senators or nationals and move them to the american league.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

You wouldn't catch ME leaving Montreal for D.C!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

Man Montreal is a great city. Everyone should treat themselves and go...

Well MLB finally quit holding out for the largest payout it could get, and the biggest black eye for the league finally has a home.

[Archive]

Posted By: John/z28jd

Senators would be a good team name but i also heard one of the groups from that area wanted to use the name Grays in honor of the Homestead Grays of the negro leagues who played some of their 'home' games at Griffith Park in DC during the 30's and 40's

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

They won't be the Senators - apparently, the Rangers own that name [insert anti-capitalist rant here].

I vote for the "Washington Bureaucrats".

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

I could see some support being raised to call them the Washington Lame Ducks.

[Archive]

Posted By: DMcD

. . . or maybe the D.C. Freedom Poodles.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gary B.

How about the Washington Monuments?

(hey, it's not any worse than the Dimaondbacks or (God help us all) the Devil Rays)

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason

How about the Washington Dick Cheney Republicans?

Well maybe not. I like the Grays. Has a nice history and its kind of cool.

I like the names of teams that have been around forever or have that throw back to early times feel... Cubs, Red Sox, Maple Leafs, Knicks, Bruins, Packers etc...

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

for the Expos last ever game in Montreal

I've had some great times at Expos games over the past 4+ years that I've lived in Montreal, and it's sad to see them go. I'll have my digi-cam with me, and supposedly a bunch of the members of the '94 team will be there too so hopefully I'll get a few good shots to post here later.

Au revoir les Expos, vous ne serez pas oublies.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pcelli60

As I have read above, " groups " in that area are favoring the name Grays. Looks like a done deal to me boys and girls.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

If nothing was winnning (how did the "Rangers" get a lock on the name "Senators"?), I was going to suggest the "Capitals,"--Canada has a hockey team by that name.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

were the Senators and took the name and all the licensing revenue that stems therefrom with them to Texas back in 1972.

[Archive]

Posted By: Elliot

Actually Julie, "Washington" has a hockey team called the Capitals.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

1) Washington Quarters
2) Washington AC-DC's
3) Washington Sexpos
4) Washington Re-runs

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

Was it the Senators, then?



...Ottowa Senators? Guess I'm hopeless...I LIKE "Diamondbacks" for a baseball team: a snake strikes quick and suddenly. So do many good pitchers and hitters.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I like how espn conviently forgets that there was baseball before 1900 all the time.They had a story tonight about a team in dc and they said numerous times this is the 3rd time major league baseball will have a team in Washington.

Really espn,are you sure of that because i can count more including the 2 they acknowledge i know of 2 more NL teams,in 1884 they had a UA and AA team and since MLB recognizes the National Association as a major league now,theres another 4 teams

I dont mind if they add in that little 'since 1900' disclaimer,but they didnt even do that

Another mistake they made in print today was saying that every major offensive stat record has been broken more recent than the hits record.....including runs scored.

Heres another false statement,Ruth scored 177 runs in 1921 which topped his record of 158 set the year before unless you count stats for everybody,then youll see Billy Hamilton scored 192 runs in 1894.I dont think im missing some rule that was different pre-1900 about how runs were scored.Im pretty sure it was,make it to first then 2nd then 3rd then home safely before 3 outs are recorded and you score a run so why draw the line anywhere for that record

I always hated when they claim a post-1900 record is the actual record without making mention of the fact.Why draw the line there,if i was Vinny Castilla id claim to hold the post-2003 rbi record and talk about how the game was different back then in the pre-2004 era.Sure some things are different from year to year but those were the recognized rules dont make records more convienant around them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pcelli60

I will NEVER defend the disaster that has become ESPN. But 19th century baseball was in great part played under a different set of rules, or at best, a shifting , or evolving set of rules. The statistical accumulations in the 19th century need to be kept in a 'pre-modern'catagory..
ESPN acts as if Baseball was never played before the 75' series!! Frankly the network is no longer interesting, forever self serving and no longer my choice for sports news..

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric

Aside from the new nickname this team will get, I wanted to put in my take on MLB's decision to move the Expo's to Washington. I think this was a poor choice, no offense to the city and residents of Washington DC. MLB provided Washington with 2 previous chances to support a team in the 20th century, one of which was moved after only 10 years of play, the other a version of the Chicago Cubs with a pathetic fan base. While I don't have anything against the city of Washington DC, I do believe that locations like Nashville, Tennessee and Portland, Oregon would have provided legitimate new homes. Had the franchise moved to Portland or Nashville, they would have fit nicely into the American League West, the only four team division, and equalled out the number of teams in each league. There were probably other suitable locations too (Salt Lake City)...so I guess I've failed to see why MLB had Washington pegged from day 1. Maybe I'm in the minority with this opinion, but I think the new Washington franchise will be a joke within 10 years.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

They wouldnt put 15 teams in each league for 2 reasons.They would either have 1 team off everyday and 7 games per league or have to play interleague games the whole season.They wont do that because they want the interleague games all going on at once to create more of an excitment around them.Its always fun seeing some of the matchups,of course there are some that dont excite but games like angels/dodgers giants/a's mets/yankees indians/reds devil rays/marlins royals/cardinals cubs/white sox let natural geographic rivals all play at once.I assume that the new Washington frnachise will be playing the Orioles during those games,probably 6 times,3 at each park.

Washington mustve put together the best deal and the difference in the population from back then till now is huge so they will have a bigger fan base to choose from.Its the 7th largest market right now so im sure that fact,and a new stadium should keep them from going anywhere for awhile