I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

 

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

What I have been hearing from folks is the accessability issue. Not so much in getting there as in leaving there. It's one of the biggest reasons a high majority of those people are saying that 2012 will be their last year of season tickets, or any ticket plan.

 

This will certainly be true for some people (probably Palm Beach County fans), overall it's a better location. The few season ticket holders lost will be more than made up for by the season ticket holders gained. In fact, unless Samson is lying, they already have more season ticket holders for 2012 than 2011.

 

"While the team does not release season ticket figures, Samson said that sales for next year have already outpaced those of 2011."

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/30/2142557_p2/florida-marlins-have-one-eye-on.html

 

I also agree that this was the only location it was going, because the land was there. I still think it's shortsighted though. A part of me wishes the Hurricanes never left, cuz then maybe we could've gotten the Miami Arena site for the new ballpark. But the other part of my says without the Canes leaving, the Marlins may have left S. Florida. Beggars can't be choosers, I suppose. Nonetheless, I fear the new park failing because it's not downtown.

 

I pretty much agree with everything here. The PBC fans statement is partly true. Even tho I live in PBC, I don't know many season ticket holders, even partial plan fans. Most fans here seem to buy as they go. And I do know alot of folks who do make 10-15 games a year doing that. The numbers I have seen released from the FO say differently, but I just haven't had the priveledge of meeting that many PBC season ticket holders. But I've been getting the same response from Broward and Dade residents. And almost always the reasoning is leaving the games. Seems to be quite the issue at this point. We are going to try it for the first year and see what happens before we make a decision, but most have already made theirs.

 

Season ticket figures is undoubtedly correct. But only on face value. Season ticket sales for 2011 dropped from those of 2010. Reason is because folks bought the package for 2010 to get that preferred seating for 2012 and then after getting it dropped their package for 2011. That fact comes from the front office.

 

Now add this in.....Folks were able to double up their package of 2010 for 2012. Meaning if they had 2 season tickets for 2010 (and/or 2011) they were able to purchase 4 for 2012. Alot of folks did just that in hopes of selling them for profit over StubHub or other various on line sites. Most everyone I have talked to that did this are saying that after 2012 they will drop the "double" part at least. And a good amount of those are saying they will drop the entire package. So this leads me to believe that the poster that said we will rank around 20th after the new ball park smell wears off is most likely very close to being correct.

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

I'm not sure if Miami had sufficient public transportation to support a downtown stadium. Unless you were to put the stadium right on top of Mary Brickell Village, where people actually walk around at night, no other downtown location would work. The counter argument to my statement would probably be the location of the Heat games at American Airlines, but even then everybody drives to it anyway. So with the idea that people are driving to it, its Orange Bowl location is pretty good for people in South Miami, Gables and Kendall which puts the stadium about ten miles closer to them. I definitely agree with statements that there will be absolutely no revitalization of the surrounding area, a great example is the Nationals' stadium, which is built in Anacostia, with the supposed idea of boosting the surrounding area, which it did not and will not. The only plus with the Nationals downtown stadium is that DC has much better public transportation for the suburbs so people don't actually have to drive to go see a game.

They have been doing some work around Nationals Park. It's gradually getting better in the north-east area outside of the park. The waterfront is really terrible because it's just a bunch of filthy industrial lots.

 

I do think the Nats location has more potential than the Marlins park does, because there really aren't many residential buildings in the way at that part of the Anacostia.

 

There absolutely will be some revitalization around the Marlins park too, but other than the essential couple of bars and restaurants it probably won't be as welcoming as the neighborhoods for other ML parks are.

They have been doing some work around Nationals Park. It's gradually getting better in the north-east area outside of the park. The waterfront is really terrible because it's just a bunch of filthy industrial lots.

 

I do think the Nats location has more potential than the Marlins park does, because there really aren't many residential buildings in the way at that part of the Anacostia.

 

There absolutely will be some revitalization around the Marlins park too, but other than the essential couple of bars and restaurants it probably won't be as welcoming as the neighborhoods for other ML parks are.

 

 

It has been at least a year since I've been to a Nats game so you are probably right, but I think they had a separate investment in infrastructure there. And, if I remember correctly they bascially tore down a bunch of residences, most probably unused, to build the stadium. But, I believe the Nats stadium is going to end up just like RFK, get in and get out. And you do bring up a good point about the amount of residences around the Orange Bowl area, that pretty much limits the amount of businesses that can pop-up, unless they are purchased and destroyed or city/county starts to modify zoning. The interesting thing is, its not that difficult to get to where you need to go by driving in Miami, as compared to cities like DC or NY where it is almost impossible to get where you need to go, thus public transit is extremely inviting.

 

I still do not see to much revitalization around a park that mostly lures in drivers as opposed to ones that have easy access to public transportation, thus people are willing to chill out more after and before the game. Since public transportation is the way it is down here, I think the stadium location is great. The view driving past it is awesome.

I'm not sure if Miami had sufficient public transportation to support a downtown stadium. Unless you were to put the stadium right on top of Mary Brickell Village, where people actually walk around at night, no other downtown location would work. The counter argument to my statement would probably be the location of the Heat games at American Airlines, but even then everybody drives to it anyway. So with the idea that people are driving to it, its Orange Bowl location is pretty good for people in South Miami, Gables and Kendall which puts the stadium about ten miles closer to them. I definitely agree with statements that there will be absolutely no revitalization of the surrounding area, a great example is the Nationals' stadium, which is built in Anacostia, with the supposed idea of boosting the surrounding area, which it did not and will not. The only plus with the Nationals downtown stadium is that DC has much better public transportation for the suburbs so people don't actually have to drive to go see a game.

 

 

It would have worked at Bicentennial Park. Now they are building an art museum and science museum. Don't get me wrong I love science museums, but yeah...the ballpark at that location would have been iconic.

 

I think the argument for building the ballpark downtown wasn't because the area is perfect right now. (even though it is still better than the orange bowl location) All you need to do is look at the growth downtown miami has had. Then look at the projected growth (even in this economy). Then look at the goals of Miami DDA. Lets say the new ballpark was being built right now somewhere downtown. When it opened you aren't looking at a this is as good as its going to get situation like we have at the orange bowl site. It would have been its pretty good now but it will only improve from this point on. Downtown Miami is going to be completely different 5-10-15-20 years from now. I really wish they had been able to build downtown, but keeping baseball in Miami was more important.

 

I think you are the one who made an excellent point about location not being a controlling factor in attendance. I definitely agree with that, but because of the lack of adequate public transportation in Miami. Meaning the majority of fans will be driving to the park no matter where they are coming from.

 

I think looks wise, a downtown stadium would be great, but outside of that there is no real difference in the location of the stadium at this point. But I concede the point of the long term outlook, being that the area will build up and become more hospitable to families and such, but I think Mid-town then would have been a better bet with the idea of building up that area.

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

 

It's hard to really gauge because all cities have different populations. Some cities have more sports teams than others and teams have better ballparks or stadiums. Of course your mega cities are going to draw, no matter what for whatever sport. It's also hard to figure out objectively which cities have less entertainment then others.

 

For baseball, St. Louis is an example of city that does well attendance wise, maybe regardless of the tradition because its one of the only things to do on a regular basis. In a place like Miami, a baseball game is likely WAY further down the list of things to do. More times than not there is around 15% of the city of St. Louis at a Cardinal game, it would be hard to say that about some mega cities regardless of the capacity of the stadium. Cincinnati or Milwaukee will probably always have more potential to draw than Florida, for the same reason. There might be some things to do entertainment wise in those places but nothing like Miami.

 

Maybe I got it in my head mostly from college football, which could be bad to base it on because there are factors like alumni and enrollment, public and private schools; but the schools with the mega stadiums are always in the most brutally boring places. Norman, Oklahoma, Lincoln, Nebraska, Anne Arbor, Michigan, Blacksburgh, Virginia, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. I've been to Auburn dozens of ties the last few years and there is literally nothing to do all year around until football season. But I know this probably translates very little to baseball, it's just probably where I got it in my head.

 

But common sense might make you think if a baseball game is among 10 other options for entertainment, there's less chance of someone picking a baseball game than if its among 3 other options.

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

 

More times than not there is around 15% of the city of St. Louis at a Cardinal game, it would be hard to say that about some mega cities regardless of the capacity of the stadium.

The greater St. Louis area in Missouri has a population of 2.7 million people. So the Cardinals are drawing almost 417,000 per game? Wow!

 

The Cardinals are a regional team, like the Cubs, and the New York teams. Their fan base is not just St. Louis, but they draw from all over the Mid-West region of the country. That is why they not only draw well in St. Louis, but also have a strong following all over the country.

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

 

More times than not there is around 15% of the city of St. Louis at a Cardinal game, it would be hard to say that about some mega cities regardless of the capacity of the stadium.

The greater St. Louis area in Missouri has a population of 2.7 million people. So the Cardinals are drawing almost 417,000 per game? Wow!

 

The Cardinals are a regional team, like the Cubs, and the New York teams. Their fan base is not just St. Louis, but they draw from all over the Mid-West region of the country. That is why they not only draw well in St. Louis, but also have a strong following all over the country.

The St. Louis Metropolitan Area still ranks around 20th in baseball in population so they still have one of the highest percentages of their population attending games. I realize there are a lot of regional Cardinal fans due to St. Louis being the most western baseball city at one point and some other reasons; but I'm not sure I believe that a vast majority of the fans day in day out aren't from the St. Louis Metro area. If you subtracted those not from the metro area I'd guarantee it would still be among the league leaders in attendance. The enthusiasm for the Cardinals in the city alone is unbelievable. I always heard about it but I was blown away in person.

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

 

More times than not there is around 15% of the city of St. Louis at a Cardinal game, it would be hard to say that about some mega cities regardless of the capacity of the stadium.

The greater St. Louis area in Missouri has a population of 2.7 million people. So the Cardinals are drawing almost 417,000 per game? Wow!

 

The Cardinals are a regional team, like the Cubs, and the New York teams. Their fan base is not just St. Louis, but they draw from all over the Mid-West region of the country. That is why they not only draw well in St. Louis, but also have a strong following all over the country.

The St. Louis Metropolitan Area still ranks around 20th in baseball in population so they still have one of the highest percentages of their population attending games. I realize there are a lot of regional Cardinal fans due to St. Louis being the most western baseball city at one point and some other reasons; but I'm not sure I believe that a vast majority of the fans day in day out aren't from the St. Louis Metro area. If you subtracted those not from the metro area I'd guarantee it would still be among the league leaders in attendance. The enthusiasm for the Cardinals in the city alone is unbelievable. I always heard about it but I was blown away in person.

 

I'm not saying that the majority of the fans in St. Louis aren't from St. Louis, but you said 15% of the city is there...which is ridiculous since that would be hundreds of thousands of people. But yes, St. Louis is a great baseball town.

It may been misleading because many live outside of the city of St. Louis, but all I was saying is a 45,000 crowd is 15% of the population of the city itself, that's all. You can't say that about many places.

I took a tour of the ballpark today. Ill make a post with pics later tonight.

 

Nice. Weren't you the one who originally leaked the early concepts of the ballpark?

I've been to games during the summer in Cincinatti, St. Louis and Atlanta and it was at least as hot or humid as Florida. St. Louis was just unbearable. Cincinnati, and places like Louisville on the Ohio are disgustingly humid during the summer.

 

Sometimes people in Florida have it in their head that it doesn't get hot and humid as hell anywhere else during the summer.

 

But that aside. I think it's mainly the culture in Florida. Even though it's played so much here, I've been all over the east and have never seen a place so unenthusiastic as Florida. I'm thinking maybe it has to do with the fact that there isn't a history of baseball entrenched in the city and so many people are from other states or countries. In a lot of cities up north peoples great grandfathers have supported the same team as them. If I've never been anywhere else I'd probably be convinced that baseball is on par with hockey in terms of popularity.

 

[/b]Also its pretty obvious that cities with the least amount of entertainment draw the most sports fans.

I don't expect league average attendence long term but I'm just glad the Marlins will be around for a long time.

 

 

This is the part that has me scratching my head. I don't agree. Unless you meant to say the least amount of entertainment that you personally like. That I could understand. I just can't come up with a top 10 attendance MLB team that dosen't have loads of other non baseball related activities.

 

It's hard to really gauge because all cities have different populations. Some cities have more sports teams than others and teams have better ballparks or stadiums. Of course your mega cities are going to draw, no matter what for whatever sport. It's also hard to figure out objectively which cities have less entertainment then others.

 

For baseball, St. Louis is an example of city that does well attendance wise, maybe regardless of the tradition because its one of the only things to do on a regular basis. In a place like Miami, a baseball game is likely WAY further down the list of things to do. More times than not there is around 15% of the city of St. Louis at a Cardinal game, it would be hard to say that about some mega cities regardless of the capacity of the stadium. Cincinnati or Milwaukee will probably always have more potential to draw than Florida, for the same reason. There might be some things to do entertainment wise in those places but nothing like Miami.

Maybe I got it in my head mostly from college football, which could be bad to base it on because there are factors like alumni and enrollment, public and private schools; but the schools with the mega stadiums are always in the most brutally boring places. Norman, Oklahoma, Lincoln, Nebraska, Anne Arbor, Michigan, Blacksburgh, Virginia, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. I've been to Auburn dozens of ties the last few years and there is literally nothing to do all year around until football season. But I know this probably translates very little to baseball, it's just probably where I got it in my head.

 

But common sense might make you think if a baseball game is among 10 other options for entertainment, there's less chance of someone picking a baseball game than if its among 3 other options.

 

Like I said, it depends on what you consider entertainment. To me, it's the ability to utilize expendable cash on fun things to do for the family. It dosen't mean just attending organized sporting events, be that professional or college. Not to judge you, but I can almost guarantee that if you just laid around while in Auburn (in fact, every one of those places you mentioned) except for the 3 months of football season then you were missing out on alot of things. Or, and maybe closer to the truth, the things that they consider to be entertaining or fun to do you just didn't care for. But variety is the spice of life. Not at least trying different things is boring to me.

 

I've lived in alot of different cities and in a few different countries. I always tried to mingle, or to put it better, catch the entire flavor of a community instead of just trying to translate what I consider fun into their norms. To me that would be like going to Thailand and looking for a McDonalds to eat at.

It may been misleading because many live outside of the city of St. Louis, but all I was saying is a 45,000 crowd is 15% of the population of the city itself, that's all. You can't say that about many places.

 

 

So you are saying there is nothing else to do in St Louis except go to a ball game?

It may been misleading because many live outside of the city of St. Louis, but all I was saying is a 45,000 crowd is 15% of the population of the city itself, that's all. You can't say that about many places.

 

 

So you are saying there is nothing else to do in St Louis except go to a ball game?

 

 

They do have that arch

Poor attendance is most likey a combination of factors instead of just weather or location. Current location, heat, perception of rainouts/delays, ballpark experience, firesale history, and miamis event mentality all play a role. I do think the biggest reason is the event mentality. Miami draws very well for anything limited and exclusive which is part of the reasoning for the size of the new ballpark. The marlins have adressed every issue as best they could. They eliminated any weather excuse. They are in the process of letting fans know they are keeping great players. Location is the best they could get. The experience of going to a game should be 1000000x better. After the new park feel wears off I do think the normal attendance will be higher than it is now. I think the marlins will rank close to 20 in attendance after the new stadium draw wears off. Not amazing but much better than now.

 

 

The only valuable excuse for attendance is that this is a transient city. That's it. Every home game the crowd has a large/decent amount of the other team's fans, even with the crappiest visiting teams. If all those people were Miami natives, there would be no attendance problem rain, shine, blizzard, etc.

Poor attendance is most likey a combination of factors instead of just weather or location. Current location, heat, perception of rainouts/delays, ballpark experience, firesale history, and miamis event mentality all play a role. I do think the biggest reason is the event mentality. Miami draws very well for anything limited and exclusive which is part of the reasoning for the size of the new ballpark. The marlins have adressed every issue as best they could. They eliminated any weather excuse. They are in the process of letting fans know they are keeping great players. Location is the best they could get. The experience of going to a game should be 1000000x better. After the new park feel wears off I do think the normal attendance will be higher than it is now. I think the marlins will rank close to 20 in attendance after the new stadium draw wears off. Not amazing but much better than now.

 

 

The only valuable excuse for attendance is that this is a transient city. That's it. Every home game the crowd has a large/decent amount of the other team's fans, even with the crappiest visiting teams. If all those people were Miami natives, there would be no attendance problem rain, shine, blizzard, etc.

 

There is always an aggregate of factors that go to attendance, being a transient city can't be the only reason. I have never been to Cleveland or Pittsburgh, but our attendance is actually better than theirs (by a small margin) and i would not consider them transient.

Poor attendance is most likey a combination of factors instead of just weather or location. Current location, heat, perception of rainouts/delays, ballpark experience, firesale history, and miamis event mentality all play a role. I do think the biggest reason is the event mentality. Miami draws very well for anything limited and exclusive which is part of the reasoning for the size of the new ballpark. The marlins have adressed every issue as best they could. They eliminated any weather excuse. They are in the process of letting fans know they are keeping great players. Location is the best they could get. The experience of going to a game should be 1000000x better. After the new park feel wears off I do think the normal attendance will be higher than it is now. I think the marlins will rank close to 20 in attendance after the new stadium draw wears off. Not amazing but much better than now.

 

 

The only valuable excuse for attendance is that this is a transient city. That's it. Every home game the crowd has a large/decent amount of the other team's fans, even with the crappiest visiting teams. If all those people were Miami natives, there would be no attendance problem rain, shine, blizzard, etc.

 

There is always an aggregate of factors that go to attendance, being a transient city can't be the only reason. I have never been to Cleveland or Pittsburgh, but our attendance is actually better than theirs (by a small margin) and i would not consider them transient.

 

Our attendance should be larger than theirs by a large margin. In a city with 4 million people that's pretty much the only viable excuse. Where else do you see so many Reds, Pirates, or Padres fans other than in their home stadiums these days? If most of those people were from around here, chances are they'd be rooting for the home team. And I know people also don't go sometimes because of the weather, but that wouldn't be much of a problem with a larger fanbase.

Poor attendance is most likey a combination of factors instead of just weather or location. Current location, heat, perception of rainouts/delays, ballpark experience, firesale history, and miamis event mentality all play a role. I do think the biggest reason is the event mentality. Miami draws very well for anything limited and exclusive which is part of the reasoning for the size of the new ballpark. The marlins have adressed every issue as best they could. They eliminated any weather excuse. They are in the process of letting fans know they are keeping great players. Location is the best they could get. The experience of going to a game should be 1000000x better. After the new park feel wears off I do think the normal attendance will be higher than it is now. I think the marlins will rank close to 20 in attendance after the new stadium draw wears off. Not amazing but much better than now.

 

 

The only valuable excuse for attendance is that this is a transient city. That's it. Every home game the crowd has a large/decent amount of the other team's fans, even with the crappiest visiting teams. If all those people were Miami natives, there would be no attendance problem rain, shine, blizzard, etc.

 

There is always an aggregate of factors that go to attendance, being a transient city can't be the only reason. I have never been to Cleveland or Pittsburgh, but our attendance is actually better than theirs (by a small margin) and i would not consider them transient.

 

Our attendance should be larger than theirs by a large margin. In a city with 4 million people that's pretty much the only viable excuse. Where else do you see so many Reds, Pirates, or Padres fans other than in their home stadiums these days? If most of those people were from around here, chances are they'd be rooting for the home team. And I know people also don't go sometimes because of the weather, but that wouldn't be much of a problem with a larger fanbase.

 

I agree with you about the transient nature of Miami, and the fact that most people who live here were not born here. But look at the Dolphins, they rank in about the middle for attendance, and if transient nature was the only factor, they would be at the bottom too. Take a look at the Minnesota Twins for example, they are close to the top for attendence, but the Vikings are close to the bottom. There has to be other factors at play. I am just looking at ESPN resources for all this stuff.

Poor attendance is most likey a combination of factors instead of just weather or location. Current location, heat, perception of rainouts/delays, ballpark experience, firesale history, and miamis event mentality all play a role. I do think the biggest reason is the event mentality. Miami draws very well for anything limited and exclusive which is part of the reasoning for the size of the new ballpark. The marlins have adressed every issue as best they could. They eliminated any weather excuse. They are in the process of letting fans know they are keeping great players. Location is the best they could get. The experience of going to a game should be 1000000x better. After the new park feel wears off I do think the normal attendance will be higher than it is now. I think the marlins will rank close to 20 in attendance after the new stadium draw wears off. Not amazing but much better than now.

 

 

The only valuable excuse for attendance is that this is a transient city. That's it. Every home game the crowd has a large/decent amount of the other team's fans, even with the crappiest visiting teams. If all those people were Miami natives, there would be no attendance problem rain, shine, blizzard, etc.

 

There is always an aggregate of factors that go to attendance, being a transient city can't be the only reason. I have never been to Cleveland or Pittsburgh, but our attendance is actually better than theirs (by a small margin) and i would not consider them transient.

 

Our attendance should be larger than theirs by a large margin. In a city with 4 million people that's pretty much the only viable excuse. Where else do you see so many Reds, Pirates, or Padres fans other than in their home stadiums these days? If most of those people were from around here, chances are they'd be rooting for the home team. And I know people also don't go sometimes because of the weather, but that wouldn't be much of a problem with a larger fanbase.

 

I agree with you about the transient nature of Miami, and the fact that most people who live here were not born here. But look at the Dolphins, they rank in about the middle for attendance, and if transient nature was the only factor, they would be at the bottom too. Take a look at the Minnesota Twins for example, they are close to the top for attendence, but the Vikings are close to the bottom. There has to be other factors at play. I am just looking at ESPN resources for all this stuff.

 

Also forgot the Vikes roof collapsed on them last year, so maybe point is a little faulty.

To me that would be like going to Thailand and looking for a McDonalds to eat at.

Kind of sounds like that movie The Beach/

 

What you're saying is really true. I mean I've found things to do in those smaller cities I was referring to do as boring, you can have fun anywhere. But I think Miami has to offer it's demographic far more than most cities in the country. What other city have a draw like South Beach on a Saturday night, or just the beach in general on a Sunday afternoon. Few have similar but not many. Baseball has more to compete with than other cities.

Season ticket figures is undoubtedly correct. But only on face value. Season ticket sales for 2011 dropped from those of 2010. Reason is because folks bought the package for 2010 to get that preferred seating for 2012 and then after getting it dropped their package for 2011. That fact comes from the front office.

 

Interesting, that's a good point.

 

So this leads me to believe that the poster that said we will rank around 20th after the new ball park smell wears off is most likely very close to being correct.

 

Definitely agree with this. I just hope 20th is enough to keep the team in South Florida when the next round of new ballparks comes in 25-30 years time.

Kind of sounds like that movie The Beach/

 

What you're saying is really true. I mean I've found things to do in those smaller cities I was referring to do as boring, you can have fun anywhere. But I think Miami has to offer it's demographic far more than most cities in the country. What other city have a draw like South Beach on a Saturday night, or just the beach in general on a Sunday afternoon. Few have similar but not many. Baseball has more to compete with than other cities.

 

 

The Beach. Is that the movie where they live on an island off Thailand? If so, loved that movie. But I just used Thailand as an example because I really liked it there. Every country I went to had basically the same results. Folks looking for "Americanized" eating establishments when friends and I were looking for mom and pop type diners. Or making friends and eating at their place. Some things on the menu may have turned some peoples' stomachs, but the locals sure seemed healthy enough so what the heck..... Although sampling the local cuisine may be a bad example of what I am trying to get accross.

 

Anyway, I still disagree. Every place has "draws". Different than South Florida, but definetly very interesting and entertaining to their demographic or they wouldn't have a demographic. It's really that simple. South Florida dosen't have more to do, just different things to do. We are a tourist spot because people like to have a taste of something different from time to time. Not because they like it more, but just because it's different.

but other than the essential couple of bars and restaurants it probably won't be as welcoming as the neighborhoods for other ML parks are.

 

Just so log as its not like the AAA where you have to park in the 'hood and walk across Biscayne Blvd to get to the arena.