There was no link to the story available online, but the gist of the story: Rays fans would go to more games if the stadium were closer to them:
- "I feel like I'd go to a lot more games if it was closer to where I live," said one fan.
- "It'd be a lot better if it was more in our home area," said another.
But the WFLA story also included a few intelligent thoughts: one fan said the Rays just need some more time to build its young fan base, while another said Tampa Bay fans are just too lazy to drive to a baseball game (an idea explored here before).
And the problem with much of the media coverage of the Stadium Saga is that the questions have been limited to the mindless, "where should a stadium be built?" Then, these largely-uneducated opinions ("a new stadium closer to me would be better!") dominate the conversaion.
Instead, we should be asking fans questions that matter:
- Would you go to more games if the stadium were in Tampa, but tickets were more expensive?
- Should the Rays have to open their books before they receive any public subsidies?
- How much of a half-billion dollar stadium should the public pay for, versus the team?
- How much of a new stadium's revenue should the public get, versus the team?
- Would we be better just writing the team a $100 million check so it can "remain compeitive?"