Baseball in Kansas City Still Hasn't Recovered From the 1994 Strike
Summers in Kansas City can make one feel like it's 1995. Not because people are still watching Toy Story and Apollo 13 in movie theaters or because Kansas Citians are looking forward to the upcoming season of The Drew Carey Show and Seinfeld. Instead, a mid-90s baseball malaise and sense of resentment continues to hang over Kansas City, nearly a decade after the rest of the country has moved on.
Attendance at Kauffman Stadium Since 1994:
| Per Game Avg | AL Rank | |
| 1995 | 17,132 | 10th |
| 1996 | 17,838 | 10th |
| 1997 | 18,853 | 10th |
| 1998 | 18,570 | 10th |
| 1999 | 18,709 | 11th |
| 2000 | 19,319 | 12th |
| 2001 | 18,968 | 13th |
| 2002 | 16,334 | 13th |
| 2003 | 21,974 | 11th |
| 2004 | 20,512 | 13th |
| 2005 | 16,928 | 13th |
| 2006 | 16,946 | 13th |
| 2007 | 19,961 | 13th |
| 2008 | 19,493 | 14th |
We can make two quick observations from the numbers above: 1) attendance at the K has been fairly stable and 2) the Royals have not been able to keep up with the rest of the American League at the gate. While Royals fans may have not noticed, in the last decade attending baseball games in person has become extremely popular, and from 2003-7 Major League baseball set a new attendance record each season. The overall average attendance? In 2007: 32,785, in 2008: 32,539. The Royals are lucky to draw the Major League average, average mind you, ten times in a season.
Certainly, caveats can be made. To be sure, the Royals have been a consistent and indeed a spectacular loser since 1995, so much so that the team's hot start in 2003 -- and months spent in first-place -- was only able to provide a modest (very modest) bump in attendance. Moreover, Kansas City remains one of the smallest markets in baseball and a middling one economically. (According to Nate Silver's exhaustive and very math-heavy research, Kansas City is MLB's 29th largest market.) Finally, the un-balanced schedule has concentrated well-attended Yankee and Red Sox road games within the AL East, and the AL Central lacks a single team that travels well or that consistently interests casual fans at the gate. Nobody comes to the game just because the Twins are in town.
What makes the attendance figures since the strike even more telling however is the clear bright-line formed by 1994. In the interests of avoiding another table, going backwards, here are the game averages from 1994 to 1980: 24,356, 23,884, 23,058, 26,686, 27,888, 30,589, 29,195, 29,537, 28,652, 26,700, 22,346, 24,097, 28,203, 24,843, 28,256. The lowest average from that period, 1984's 22,346 is nevertheless higher than any average since 1994. When you consider how much lower attendance was during the 1980s, those totals are even more impressive. Then again, those numbers also underscore just how much the core of the Royals' fanbase has eroded.
How much might winning, real, sustained winning, improve things at the K? While it is difficult to find a truly comparable situation to the one in Kansas City (non-new stadium, small market, beaten-down fanbase) one would have to look at the Twins over the last five years and, weirdly enough, the White Sox as decent data points. The Twins are obvious enough, but the White Sox are roughly comparable as well, given their minority market share in Chicago, negligble regional appeal and convienent yet bland stadium. You might also throw in a variable covering "contentious relationship between ownership and fanbase" as well.
| CWS-Comisky II | MIN-Metrodome | |
| 2000 | 24,047 | 12,355 |
| 2001 | 21,805 | 22,011 |
| 2002 | 20,703 | 23,906 |
| 2003 | 23,945 | 24,025 |
| 2004 | 23,834 | 23,599 |
| 2005 | 28,924 | 25,114 |
| 2006 | 36,511 | 28,210 |
| 2007 | 33,141 | 28,350 |
| 2008 | 30,496 | 28,425 |
Although attendance at the Cell was something of a punch line for many years, the White Sox have drawn well since winning the World Series, and in fact were rebuilding their attendance base as early as 2000. The Twins meanwhile, were supposedly so poorly supported that Baseball's best option was simply to contract the team. Well, emphasis on "supposedly". Truly, Minnesota's per game averages in the late-nineties were miserable, hovering around 14,500 at the end of the decade before collapsing to the 12,355 average you see above in 2000. The Royals have avoided sinking that low, however given the overall increases in league attendance, Kansas City's recent rut of 18,000 fans per game is hardly better than the performance of the contraction-era Twins.
In terms of both on-field success and market potential, the Twins are the more reachable model, and in part that table above reveals just how valuable actually winning a World Series is: even through a miserable 2007 season, the White Sox were still drawing well.
Unfortunately, with the economy headed south again, it's likely that we'll see attendance figures drop again next season, and depending on just how bad things get, a return to the bad old days of anti-Yankee protests with fans throwing trash and or fake money at supposedly greedy players could very well be possible. Spending 365 days a year on this website and the rest of the Royals blogosphere, I can confidently state that quite a few Royals fans remain on the verge of bitterness over salary imbalances in the game and that resentment towards the game's haves, both franchises and individuals is strong.
The Royals are two good summers away from drawing something like 24-26,000 a night at the K, maybe a notch more depending on how well the renovations go over and how low prices remain. However, if the current batch of players, namely the Alex Gordon Generation fail to materialize into a contender, attendance could drop all the way down to the mid-nineties levels. Unlike so many inside baseball, the Royals spent the boom years barely getting by, leaving them in a precarious position as storm clouds gather.
Read Related
Comments
How much of an attendance spike
Do you think we will get out of the renovations next year? I think you will see a significant increase, although not as much as if we had built a new stadium. I think we could reach 2 million fans next year, which could be quite an improvement. A .500 season or better would really help too. It won’t take much to get a lot of walk ups. Remember 2003? We flirted with being a contender and Friday and Saturday night games were near sell-outs.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Oct 7, 2008 9:42 AM EDT 0 recs
I don't think the renovations will have a huge effect
i think it will be more of a subtle thing, but I could be wrong
at this point, I can barely even remember what will be different
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 10:16 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Everything!
I think there will be a novelty factor, people will want to see how it looks different.
As a refreshers:
New Crown Vision (implemented this season)
Wider concourses with a new facade surrounding the stadium
Restaurant in right field
Hall of Fame in left field with Slugger’s Lair
Seats above the bullpens which will now be stretched from left to right field.
Seats where the grassy knoll used to be
Walkway beyond the outfield fence behind the Royals Crown so fans can walk completely around the stadium
Mini-K and carousel beyond the Royals Crown
“Taste of KC” BBQ stands beyond the Royals Crown
Wider vomitories
Press box emptied and turned into suites; press box moved to view level upper deck
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
Oct 7, 2008 10:28 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Economy
The economic downturn has come at a horrible time for the Royals (as well as everyone else). I am sure the hard times will dampen the hoped-for spike in ticket sales.
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on
Oct 7, 2008 10:37 AM EDT
up
0 recs
i hate at least half of the additions
but will probably still have some desire to see them
it will be a one game thing
"So whattya say, should we clean this place up?" - Tom Cruise
by DyeFan187 on
Oct 7, 2008 11:04 AM EDT
up
0 recs
i wonder about seeing the new outfield seats
personally, i liked the grass back there
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
can't believe no one has busted out "vomitories" jokes
if the royals put Burrell/Dunn/Hinske on one corner with JoGui in the other, though…
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 11:33 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Do you really think a new stadium
would have increased attendance more than the renovations on the K? Everyone loves the K, from what I can tell. All the new stadiums (except the one in Arlington) that have been built or are in development since 1989 have either been replacements for buildings that are at least 70 years old, or baseball-only replacements for stadiums designed as multi-purpose, neither of which is true of the K. (or for a brand new team, such as the one in Arizona).
The K is a gem, and the fans know it. The building is a greater attraction than the baseball at this point.
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
by cmkeller on
Oct 7, 2008 10:44 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Yes
It is empirically proven. People will go just for the novelty factor if nothing else and the newness of it. For a short time it becomes “the thing to do.” And if they had put it downtown I think you’d seen an uptick in attendance from businessmen taking clients out, particularly on those weekday afternoon games.
It would be temporary, but yea, I think you’d definitely see a major uptick in attendance with a new stadium.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
Oct 7, 2008 11:34 AM EDT
up
0 recs
This is really important.
I’m no math professor, but averaging 10,000 below average attendance x 81 games = 810,000 fans less than average. At $30/person (probably below what the Royals get from each fan), that’s $24.3 million the Royals don’t generate. From 2000-2008, that’s $218.7 million the Royals haven’t generated. Think of all the Terrence Longs Allard could have signed with that kind of dough.
Of course, some of that $218MM has been offset by the welfare checks the Yankees and Red Sox (and Cardinals, and next year the Rays) write David Glass every year, so the Royals haven’t left all of that $218MM on the table. Most of us agree that revenue sharing is good for the Royals, but it undeniably creates an incentive to lose as well: Easier/cheaper to lose and cash a check from the Yankees than build a winner.
Attendance is really important. I agree with RR that our latest youth movement needs to create at least a .500 team or we might be hitting Pirates levels of attendance.
I can’t believe the Royals still draw 19k/night considering the ‘spectacular" amount of lineptitude on and off the field. These are great fans. I admit I haven’t been to a game past July the past 5 years.
by hippdoghipp on Oct 7, 2008 9:44 AM EDT 2 recs
yes, and I see improvement
the royals have already moved up a notch in their attendance (from 16,000 to 19,000) without getting terribly better afield
"So whattya say, should we clean this place up?" - Tom Cruise
by DyeFan187 on
Oct 7, 2008 11:05 AM EDT
up
0 recs
62 to 69 to 75
….definite improvement in win total. We were significantly better in 2007 than 2006, and we were marginally better in 2008 than 2007.
by Royals Nation on
Oct 7, 2008 2:26 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Royals Pythagorean records 2006-2008
2006: 63-99 (Luck -1)
2007: 75-87 (Luck -6)
2008: 73-89 (Luck +3)
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 2:36 PM EDT
up
0 recs
OK....
….I’ll concede that the pythag. dropped in 2008, but the increased in attendance in ’07 directly coincided with a fairly dramatic improvement (12 pythag. wins) in team performance.
by Royals Nation on
Oct 7, 2008 2:39 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not arguing either way, just putting it out there
I agree that a better team almost always improves attendance.
I actually think that the 2008 team was better that the 2007 team — better bullpens (mostly Ramirez, Nunez was a bit better (if hurt). Mahay had half a good season), I’m told, can sometimes be expected to outstrip their Pythags. A full season of Greinke as a starter also helped.
ON offense, Gordon continues to develop, Aviles had a great (if fairly miraculous and unrepeatable) year, and DDJ returned ot his usually underrated self.
Unforuntatley, defense seems to have been a problem. As has been noted, Gordon, DDJ, and Teahen were all above average last year, and all below this year. Hopefully, particularly for Gordon, this is just a “slump” or blip. Jose Guillen was a disaster — at most a game better than Emil on offfense, but his defense probably made him a worse player. TPJ had terrible offensive luck that made him look even suckier than he is (although that did lead to the Aviles call-up). Gload was also unlucky, but his glove was pretty awful, according to the metrics.
TPJ is replaced. Even if Aviles is just average on defense and replacement-level on offense next year, that’s probaby a three win improvement there alone. Gordon and Teahen seem like they might rebound on defense. DDJ maybe — depends on whether he’s lost a step or not. Teahen’s probably a big better on offense than he showed. Gordon will continue to improve. IF Butler is still around, he can, too. JoGui is what he is at this point. Soria to the rotation could add 2-4 wins.
.500 isn quite possible next year, even without a big signing. Don’t sign someone to reach that lame goal, though. Make decisions that will have more of an impact 2-3 years down the road. A bit of improvement will peak interest. THat’s going to happen anyway. But if it just happens in 2009-2010 and then the team doesn’t have a shot of contending by at least 2011, attendence will level off again.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 2:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
and you reap the rewards of improvement the next year...
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 9:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
by the way, I meant ".500 is quite possible next year"
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 9:44 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Excellent post
I’m taking this opportunity to reiterate something I feel strongly about. David Glass is a piss poor excuse for an owner. It should be fairly obvious that if you spend some money to ensure the team is competitive and occasionally wins the division (shouldn’t be that hard – we are competing with other similar markets, not the beasts of the East), you will get your money back and then some from the attendance spike. It does require some faith, in that the outlay of cash needs to come first, then a bit of a lag before you get your money back as the team starts to win and revenue grows.
I also like to point out something – the Royals diehard fan base is in for quite a shock if/when the team actually does start winning. Prices for parking, tickets, and concessions are LOW LOW LOW at the K, at least as compared with other parks. I recommend taking in a series in another town sometime – fans will be shocked at the difference. Royals fans are used to a myriad of giveaways, from T-shirts to buck nights, to discounted September tickets. Yes, the team has sucked, but it’s still Major League Baseball, and right now the Royals, compared to other franchises, practically give their product away. That will change DRAMATICALLY if the team ever starts to win.
by loyal2sdad on Oct 7, 2008 11:28 AM EDT 3 recs
+1
Both great points. I do think Glass has “shown something” since DMGM’s arrival, but I trust him about as much as I trust [insert “favorite” untrustworthy political figure here].
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 11:30 AM EDT
up
0 recs
not only cheap, but easy
I’ve attended games in probably… I dunno… 11-12 parks and not only was the K the cheapest overall, but also easily, well, the easiest
o/c, i am speaking as someone traveling by car, but for better or worse, that is still most of us
sure, it isn’t located next to a supposedly revitalized neighborhood with three sports bars like some newer parks, but easy is easy
most difficult? the new nats stadium: 1 hour drive to park at RFK, then take a shuttle bus to a 10 minute walk… although i am one of the weird people who live in the District but not anywhere near a metro stop
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 11:35 AM EDT
up
0 recs
The Nats Stadium
perfect park in the perfect location at the perfect time
symbolically speaking, of course
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
i actually liked the look of the stadium
it looked clean and modern rather than faux-retro
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 12:14 PM EDT
up
0 recs
oops
I have no idea what it looks like… I meant the politics, economics, and timing of the new stadium combined with its location
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 12:20 PM EDT
up
0 recs
+1
Jeffrey Loria is worse that Steinbrenner and Glass combined
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 9:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
If nothing else
I loved their logo:

Actually, as a kid, the Expos were my “NL team”. I liked them because they were from Montreal, a mysterious an exotic locale that Americans seemed to disdain and ignore, thus to be contrarian, I supported them. Dennis Martinez, Bryn Smith, Tim Wallach, Tim Burke, Andres Galarraga, Otis Nixon, Mike Aldrete, Herm Winningham, Nelson Santonvenia, Spike Owen – they had some decent teams in the late 80s/early 90s.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
Oct 8, 2008 11:15 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Not Tim Raines?
the 4rd greatest LF of our time, behind only Bonds, Henderson, and Cust?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 8, 2008 11:42 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I was the same way
although I never really figuredout what the logo was
i always see an e-l-b
by royalsreview on
Oct 8, 2008 12:24 PM EDT
up
0 recs
The letters in the Expos logo
The big letter was an M for Montreal. On the left, there is an E for Expos and on the right a B for baseball.
by jbrocato on
Oct 8, 2008 12:53 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Thanks!
for some reason, I always thought that was an e-l-b as well. I just figured it stood for something in French.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
by loyal2sdad on
Oct 10, 2008 2:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
The Expos were my NL team too
Loved Delino DeShields and Marquis Grissom. A large part of my period of not following baseball resulted from the strike precluding the Expos from finally knocking off the Braves. IIRC, the Expos had a couple game lead when the strike hit. I suppose it also didn’t help that my family had planned a vacation to Colorado, and our tickets, which we had purchased months in advance, were honest-to-god for the first night of the strike.
by KC Gunner on
Oct 10, 2008 7:07 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I found Washington's stadium pretty easy to get to,
coming from a friend’s apartment in Chinatown.
I also liked the look. Reminded me a little of Tulsa’s Drillers Stadium, only (allegedly) on steroids.
Royals, NBA, Golden Hurricane, Hawkeyes, Chiefs, and KU basketball, in that order.
by Rowyal on
Oct 7, 2008 1:33 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Went to a Nats game a few weeks ago.
It’s easy access from the Metro.
Not real impressed with the stadium. There’s nothing that catches the attention/imagination. We sat in the OF and there was a blind spot which hindered our view of centerfield and part of right. Nice OF entrance, though.
by BrRoyal on
Oct 7, 2008 1:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
If this team started winning
I think Royals management would be overwhelmed with how popular this team would become. They always seem to plan on only 15,000 people being at a game – if 30,000 showed up, it would overwhelm their staff.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
Oct 7, 2008 11:35 AM EDT
up
1 recs
keep in mind that charging more for a quality product is exactly the opposite of how ownership is used to thinking
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 11:51 AM EDT
up
1 recs
The good news is
that they would consistently sell a lot of tickets ahead of time so they could plan. The problem now is, with few season ticket holders they have upwards of 25,000 empty seats nightly, then all of the sudden its a beatiful friday night 20,000 people show up…its tough to plan
We always did feel the same, We just saw it from a different point of view, Tangled up in blue.
-Bob Dylan
by Royal Kingdom on
Oct 7, 2008 11:53 AM EDT
up
0 recs
This was an awesome post.
I believe Kansas City is a sports town, at heart. Hell, it’s the Midwest. There is little else to do, anyway. We’re Denver East.
It’s true that the front office will experience a slight lag at first, but will thrust forth no more than 1 1/2 years thereafter. Increased attendance is a direct result of increased wins. Not the other way around. Increased wins are a direct result of increased payroll. Not the other way around. Management needs to understand this.
by Royals Nation on
Oct 7, 2008 2:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'll gladly pay league average+ for tickets
to see a winner in KC. Any day of the week.
by Bornin85 on
Oct 7, 2008 3:04 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I wonder how much
adding the Rockies in 1993 helped to steal some of KC’s fanbase. I know a lot of Nebraska folks that head out to Denver to see the Rockies now instead of going to KC to see the Royals.
by trauty on Oct 7, 2008 12:53 PM EDT 0 recs
Traitors!!!!!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on
Oct 7, 2008 12:56 PM EDT
up
0 recs
plus denver has that whole mountain thing going on...
and the cards have revitalized their fanbase to the east
basically the royals territory now is the KC metro and kansas
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 9:44 PM EDT
up
0 recs
And Grass Creek
De La Rosa played well this year to establish his credentials on the other side… next year I’m thinking his collapse will allow the Royals to become the Louisiana Purchase Royals for sure.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 7, 2008 9:46 PM EDT
up
0 recs
If the Royals started winning..
I’d bet you would see a resurgence of support from Nebraska, new fans from the northwest Arkansas boomtowns which are largely comprised of recent transplants (as opposed to native hardcore Cardinal fans) as well as a reawakening of dormant Royals fans in southwest Missouri.
More simply:
bandwagon fans would rapidly appear and fill the park for a winning Royals team
Win, win, win, win, win.
by RATW on
Oct 8, 2008 1:44 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I grew up in Nebraska, and I'm sure it had an effect
My family would come down to see a weekend series nearly every summer, but in 1994 we had planned a trip out to see the Rockies. For the game on which the strike began…
by KC Gunner on
Oct 10, 2008 7:08 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yet another Royals - Pirates comparison
Great points!
I think that Royals fans are a tremendously loyal bunch and they’ll eagerly come back to the K if or when the “Alex Gordan Generation” materializes. It’s sad but there are so many young fans around that haven’t seen the Royals win but it seems to me that some small-market teams are making it happen for some long-alienated fans – just look at the Brewers.
I’m always making Pirates comparisons on this blog, so I hope it doesn’t really annoy anyone, but here’s another and some things to think about. The Pirates suck. They haven’t had a winning season in over 16 years. They also have, what I would consider, the best ballpark in the NL (if not all of baseball), but they doesn’t bring fans back. The Royals are not as bad as the Pirates and they are in much better position to contend. Also, I think that KC is much more of a baseball town than Pittsburgh, so that means fans are more likely to come back with even a small inkling of hope.
by Deaner on Oct 7, 2008 1:26 PM EDT 0 recs
Skull And Crossbones
On their notebooks, captioned with “Hyaaarrrr!!”.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on
Oct 7, 2008 8:21 PM EDT
up
1 recs
Pirates attendance in 2008
Average per game: 19,865*
Total for 2008: 1,609,076
*Basically the same as the Royals
Here is a full listing
by Deaner on
Oct 7, 2008 8:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
and the pirates get what... 9 cubs games a year?
rough
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 9:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
The time is now!
If the Royals can field a .500 team (or dare I say it, contending) they will also benefit from the fact that the Chiefs are putrid and will be for a while.
The truth of the matter is that if the Royals had any sustained success since the strike, their attendance figures would be that much better. They are having more “success” the last two years, and attendance is already starting to rise. Win, and the fans will come. It’s that simple. Lose, and we’ll continue to be below average.
by nkkc on Oct 7, 2008 1:37 PM EDT 0 recs
Increased attendance means increased wins
Increased wins means increased payroll. We have had a cheap owner who has repeatedly abandoned the draft, not committed a Major League salary, and meddled in numerous trades, centering on public image – which he had little of, anyway – over success of an actual ballclub. As a former meddling, cheap, and unprofessional owner, David Glass needs to step up to the plate and commit to a reasonable payroll. Not $100M. Not $120M. But $80M, at least. League average – or at least 17th or so.
If Dayton Moore’s pipe dream about holding a parade literally in my back yard (Plaza K.C.), he is going to have to have the financial means to ensure a playoff-caliber ballclub for a handful of years to gain that sizeable window to winning the World Series. Only a genius G.M. can compete year in and year out with our current payroll. Although I like Dayton Moore and believe he has generally performed well here in K.C., he ain’t no genius.
Folks….our current core isn’t going to the playoffs….ever. We need to either a) add pieces, by increasing payroll, or b) sell all of our tradebait for prospects. Because the fanbase certainly can’t afford another city, and because Jackson County handed out record amounts in upgrades to a sparse stadium in the 29th smallest market….THEY OWE US. Follow with Dayton Moore’s philosophy, and spend the appropriate cash to field us a contender. Now.
by Royals Nation on Oct 7, 2008 2:21 PM EDT 1 recs
This post should probably be retitled
“Baseball in Kansas City still hasn’t recovered from 15 years of horrific baseball”
realistically speaking
by slayor on Oct 7, 2008 3:35 PM EDT 1 recs
true enough
one of things i was sorta imperfectly trying to talk about in this post was an idea of resentment and tuning out that we saw for a few years after the strike… eventually, baseball became a cool date night in other cities, but i don’t know about in KC… the numbers basically just stayed bad
obviously, the losing is a huge part of it
by royalsreview on
Oct 7, 2008 9:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Losing is THE hugest part of it.
Trust me, not to go off on some dumb “you don’t live here” crap but… unless you live here, you don’t even realize what a joke the team has become. You tell people you’re going to a Royals game, they say “WHY.” or laugh and joke about the Yankees being in town. You ask somebody if they want free Royals tickets, they laugh even harder and say they’ll go if you pay parking, drive, and buy them dinner for their troubles. See what I’m driving at? It’s not that baseball isn’t popular, it’s that people in Kansas City view the Royals as an embarrassment, and that is the source of resentment.
Kansas City is a town with penis envy. People here desperately want the cachet of a bigger city like St. Louis or Chicago, even if they won’t admit it. And as long as they have this joke of a baseball team, they aren’t on that level. And this, pisses them off.
realistically speaking
by slayor on
Oct 8, 2008 4:47 PM EDT
up
1 recs
I Remember The
1994 season well. For me, it was the double whammy of the Royals’ last good team after Kauffman’s death and no World Series. Glass was the worst kind of owner to step in to this scenario. KC is a baseball town with a proud tradition going back to the Negro Leagues and being a MiL affiliate of the Yankees, so even Glass could not kill the Royals, but he came alarmingly close. He does owe the city, and especially Jackson County, bigtime.
As far as penis envy goes, I think losing the Kings to Sacramento was a huge blow to the collective KC ego. KC needs a basketball team to occupy the Sprint Center, a competitive Royals and Herm Edwards as a defensive co-ordinator is some other city.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on
Oct 8, 2008 7:10 PM EDT
up
0 recs
As for the penis envy
agree with Phil about the Kings moving. I would also STRONGLY suggest that the Charlie Finley era (dude was a worse owner than Glass, hard as it may be to believe) fed into this dynamic as well. The KC Athletics practically donated every good player they developed to the Yankees, despite playing in an era where the salary equity was basically even, or at least a very minor consideration. He further went on to embarass the city with idiotic promotions and ideas, and then moved the team to Oakland right when they were on the cusp of greatness (5 straight playoff appearances from 71-75, with 3 WS champions form 72-74). Could also throw in losing the Scouts in the NHL after the grand total of ONE season.
Finally, there is the stigma of being called a “Cow Town” for so long, especially by St Louis people. I can assure you this is a very real slight – my Mom & Dad grew up and started their family in STL; we did not move to KC until I was 6, and any time we went home to visit relatives, there was always the “you live in the sticks” vibe underlying the visit by the stuck up St Louisans.
by loyal2sdad on Oct 10, 2008 2:10 PM EDT 0 recs
wow... people from St. Louis were stuck up about something?
seriously, I’m sure it’s a nice town. I like the arch. BUT ITS ST. LOUIS
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on
Oct 10, 2008 7:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs







