AT&T Park the latest in no-name stadiums

It’s time for an Official Talking Baseball Quiz.

1. Where is Ameriquest Field?

2. What does the Great American Insurance Company have to do with baseball?

3. What is the name of the stadium in which the Oakland Athletics play baseball?

If you are like the average baseball fan, I would imagine your answers were something like this: I have no idea, nothing, and the Oakland Coliseum.

Sadly, in this era of corporate naming rights, you would completely wrong. (For the real answers, just keep reading.) Non-descript corporate sponsorship names have taken over once-great stadium names, and in my opinion – my stuffy, traditionalist opinion – it’s getting to be a bit ridiculous.

At the end of last week, the San Francisco Giants announced that they would now be playing their home games in AT&T Park.

Now, just a second, you might say. Didn’t the Giants just get a new stadium in 2000? Why do they need a new one? Well, it is the same one, but this is actually its third name.

In 2000, the Giants opened up SBC Park to replace Candlestick Park. Their old park, named for its geographical location on Candlestick Point, was no longer an adequate facility for a team competing in the 21st century. And four years before opening the stadium, the Giants had finalized a $53 million agreement with the Pacific Telesis Group to name the new stadium Pacific Bell Park through 2019. SBC Communications, Inc., purchased PTG, and in 2004, the new stadium became SBC Park.

Last year, SBC merged with AT&T, and in less than a month, the stadium will be rechristened again. This time, it will be known as AT&T Park. Six years, three names. At this rate, the Giants will have to change the name nine times before the end of the original contract. Sprint PCS Field, anyone?

As a baseball traditionalist, at least when it comes to stadium names, this ridiculous name-changing symbolizing everything that is wrong with the way stadiums are named today. The Texas Rangers play in Ameriquest Field. What that has to do with Texas or the Rangers is beyond me. While the Ballpark in Arlington had a great ring to it, I guess the Rangers though a 30-year, $75-million contract was better.

In Cincinnati, the Reds play in Great American Ball Park. That’s a great name until you realize that Great American is an insurance company paying $2.5 million a year to Cincinnati for 30 years. Hey, that’s nearly one-third of Eric Milton’s contract!

Meanwhile, back in California across the Bay from San Francisco, the A’s no longer play in the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum. Rather, they play in McAfee Coliseum which was recently called Network Associates Coliseum until another telecommunications merger eliminated Network Associates.

In my mind, this corporate naming lessens the impact of the ballpark. It’s not the same to check out a game in McAfee Coliseum as it is to go to Fenway Park. In 15 years, when the A’s are playing in AOL.com Coliseum but the Red Sox are still playing in Fenway – named for the fens that used to dot the area around the stadium – it’s clear that the Red Sox can still lay a claim to their stadium’s history. But when fans don’t know which corporation will name their stadium this season, it divorces the team from the stadium and the fans from the stadium.

Now, it’s quite easy to argue against my history/tradition defense of stadium names. First, corporate sponsorship of baseball stadiums is nothing new. Wrigley Field, built by Charlie Weeghman, was originally called Weeghman Field. When the Wrigley family acquired the team, they changed the name of the stadium to Cubs Park. In 1926, it was named Wrigley Field, and the name has become a part of Cubs lore since then.

This, in my mind, isn’t the same as the current naming craze. For 12 years, the stadium wasn’t Wrigley Field, but now that names has stuck. In 30 years, the Reds will sell the naming rights to Great American Ball Park to another company. They won’t stick with it for tradition’s sake, and thirty years of naming association with disappear into history as soon as the ink on the new contract is dried.

While historical naming rights seem acceptable, one aspect of the naming system about which I cannot complain is the money. In an era of economic disparity in Major League Baseball (coincidentally, a topic for an upcoming post), the money that Reds make each year on the stadium names provides them with an additional source of revenue that they are hopefully using to improve the team. Had these teams stuck with, say, Riverfront Stadium or the Ballpark in Arlington, these millions wouldn’t be flowing in.

In the end, I know it is important for these teams to maximize their revenue potential. The difference, especially for teams such as the A’s and Brewers who do not enjoy the financial windfall of the Yankees or Red Sox, is significant. It could be the difference between fielding a competitive team under a tight budget or a non-competitive team with a very low payroll.

However, at the same time, it would be great if Major League Baseball could figure out a way to avoid anymore two-and-out names or Enron Field debacles. I may recognize the need for corporate sponsorship of baseball stadiums, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it.

Sources

All Ballpark naming information, including history and contract details, comes from the excellent Ballparks.com.

Advertisements

4 Responses to “AT&T Park the latest in no-name stadiums”


  1. 1 J February 6, 2006 at 12:11 pm

    Actually I think the name of that park the A’s play in is called “Hell”…

    …scariest place I have ever watched a baseball game…

  2. 2 lisa gray February 6, 2006 at 7:41 pm

    hi ben!!!

    yeah, a lot of the names are stupid. i mean, nobody here calls our ballpark minute maid field – it’s either the ballpark or the Box. I know that a some of the old names were after an owner or (yecccch) politician, but the corporate names thing sucks.

    lisa

  3. 3 techne February 6, 2006 at 11:29 pm

    I don’t see any great ways out though–the problem isn’t anything to do with baseball, but the pace of corporate culture.

    As for Wrigley, it’s an interesting case in thinking about baseball and corpporations, not for the name but for the marketing. Its not hard to put together the argument that the focus on Wrigley as a destination, illustrated by how one can buy “wrigley field” t-shirts that don’t mention the Cubs at all, has hurt the team on the field.

  4. 4 Benjamin Kabak February 6, 2006 at 11:35 pm

    techne: I’m curious. Tell me more. I saw you’re a big Cubs fan. I think they are in a unique situation. I know Wrigley when they owned the team did not do a very good job of putting a quality product on the field. It pretty much mirrors the Red Sox decades of futility and poor team planning rather than any sign of a curse. But can they break out of it soon?


Comments are currently closed.



RSS River Ave. Blues

  • Tuesday Night Open Thread January 24, 2018
    ?Want to work for the Yankees? They’re looking for a Player Development Quantitative Analyst. You have to be extremely qualified and willing to both travel a lot and not make much money. That’s usually how these baseball jobs go. Front office staffer is not the most financially rewarding position. But, it is a job in […] The post Tuesday Night Open Thread ap […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Masahiro Tanaka won the slow 2017-18 offseason by avoiding it entirely January 23, 2018
    Defining the winners of the 2017-18 MLB offseason is a difficult task. Free agent signings have been sparse and few blockbuster trades have reshaped the competitive landscape. There hasn’t been one team, perhaps outside the Angels, that has clearly gone from pretender to contender in the past few months. Surely, Giancarlo Stanton and Marcell Ozuna […] The po […]
    Steven Tydings
  • Prospect Profile: Thairo Estrada January 23, 2018
    Thairo Estrada | IF Background Thairo Estrada signed out of Bejuma, Venezuela for the bargain price of $49,000 way back in November of 2012. He was relatively unheralded, as evidenced by both the price tag and how late he signed, and was something of an afterthought in a class in which the Yankees jumped all […] The post Prospect Profile: Thairo Estrada appe […]
    Domenic Lanza
  • Thoughts three weeks before pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training January 23, 2018
    We are exactly three weeks away from the biggest non-news day of the year. Pitchers and catchers reporting marks the beginning of Spring Training and the beginning of the long marathon that is the new baseball season, but nothing really happens that day. Still exciting though. Anyway, I have some thoughts, so let’s get to […] The post Thoughts three weeks be […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Monday Night Open Thread January 23, 2018
    ?Four years ago today, the Yankees got their man and signed Masahiro Tanaka to a seven-year contract. For a while that offseason it appeared he wouldn’t be posted, but MLB and NPB worked things out, and Tanaka has been a Yankee ever since. Even after the elbow injury and his rough 2017 regular season, Tanaka […] The post Monday Night Open Thread appeared fir […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Yankees land six on Baseball America’s top 100 prospects list January 22, 2018
    Spring Training is three weeks away and that means it is top 100 prospect season. All the usual publications will be updating their lists in the coming days and weeks. Earlier today the gang at Baseball America released their 2018 top 100 prospects list, which is topped by Braves OF Ronald Acuna. Angels RHP/DH Shohei […] The post Yankees land six on Baseball […]
    Mike Axisa
  • The case for trading Brett Gardner to make room for Darvish January 22, 2018
    The other day, Steven wrote about the rationale of trading David Robertson to clear some salary room to fit Yu Darvish’s hypothetical contract under the $197 million luxury tax threshold. Today, I’m here to make a case for trading away another established veteran player with a +$10M salary: Brett Gardner. We’ve talked about the Yankees’ […] The post The case […]
    Sung-Min Kim
  • Sorting out the Yankees’ potential non-roster Spring Training invitees for 2018 January 22, 2018
    Pitchers and catchers report to Tampa three weeks from tomorrow, and at some point soon, likely within the next two weeks, the Yankees will announce their 2018 Spring Training invitees. These are non-40-man roster players who get a chance to come to big league camp to strut their stuff. Some non-roster invitees are top prospects, […] The post Sorting out the […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Fan Confidence Poll: January 22nd, 2018 January 22, 2018
    2017 Regular Season Record: 91-71 (858 RS, 660 RA, 100-62 pythag. record), second in ALE 2017 Postseason Record: 7-6 (51 RS, 42 RA), won AL WC Game, won ALDS, lost ALCS Top stories from last week: There continue to be rumors connecting the Yankees to Yu Darvish. Unless he signs dirt cheap, there’s no way […] The post Fan Confidence Poll: January 22nd, 2018 a […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Weekend Open Thread January 21, 2018
    ?I finally had a chance to read Kiley McDaniel’s piece on the stats vs. scouts debate, which really isn’t a debate anymore. Every team uses both. There are a few clubs that lean analytical — from what I understand, the Rays use algorithms for basically everything, including the draft — but the very best organizations […] The post Weekend Open Thread appeared […]
    Mike Axisa

Blog Stats

  • 62,643 hits

%d bloggers like this: