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

  • Two comebacks aren’t enough, Yankees fall 6-5 to Mariners July 23, 2017
    Source: FanGraphs Well that was a rough one. The Yankees showed some Fighting Spirit and rallied to tie Saturday night’s game against the Mariners twice — twice! — but ultimately, the bullpen took yet another loss. The final score was 6-5 in ten innings. The bullpen has been pretty great since the All-Star break, but […] The post Two comebacks aren’t enough, […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Game 96: Make it Three in a Row July 23, 2017
    The Yankees have won the last two games in convincing fashion, with strong performances from the starting pitching, the bullpen, and the lineup (for the most part, at least). A win tonight would give them their first three-game winning streak since they won six in a row from June 7 through 12, and their first […] The post Game 96: Make it Three in a Row appe […]
    Domenic Lanza
  • Trade Deadline Rumors: Darvish, Gray, First Base, Betances July 22, 2017
    The July 31st non-waiver trade deadline is only nine days away now, and already the Yankees have made their most significant midseason trade in several years. Since … the Bobby Abreu deal? Nothing else comes to mind. Anyway, here are the latest rumors and rumblings. Rangers gauging interest in Darvish According to Jeff Passan, the […] The post Trade Deadline […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Judge’s monster homer leads Yanks to 5-1 win over Mariners July 22, 2017
    Your browser does not support iframes.I don’t want to alarm anyone, but the Yankees have won two straight games and are 5-4 since the All-Star break. Crazy, I know. They might actually win a series this weekend. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves though. The Yankees took the second game of this four-game set against […] The post Judge’s monster homer leads Yan […]
    Mike Axisa
  • DotF: Robinson hits two homers in Staten Island’s win July 22, 2017
    Here are the day’s notes: Two roster clearing moves, per Matt Kardos: RHP Branden Pinder has been released and RHP Dillon McNamara has been traded to the Giants for … something. Not sure what. Probably cash. Pinder had allowed just one run (unearned) in 11.2 innings back from Tommy John surgery. 3B Miguel Andujar is […] The post DotF: Robinson hits two homer […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Game 95: CC’s Birthday July 22, 2017
    The Yankees opened this four-game series with the Mariners with a nice win last night. Luis Severino outpitched Felix Hernandez and the offense put just enough runs on the board. The Yankees are 4-4 so far on this eleven-game road trip, so they still need two more wins to clinch a winning trip. That would […] The post Game 95: CC’s Birthday appeared first on […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Friday Night Open Thread July 21, 2017
    The Yankees are still out on the West Coast, which means another 10pm ET start tonight. One more of these tomorrow — that’s actually a 9pm ET start, but close enough — and then that’s it. No more West Coast night games this season. After this series the Yankees will play 62 of their final […] The post Friday Night Open Thread appeared first on River Avenue B […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Revisiting the MLBTR Archives: July 2012 July 21, 2017
    The calendar has turned over to July and it’s time once again to revisit the MLB Trade Rumors archives. Better late than never this month, right? Right. We’re now into July 2012 and, as always, July was chock full of trade rumors. The Yankees went into July 2012 with a 47-30 record and a five-game […] The post Revisiting the MLBTR Archives: July 2012 appeare […]
    Mike Axisa
  • Scouting the Trade Market: Trevor Cahill July 21, 2017
    After Tuesday’s seven-player trade, the Yankees loudly announced they were buyers. The trade solved many of their issues, but they still have a hole in the back of their rotation with Michael Pineda lost for the season after Tommy John surgery. A veteran innings eater who can more reliably provide solid innings than Bryan Mitchell […] The post Scouting the T […]
    Steven Tydings
  • Mailbag: Judge, Mateo, Hamels, Nola, Girardi, Taillon, Betances July 21, 2017
    We’ve got ten questions in the mailbag this week. RABmailbag (at) gmail (dot) com is where you can send us any questions. More than a few were rendered moot by the trade with the White Sox. A few people asked: What could the Yankees get for Judge? Several masochists emailed in asking what sort of […] The post Mailbag: Judge, Mateo, Hamels, Nola, Girardi, Tai […]
    Mike Axisa

Blog Stats

  • 62,492 hits

%d bloggers like this: