winning is the biggest problem but not the only problem

attendance would go up if the stadium was surrounded by an active location

too many games for a 'designation situation' 162 times a year.

the lower ticket prices would really hit if people could just 'drop in' for a game

I think a downtown stadium is ideal, but I don't see much wrong with the Royals playing where they play. It's a nice stadium, KC traffic isn't very bad, and if they win people will come. Some cities need the downtown stadium because traffic is so bad, even at 7:00 that it would just be a headache. I used to be able to go home, eat dinner and still make it to a Royals game from Olathe.
And there's some drawbacks to the downtown stadium. Some companies only rent their parking for certain hours and you can't park in the garage during the game anyway. And if you want to park in a lot near the stadium it can run you $25.
I like the downtown stadium better, but I don't think the Royals stadium situation holds them back.
As far as the ASG- it's not like it's a Super Bowl type party event anyway. The teams and players play two days prior, they come in for the HR contest and the game and leave. It's kind of a quick turnaround, I think. I don't think the stadium location would make MLB think KC is a bad location.

Absolutely. It would be no big deal to drop twenty bucks to walk across the street from your office and catch five innings of a game just for the hell of it spur of the moment.

You don't go to a Royals game at the last minute very often, especially if you have kids.

KK is a liar. This isn't exactly news.

They're supposed to open one in Lee's Summit late this summer.

When Cerner buys the Royals, they will build a new Park where bannister mall and then we will move all the poor people to where the K is.

There's a damn Shoneys across the highway, what more do you want?

It's pretty sad that the Overland Park soccer complex has more to do within walking distance than the Truman Sports complex. Actually, it's not even remotely close.

When the Royals were winning in the 80s, they averaged 35 thou a game.

The problem isn't location, it's the product.

The demographics of Kansas City have changed considerably in the past 25 years.

And the Royals have been losers for the past 27 years.

You put a winning product on the field, and people will go to the games, demographics be damned.

And more people will go if you put a stadium somewhere people actually go...and they have a better time when they do.

No matter how good the game is, you're still in Raytown when it ends.

I think losing for 25 years has a much bigger effect on fans than having a stadium 10 minutes outside downtown does.

Seriously, driving from the K to downtown takes 10 minutes Max. It's not as big a deal as most people make it.
Posted via Mobile Device

You got a ****ing problem with Hi-Boy and the titty bar that used to be Bunns, whatever it is called now?

I vote to build up the area around the complex. Those teams aren't getting new stadiums anywhere else in this area.

For the record, Saul, I agree with you. People just getting off of work or staggering out of one of the bars down there would be more likely to just walk up for a ticket than to drive out past 435 (the whole whopping 10-15 minute drive it is). But it's not going to happen, so they should do the next best, and smartest, thing.