THOM LOVERRO<\/b> – Smulyan gets points in fight<\/b><\/a> – The Wash. Times<\/i> “I keep hearing, ‘Local ownership!’ And I understand that. But it\u2019s also true that the most local owner baseball had was Marge Schott. That didn\u2019t work out, did it?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I will add Peter Angelo$<\/b> to that list as well.<\/p>\n In the end, I am anti-Smulyan because he already failed as an MLB owner, not because he is from Indiana.<\/p>\n
Loverro thinks the MLB wants Jeff Smulyan<\/b> to buy the Nationals because they know what they are getting — he will not go out and sign anyone for $250 million. They want him because they know he will hold the line on salaries. Loverro also notes that the D.C. Council and MLB are like Freddy vs. Jason because neither deserves a halo.<\/p>\n
DAVE MCKENNA<\/b> – Home-Field Advantage<\/b><\/a> – CityPaper<\/i>
The Cheap Seats columnist weighs in on Smulyan and reminds us that every potential owner has been roughed up throughout this process. He also notes that local ownership is far from the norm in MLB. Smulyan adds:<\/p>\n
You probably already read Chris Needham’s<\/b> Capital Punishment<\/b><\/a> Nats blog (along with all the others I have linked, right?), but if for some reason you do not make sure you go there today for some excellent commentary on the ownership\/ballpark issues.<\/p>\n
Rich Fan, Poor Fan<\/b><\/a> – CityPaper<\/i>
Have you been waiting for the CityPaper’s<\/i> take on the proposed ballpark? Wait no longer it is this week’s cover story and the tone is about what you would expect.<\/p>\n