Print Columns   |   Web Chats   |   Blog Archives   |  

Nats TV: MASN's Defense

Yesterday's item offering some theories on why the TV ratings for Washington Nationals ballgames are so weak won generally supportive comments here on the big blog, but raised the hackles of MASN insiders, who argue that Nationals broadcasts are every bit as good and every bit as heavily promoted as those of the network's real home team, the Baltimore Orioles.

MASN spokesman Todd Webster takes strong issue with my characterization of the Nats as MASN's "ugly stepchild." "It's just not true," he says, and he argues that "everything has been done equitably."

To my view--and that of many Washington viewers--that watching a Nats game on MASN is a strange experience peppered with reminders that this is a Baltimore-centric sports channel, Webster replies that this is somehow a product of a fevered imagination or a deep animus against the Orioles and their argumentative owner, Peter Angelos.

Webster says he checked with the executive producer of the broadcasts and found that indeed the same technology is used in both O's and Nats casts, including the Pitch Track feature that documents where each pitch lands and the pitch speed graphic, both of which Nats fans find to be a regular presence on the Orioles games, but rarely used in the Washington broadcasts.

"The Nats do get the cool pitch tracker technology," Webster says. "It's an $80,000 piece of equipment that is used by both teams, like a replay, at the discretion of the talent (which, in this case is Hall of Fame pitcher Don Sutton)." Maybe that's the issue--the O's broadcasters use the toy more and more wisely than do the Nats' crew. In any case, the bottom line is that, to a fan's eyes, one broadcast has more bells and whistles than the other.

Webster catalogues the ways in which the two teams' casts are the same: "The graphics are identical - except for the colors. All of the promos, ticket sales, community events, in-game inventory [are] identical --- both teams get an equal number of promotions. The identical number of games are shown on MASN and MASN2 for both teams - 100 games on MASN; 61 games on MASN2; 40 games on MASNHD."

So how does MASN explain the lousy ratings on Nats games? Injuries. The company's argument is that the stunning number of injuries to key Nats players has so diminished the level of play and the team's overall performance that the games are just not drawing as much attention as they otherwise would.

Other points: MASN concedes that the basic shot of home plate that is a staple of most baseball broadcasts is a major problem at Nationals Park, but the network argues, with merit, that this is a question of poor design by the architects, not any fault of the broadcaster. The camera position is seven stories above the field, making a clear and useful shot impossible. Indeed, when MASN moved its camera two stories lower, the Nats said sorry, you can't do that, and required the network to move back to the sky-high spot. To remedy the lack of a good view of the incoming pitch, MASN has attached a camera to the screen behind home plate, for a low view of home. It's an interesting perspective, though hardly a replacement for the basic view that most teams offer of the pitch.

Webster also argues that MASN has done its share to let people know where to find the startup channel, despite some rough channel positions on local cable systems. "At the start of the 2007 season, when both teams began playing on MASN, the network launched a massive campaign to inform fans where MASN and MASN2 are located on their particular cable system," he says. "We received no complaints from fans unable to find the game on television."

My bottom line: MASN is trying to present itself as a fair and equitable hometown sports channel, but it's just not working. The channel still feels like a Baltimore affair, from the lineup of sponsors to the quality of broadcasters staffing O's games vs. those on the Nats to the other programming on the channel. Yes, there is one Washington talk show on MASN, but it's John Riggins' Redskins-oriented show, with hardly any Nationals content, a sharp contrast to the O's content that is often available on the channel's Baltimore-based shows.

The best regional sports channels offer wall to wall coverage of the local team--NESN is Red Sox heaven, YES is a 24-hour encyclopedia of Yankees heritage and news, and so on. MASN just isn't remotely in that league. Would the Nats still have problems drawing a big audience with a TV channel of their own? Absolutely, but MASN is one of the several factors that explains the weak ratings reported yesterday.

By Marc Fisher |  July 9, 2008; 10:46 AM ET
Previous: Why Nats TV Is A Dud | Next: Dithering Over D.C. Libraries


Please email us to report offensive comments.

About the only good news in the low ratings is that Angelos is definitely losing money on something he wanted so badly. Which means the idea of the Nats getting broadcast rights back is a reasonable possibility.

The bad news is the Kasten is quoted in Boz's article as paying no attention to baseball ratings. I hope he was lying, management cannot be building a franchise without paying attention to both the live attendance and the ratings.

Posted by: Native DC | July 9, 2008 11:39 AM

I hate the pitch track. Glad we only see it once or twice a game.

Posted by: mrm0to | July 9, 2008 11:41 AM

Marc, I agree with you on most things (even the taxi zone system - RIP). But I just don't get your point. You are presented with clear evidence that the production is exactly the same - save for the colors, with the teams on equal footing in terms of MASN vs. MASN 2. But because the channel still "feels like a Baltimore affair" there is anti-Nats bias taking place?

Todd Webster is exactly right - you hate Peter Angelos so much that your judgment towards MASN is completely clouded even in the face of clear facts. It's been nearly 4 years. Angelos has virtually disappeared from the scene - you barely hear from him anymore. Time to get over it.

Posted by: Matt C | July 9, 2008 11:44 AM

The primary problem is that Angelo$ kept the Nats games off TV for the first two seasons. Digging out of that hole is very tough. Boswell accused Angelo$ of crib death back then.

Posted by: WFY | July 9, 2008 11:45 AM

Hey Marc,

Last night I was at the game sitting at the Scoreboard Walk bar (sponsored by Miller Light!) and they were trying to get the game on the TVs. The guy working the TVs couldn't find MASN anywhere and, after about five minutes of shuffling aroud, just put on the scoreboard channel so that you could at least see the scoreboard game.

If they can't get MASN on at Nationals Park? then yeah, I'd say it is hard to find.

Posted by: GSM | July 9, 2008 12:02 PM

Also, did MASN indicate why the Orioles lack the courage to compete in an open market without controlling the Nats TV rights? I think we all know the answer -- Peter Angelo$ is a coward!

Posted by: WFY | July 9, 2008 12:05 PM

Why don't you ask the MASN hack where his office is?

Posted by: Chris | July 9, 2008 12:22 PM

scoreboard game = scoreboard coverage, above

Posted by: GSM (oops) | July 9, 2008 12:23 PM

Glad to see that your judgment isn't colored by the facts, as usual. Keep up the great work

Posted by: nathater | July 9, 2008 12:29 PM

Marc, I find it a little ironic that you are complaining about the quality of MASN's coverage when the Post sends an intern who still is a year away from graduating to cover the Nats game last night. An intern?!?! Really?

Posted by: Arlington, VA | July 9, 2008 12:37 PM

but, you see, hating the diminuitive despot is such an irrepressible, automatic, human thing to do that it cannot be stopped. and then, once liberated by the total loathing peter shortstuff inevitably inspires, you would naturally start to notice the baltimore-centric bias of MASN sports. the argument "the equipment's the same" reminds me of the standard defense of segregated schools in the old days. the only actually funny joke tony kornheiser ever told in the course of a dismally overlong, overhyped career was when he made the analogy that the orioles 3rd base coach, based on his experience watching the throw come in from the outfield, was therefore as qualified to tell czar peter the anklebiter when to settle an asbestos case as knee-high angelos was to run a baseball team. it is extremely satisfactory that the nats' substandard broadcasts are losing angelos 80% and the nats only 20% of the extremely short, small, infinitesimal revenues.

Posted by: natty bumppo | July 9, 2008 12:52 PM

Really, fans of the Nats aren't watching the game because of bad MASN coverage?

That is the lowest and worst excuse I think I have ever heard. Its actually 100% BS.

No fan of any sport is not going to watch a game because of lousy TV coverage. I'm a Brewers fan and I have watched countless games through snowy WGN Cubs broadcasts without thinking twice about it. How can you call yourself a fan of team and not watch their games?

The problem isn't the quality of the TV broadcasts its the quality of the fans. I have watched the Brewers while they were in the cellar, with one of the worst teams in baseball and while its not pretty its still my team. By watching all those awful games it just makes this year's season all the better...its called team loyalty and Nats fans have no understanding of it.

Nats fans complained about RFK (where they actually had higher attendance in their first season) so we paid $600 million for their new stadium
They complain about the metro so we upgraded the station
They complain about parking so we opened up DC streets to special Nats passes
They complain about not having HD broadcasts so now I'm sure MASN will move the games to HD

Why don't you guys grow up and stop blaming everyone and everything else for your poor fan base and start concentrating on the actual product on the field?

Posted by: Southeasterner | July 9, 2008 1:09 PM

Nothing more boring that watching empty seats (like those million dollar seats behind home plate at the home games), and a line-up that every night seems to go four or five innings in a row without a hit.

I'm a big baseball fan, but this team has been a dreadful bore. I mean, who in this town with a life wants to watch Wily Mo go oh-for-four with two strikeouts and a weak ground ball to shortstop four times a week.

They had a decent roster, but injuries have decimated them. And their excellent rebuilding program is still two years away from paying off.

I'm not sure what the hated Angelos could do to spice up this dreadful product. There's empty seats behind home plate, goose eggs on the scoreboard for the home team, and the on-field product is simply unwatchable.

And it will be, until the injured players heal, and the real prospects gain the seasoning they need in the minors. So be grateful that attendance or watching is not compulsory - though I recommend it to cure insomnia.

Posted by: The Former Little Leaguer | July 9, 2008 1:15 PM

Personally, I think Sutton and Carpenter do a good job. Although I like Ray Night better than Sutton because he's more into the hitting aspect than the pitching. Sutton also seems to give more symphathy to the opposing pitchers than a home game announcer ought to. He's just a little to diplomatic. Could Sutton be the problem? As far as MASN being this Oriole laden vehicle I still don't see it. I don't like Angelos any more than anyone who remembers him firing Johnson back in the late 90s but to blame him and MASN for the ratings woes is nonsense. We live in a transient city and we need a goooood team before anyone will watch. Go Nats!

Posted by: Rich | July 9, 2008 1:20 PM

I am curious as to actually how many games Marc Fisher has actually watched on MASN. I have watched BOTH teams, and I am a fan of BOTH teams, and the coverage is the same done rather well. As for network offerings, the network is still rather young, and we need to look at the coverage of the team here in this market. There are NO talk shows (other than Post Game) covering the team on any of our sports stations here in town, and we complain about coverage by a network an hour away from us. Time to grow up and stop the petty foolishness. We need REAL answers on why the Nats stink and start talking about a NEW GM.

Posted by: EJ | July 9, 2008 1:20 PM

The problem is Kasten and the Lerner's are rolling in dough. They don't care about the product as long as it sells. I got suckered into buying season tickets, but I will not spend another dime at the stadium this year. And I've been one of the 9,000 every night. I can't watch anymore. This is an insult. Kasten is about building the business, not the team. Bowden's the incompetent who brings us LoDuca, Pena, Kearns, etc. He's a loser. Acta's teams don't start playing until they are out of it in May. All 3 have to go. Now.

Posted by: Tim from Silver Spring | July 9, 2008 1:23 PM

Another point, doesn't Peter Angelos have a vested (monetary) interest in the success of the Nats on MASN? So why would they want to downgrade the quality of the Nats broadcast? That doesn't make any sense.

As I understand it, the more people who watch the Nats means higher advertising rates which means higher profits for Angelos.

We all know that Peter will not leave a single dollar behind. If anything, he is probably angry that the Nats broadcasts are doing so poorly because it is taking money out of his pocket.

Posted by: Matt C | July 9, 2008 1:36 PM

On a night when both teams are playing, compare the Orioles pregame/game/postgame with the Nats pregame/game/postgame. The O's broadcast looks like a professional, modern regional sports telecast in the mold of YES, NESN, SNY, etc. The Nats broadcast looks like a cable access show or a high school AV club.

Posted by: B | July 9, 2008 1:42 PM

I've never seen a MASN O's broadcast, so can't opine on whether there's any difference, but it's a simple fact that the MASN Nats broadcasts are poorly done and in need of serious upgrade. (Sorry, Brewers fan, above. Brewers? who knew they had any fans? what's their attendance rank over the past 25 years?).
But, knowing that the Asbestos King is shelling out $25M and thus must be hemorraghing massive amounts of money on this deal, does make me very happy.
Building a fan base, including TV viewers is crucial to the Nats, but logic and reality dictate that a rival team with a petty owner can't control the TV rights if long-term success is the goal. Peter G. will eventually be forced to admit he wildly miscalculated, and sell the rights to the Nats, where they belong. Given how petty Angelos is, he'll delay this longer than an intelligent man would, but losing this much money is enough even to overcome Angelos' fat ego.

Posted by: joeonthehill | July 9, 2008 1:48 PM

Hey Tim from Silver Spring,

Can I have your tickets? I mean if you aren't gonna go it'd be a shame to waste 'em!

Oh yeah, and in case anyone forgot, the Nats still out draw the O's, at home AND on the road, so it isn't like things are terrible or anything!

Posted by: GSM | July 9, 2008 1:48 PM

The real problem is that there is nothing for a Nats fan to watch MASN for except the games. Comcast has SportsNight, Washpost Live, SportsRise, people talking about DC teams for 12 plus hours. MASN has people talking Baltimore, or ESPN news, or 2 hours of John Riggins (seriously, who can watch that horrible TV production for more than 20 min? The radio show is fine, put it on TV and it's bad)

Once MASN gives Nats fans a reason to turn to their station more than once a day (if they're lucky) the numbers would go up. I think this is what Mark is getting at.

Posted by: belcharlie | July 9, 2008 1:51 PM

I do tend to agree that some Nats fans are can be whiny, but to blame them for everything that ills this franchise, like a commenter above did, is ridiculous. I've taken my shots at those who complained about food, lines, parking, et al. But believe it or not, there is a decent fanbase here. It might not be the most educated patient, but what fan base is? C'mon, more than 26K came out last night to see the worst team in the league take on a lousy draw in the Diamondbacks. I happen to be one of the few who believe in "the plan" and am willing to put up with the sorry product on the field right now. There aren't many of us. But I can't expect this team to drum up any fan interest right now. I have to think this is the worst-case scenario. My god, this is what so-called Orioles fans have been putting up with for years! And how can an O's fan complain about our fanbase? They've actually got a decent team playing up the road and no one is going to their park! Last night, on a sticky, humid Tuesday, the Nats outdrew the Orioles' Fourth of July crowd. Talk about pathetic!

Posted by: Rob | July 9, 2008 2:09 PM

How can we trust the Nielsen ratings? Aren't they based on a small selection of TV-aholics that will sit there and record what they watch every day and night? I don't watch much TV but I turn on the games everytime I am home and they are playing. I am not being counted in those ratings. I must confess I have to turn the channel when Willy Blo Pena comes to bat- get rid of the guy! I am wondering about the abilities of Bowden- not many of his moves are bearing fruit at this point. He needed to pickup a couple more veteran pitchers and somebody-anybody- who can hit consistently as a major leaguer should.

Posted by: Bob | July 9, 2008 2:23 PM

Go in any bar in the city or the metro area and your lucky to find the game on. Why? It's hard to find. The guides for the stations don't allign, their are 3 stations broadcasting the games and it seems different everynight. Every person at the cooler says its hard to find. So to say this isn't the case is pure ignorance. Further, it's not a good model for a team trying to build a fanbase.

Posted by: Jdb | July 9, 2008 2:29 PM

When the Nats and O's play each other at Nationals Park, when said game is broadcasted on MASN and MASN2, and when graphics of broadcast imply that it is an O's home game ... why would Nats fans want to watch? It's minor, but it's a slight nonetheless.

Give the Washington DC fans a Washington DC sports channel and we will watch. We really don't care what happens with the sports teams in B'more.

Posted by: Robbie | July 9, 2008 2:44 PM

"To my view--and that of many Washington viewers--that watching a Nats game on MASN is a strange experience peppered with reminders that this is a Baltimore-centric sports channel, Webster replies that this is somehow a product of a fevered imagination or a deep animus against the Orioles and their argumentative owner, Peter Angelos."

Mr. Webster is paid to tout Angelos' party line at MASN

Fact #1: More than the majority of advertisements are for Baltimore. Very few for DC, because the advertisers know most viewers are Baltimore County and City.

Fact #2: Only one show that periodically talks DC sports and that is Riggins. It is not even a Nats show.

Fact #3: MASN has the fewest number of HD broadcasts of any RSN in the nation.

Fact #4: The station on which the Nats are shown changes without any rhyme or reason. Whether it is MASN, MASN2, or WDCA it does not have any predictability to it, so if you are in a bar at 7:00 and the bartender asks what channel the game is on, it is a complete crapshoot. Make the channel MASN-Baltimore and MASN-Washington and keep the games on those channels.

Fact #5 - The Nationals are the ONLY professional sports team that can't do a single thing about how their broadcast product is televised, marketed, and advertised. That is anti-American and anti-Capitalist, no way Webster can spin out of that one.

Posted by: Ken in DC | July 9, 2008 3:17 PM

It's not just the home plate shot that sucks, there have been numerous occasions where the announcers are describing some on-field action, but that action isn't on the screen! happens at least once a game.

Posted by: Beth | July 9, 2008 3:20 PM

Marc, would you like some cheese with your whine? Good gravy. Hw does one get The Post to pay them to come up with this drivel?

Posted by: O's Exec | July 9, 2008 4:03 PM

(Sorry, Brewers fan, above. Brewers? who knew they had any fans? what's their attendance rank over the past 25 years?).
Posted by: joeonthehill | July 9, 2008 1:48 PM
We have always been consistently in the middle of the MLB as far as attendance. This year we'll easily break into the top 10.

I can't tell you about 25 years ago but here are the latest years...(MLB rank - Team - Attendance)

11 - Milwaukee - 35,466
15 - Washington - 29,689
22 - B'More - 26,059

12 - Milwaukee - 35,421
23 - B'More - 27,060
25 - Washington - 24,217

17 - Milwaukee - 28,835
20 - B'More - 26,583
21 - Washington - 26,582

11 - Washington - 33,651
14 - B'More - 32,404
18 - Milwaukee - 27,296

12 - B'More - 34,300
20 - Milwaukee - 25,461
30 - Montreal - 9,356

11 - B'More - 30,302
25 - Milwaukee - 20,992
30 - Montreal - 12,662

10 - B'More - 33,116
19 - Milwaukee - 24,310
30 - Montreal - 10,025

6 - B'More - 38,685
13 - Milwaukee - 34,704
30 - Montreal - 7,935

Even though the Nats have a new stadium they weren't able to beat their attendance during their first year at RFK. They also have the lowest attendance % of any team to play in a new stadium in the modern history of baseball....even with the inclusion of season tickets that have gone unused.

Posted by: Southeasterner | July 9, 2008 4:26 PM

Marc, you're delusional. Generally supportive? As I remember it, everyone said your comments directed toward MASN's production values were idiotic. Way to rewrite history.

Posted by: Tom | July 9, 2008 4:32 PM

Hasn't Milwaukee lost a team also? Your attendance assertions are fine, however no opening of a stadium or relocation has ever ever had the uniques situation that this stadium and team has had. You can deny that or try and understand this. Your choice.

Posted by: Jdb | July 9, 2008 4:34 PM

Let's not forget that the Baltimore O's started life as the Milwaukee Brewers back in 1901...and until we were moved to the NL the modern day Brewers were in the AL East with the O's.

Posted by: Southeasterner | July 9, 2008 4:34 PM

Funny that none of the columns mention that DC United is drawing better television ratings than the precious Nationals. Too bad the city wasted half a billion dollars on a stadium for a team no one cares about than a team that has brought more championships to the city than anyone but the Redskins

Posted by: Fisher Out | July 9, 2008 4:40 PM

So are people really saying if the production of the broadcast was top notch that the ratings would triple (that would just barely get them close to the next worst team)? The problem is the team STINKS! They are horrible and have gotten worse from year to year. I remember seeing on sportscenter that during a 3 game series a few weeks back the Nats had 3 extra base hits. 3! How is that possible? And why in the world would anyone watch that.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 9, 2008 4:59 PM

Again, my single biggest complaint with MASN is the dearth of HD. I think they do a good job in terms of the broadcast, but as for the actual picture quality? It's terrible. I can't stand watching baseball, or any other sport for that matter, in standard definition. The lack of majority HD seems cheap to me.

Every other baseball network broadcasts the majority of its games in HD. WHY CAN'T MASN?

Posted by: Blackaces | July 9, 2008 5:07 PM

I am a retired television engineer. I have worked for a major tv network. After watching MASN's coverage, I am sure that the same technology is used on both telecast. However the production is some what under done. There is a great fan base here. Injuries, and personnel decisions are the cause of low ratings. Winning cures all ills. GO NATS

Posted by: broadcaster | July 9, 2008 5:50 PM

The Orioles actually post how many show up to games, not the PAID attendance like the Nationals Post. HAs anyone watched a nats game (apparently 9,000 of you have) there arent 15,000 a game there at any time except 2 or 3 games a month. Watch the economy get better the next few years when that dope is out of the white house and watch fans be able to go back to games in bmore at high rates

Posted by: John | July 9, 2008 6:10 PM

Yes John I go to the Nats games. Do you? I have season tickets. I have seen 30 thousand fans there many times. That statement you made is just not true.

Posted by: broadcaster | July 9, 2008 7:02 PM

Fisher has written 2 articles in his career about MASN--both are negative. His vendetta for Angelos clearly affects his news judgement and makes the paper (and its dying genre) look weak and ill-informed. Picking on local media is a time-honored tradition from newspapers, but Fisher seems not to realize the challenges involved in creating a network from the ground-up in 2 years.

Posted by: google fisher | July 9, 2008 7:26 PM

The Washington Nationals would not exist without MASN. It is in the best interests of Peter Angelos for the Nats and MASN to succeed. The Lerners and the Nats benefit tremendously from the current arrangement, it is a financial windfall for them. The truth may be inconvenient (to coin a phrase) but it remains, nonetheless, the truth. I also find it mordantly amusing that MASN is attacked as a Baltimore-centric channel but it is perfectly ok for Comcast Sportsnet (built on the bones of Home Team Sports and it's coverage of the Baltimore Orioles) to be biased towards DC. In Baltimore we don't cry about this - we just change the channel.

Posted by: Uncle Bmore | July 9, 2008 9:55 PM

haha good point. HTS became Comcast sportsnet. That whole channel was orioles. This area whines about everything uncle bmore let it go

Posted by: big g | July 10, 2008 12:55 AM

Question: They move the camera to a better position and the Nationals demand it be moved back. Was a reason given, or is it a case of "do it because I said so" (which more than a few fans claim to be victims of when it comes to water bottles, empty seats and leaving as soon as the game is over, etc.)?

Posted by: Iceman | July 10, 2008 12:18 PM

Why blame the messenger? DC was never going to support this team....developers only wanted to legitimize DC's "last frontier." Put a team in a new stadium in a blighted area clean up an area for hotels, condos, apts., restaurants. There was little interest in the developers couldn't care less about the team. Leave MASN alone...they're doing fine. The grass-roots support was never there.

Posted by: Harold | July 11, 2008 12:35 PM

How can you say the support is not there when we draw the MLB average attendance? Ridiculous argument, Harold.

The TV guides do not list the game. Only true fans know that MASN2 is showing the Nats game and not US SENATE as it was showing AGAIN LAST NIGHT. FIX THE DANG COMCAST GUIDES!

Posted by: Eric | July 11, 2008 12:50 PM

Seriously, who (besides me occasionaly) watches US SENATE???

Posted by: Eric | July 11, 2008 12:51 PM

I will complain about not being able to find the games on MASN. Between watching at home on Comcast (3 channels) or finding it on a dish system in a bar (of course it wasn't already on, I have to ask for it, and it's usually buried somewhere in the 600s), the number of channels MASN could be on is astronomical. Also, I got on the MASN website during spring training to see the season's telecast schedule, and of course it had been most recently updated the previous year. How's that for getting the word out?

Posted by: Eric | July 11, 2008 1:04 PM

their are 3 stations broadcasting the games and it seems different everynight.

Posted by: "there" are | July 11, 2008 5:57 PM

To those of you who are dreaming that a fan base is here when you can't half fill a brand-new park....just wait a year or two for any novelty to wear off...then the attendance and cable viewership will be even LOWER. Come to think of it...the place wasn't even filled for game ONE to open the park. That dog just won't hunt....
Never has,,,never will.

Posted by: Harold | July 12, 2008 5:56 PM

So how is it that Orioles fans can find MASN and MASN2 but Nationals fans can't? And if MASN had more Nationals chat shows on, those people who don't tune in for the actual games will start to watch?
Logic please.

Posted by: bowiemd1 | July 16, 2008 3:53 PM

read today that there were very few who were viewing the Nats on TV. I want to share with you a meeting I had last month with a Nats fan in the Charleston WV airport. I approached him since he was wearing a Nats hat and so was I. We chatted non stop about the team for 10 minutes. It was cut short by my 2 year old granddaugher who was running out the door. Never got his name, but we could have talked for hours! Both loved the Nats and both watched on Direct TV. I am sure there are thousands out there who continue to view the gameS. Love them, getting ready to stay up and watch us get back at the Giants!
Keep up the good work, the times they will be a changing!

Posted by: John Shimp | July 22, 2008 10:42 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2010 The Washington Post Company