Mac Engel’s June 26 sports column (“New ballpark mostly about Bob and Ray”) contained some very interesting information about the Texas Rangers and the Arlington city fathers pushing to build a new ballpark.
Engel raised the possibility that the billion-dollar ballpark is not much more than an increase in the net worth of co-owners Bob Simpson and Ray Davis and that they will, in all probability, sell the franchise within a year or so.
Engel seems to think it doesn’t look like such good deal for Arlington residents or Rangers fans.
Then, in the Opinion section of the same edition, I read the commentary by Richard Greene, who seems to think a new ballpark is the best thing for Arlington since bottled beer.
Greene tried to sell his argument that Dallas is lusting after the Rangers and Arlington should placate the owners and build the new park.
After reading both articles, I agree with Engel’s argument. This seems like a bad deal for the residents of Arlington.
The present ballpark is beautiful and a wonderful place for baseball.
A winning team will draw the fans. Increased ticket prices and increased parking fees will not.
Bob James, Denton
Engel’s evaluation was spot on. Building another stadium when we have one that’s paid for is a scam.
Attendance is determined not by temperature but by the quality of the team.
St. Louis is just as hot, and its stadium is filled because the Cardinals are good.
Greene’s column resorted to the time-honored playbook: When the message is uncomfortable, attack the messenger.
When Greene finally discussed the salient issues, he suggested that the reason The Dallas Morning News questions a ripoff of Arlington taxpayers is that it owns land near where a Dallas ballpark could be located.
Arlington taxpayers will be making Greene’s rich buddies richer. Once again, Greene proves that he lives in a fact-free universe.
He is claims there is an evil conspiracy behind every rock and under every bed.
The fact is that the Rangers don’t need a new ballpark. Just ask the standing-room-only crowd June 25 for the game with the Boston Red Sox with temps in the 90s.
Walter Slaven, Arlington
Because “civic pride” and “national visibility” appear to be two of proponents’ most compelling arguments for keeping the Rangers in Arlington and justifying Arlington’s share of the cost of a new stadium, how about negotiating a name that includes “Arlington”?
Richard L. Cole,
As an Arlington resident, let me clear the air. Yes, Dallas was interested to see if the Rangers would consider relocating the team there.
The only reason that Arlington feels the need to build a new roofed stadium is so we don’t lose the Rangers to Dallas, or any other city in America.
To lose the Rangers would cause a negative economic impact the city doesn’t want to endure, and I agree.
That’s it. We don’t want to lose the Rangers.
How can I explain the reason for building a new roofed stadium any simpler?
Drive New York Avenue from Park Row to Arkansas Lane at the legal speed limit of 35 mph. For safety’s sake, keep a tight grip on the wheel.
Now tell me again about the extra pocket change Arlington taxpayers have available to build another baseball stadium.
While we’re on the subject, be good enough to explain why we didn’t get it right the first time.
Full disclosure: I have been a Rangers fan for a long time, and hope to continue.
I am sure I can enjoy a telecast, even if it originates from downtown Dallas.
Dave Taylor, Arlington