Better yet, can you say Baltimore United?!

I am neither for or against your argument here however I would rather go see a Capitals game any day of the week. Soccer is as exciting unless your playing.

However before you write that the DC United have better home attendance than the Caps you might want to rethink that and check your numbers. Yes in 2008 the United had an average of 19,835 and the Capitals averaged 18,097 you don't take into account the number of tickets available. The United play in a stadium which for soccer has 56,692 seats available while the verizon center has 18,277 seats for hockey games. If you do the math I would say the Capitals attendence is comparibly better.

Tman, RFK only seats approximately 20,000 for MLS (United) soccer games. If they open up the upper deck (which is very rare), it can hold 45,000.

Your much higher numbers are from way back before it was reconfigured for the Nationals.

The math might still be bad due to the higher numbers of games that the Caps play vs. United, but not for the reason you state :-)

But United's stadium can be used for so much more, the MD Stadium Authority estimated between 50-65 events - only about 30 of them soccer games, which is about right when you look at the other new MLS Stadiums.

DC United should get that soccer stadium in Prince George's County, BUT only on one condition. That being Baltimore getting its own 30,000-seat facility for soccer and lacrosse with a retractable dome and located within the city limits and convenient walking distance from public transportation. The Pimlico location would be a good idea. Otherwise, DC United is on its own.

GMan, I'd much prefer an MLS expansion franchise for Baltimore, thank you.

Tman, wouldn't want to get into an argument about whose attendance is 'better' , but will point out that RFK upper deck is closed for soccer so attendance caps out at about 30K.

Tha main point though, if you're living in Prince Georges county your council voted to say "no, we don't want the state to spend state money to find out if a stadium would be a moneymaker for our county." As a public servant how can you justify that?

Peter, I think you've hit on the often-missing rational middle ground in public debate. It absolutely right to raise questions about spending public money -perhaps ownership needs to chip in more than 25%. However, the reflexive dismissal of a study of the soccer stadium seems awfully narrow minded.

Tman - I appreciate your point about the Caps having great support and nearly filling the building.

However, I believe the comparison to the Caps was to make DCU's attendance look good, too, not to say the Caps are lagging in attendance. I don't think it's either/or.

Also, since you brought up checking numbers, the capacity at RFK was reduced when bleachers were removed when the baseball team came in for three years. It's now about 45k.

And Peter, there are six stadia primarily for MLS in the US (LA, Salt Lake, Denver, Dallas, Chicago, Columbus areas) with two more under construction in the NY and Philly areas.
The league has another in Toronto, too.

The other thing is that nobody seems aware of the fact that Maryland taxes stadiums at more than double the rate of all other business ventures. (An extra 6% on top of the sales tax). DC United was proposing to pay 25% in rent, and have the rest be paid by the tax.