Nice to dream about such gestures of magnanimity, but I reckon it's just that, a dream. Hafner is hardly alone in being MLB player made millionaire thanks to long-term contract after ONE good year (in Hafner's case, 2006). Sizemore is another, of course, although I don't think he has been faking his injuries. Still and all, foolish for FO to have offered him $5M for 2012, only to find him in whirlpool bath instead of in center field. I do feel sorry for Sizemore because he has/had all the talent in the world, and I don't think he is a malingerer. Just rotten luck. Had he remained healthy, he could have become a league MVP. Instead, he will be remembered -- if at all -- as "the Indian who wore Willy Mays's number and, like Willy, played centerfield." Too bad.

Miami just opened a billion-dollar new stadium and seats are still empty. Maybe the fans there hate Ozzie Guillen as much as I do. Similar situation in Tampa. Good team year after year, empty seats year after year. IMHO, they never should have awarded ANY franchise in Florida. Too many retirees, many of whom would rather drive around in their golf carts and be happy they shot round of 150 (for nine holes). Others find escalators and ramps unfriendly to walkers and gurneys. Many others are dead, so at least they have a valid excuse for not attending.

Indians should move to Columbus as well as the Browns. The market there is twice the size of Cleveland. 393,806 - Jul 2011
Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Columbus Ohio
797,434 - Jul 2011
Source: U.S. Census Bureau

The Browns would fill the Horseshoe every Sunday and with that revenue maybe they could be a contender.

The Indians would also draw more fans and more revenue.

Both of these teams could also keep their NE Ohio fan base with this move.

The Browns draw just fine in Cleveland. It doesn't matter where the Indians play, you're not going to draw huge crowds unless a few more good players are bought and improves the team. The hockey team in Columbus is a prime example for you, their attendance was 27 out of 30 teams. If you don't put a good product out there, you won't draw. It has been proven with the Cavs, Browns and Indians, when they do well so does their attendance.

I can't disagree with you on any of that. What i was thinking was taking away the small market arguement from the Dolans. Plus the Browns with 40k more attendance.

Sad to see how drastically Cleveland's population has ebbed. In 1950, Cleveland was sixth-largest city in nation. What it is now, SIXTY-sixth? Whodathunk Columbus would ever be almost twice size of Cleveland.

The "small-market" rationale is bogus. No shortage of examples of professional sports teams in small markets that enjoy success financially ... Oakland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Tampa are a few examples. It's complete poppycock and fans ought to call out owners who lean on it.

It is too bad, yes, think the last good year for Sizemore was 2007.

Rotten luck, rotten shame. Had he remained healthy, I believe he'd have been among best all-around outfielders in history of franchise. That said, nobody climbed fences like Larry Doby! :-)

But the fact that the Browns usually draw better than the Indians doesn't support the idea that all the Indians have to do is put a quality product on the field if they want to draw fans. The Browns have not had a quality product on the field since they came back. The Indians, despite all of their ups and downs, have a better winning % than the Browns do. The fact that the Browns draw and the Indians don't simply shows that this is a football town first and whoever is the hotter team between the Cavs and Indians will rank #2. That's just how it is here, and how it's always been EXCEPT for the stretch of time in the 90's when the Browns were gone.

I agree, it's a football town and the Cavs and Indians will never be #1. There are more than enough baseball fans in this area to support a successful Indians team though. The attendance and team success relationship is even noticeable this year. The crowds were starting to get larger before the losing streak. The last few games have been back to how it looked at the start of the season. There is no way you would see empty seats in the lower level against Boston if our team didn't tank. I think most of us can agree that constant sellouts are unlikely. But, I do believe a very good team would regularly draw in the low 30k's.

"There are more than enough baseball fans in this area to support a successful Indians team though. The attendance and team success relationship is even noticeable this year. The crowds were starting to get larger before the losing streak."

I want to agree with you...but if that were the case, we would have been better than 21st in attendance in 2007 when we won 96 games and were in first place basically all season.

We were 21st in attendance but we did average 28.5k fans per home game, not great but not far from 30k+. I went to games that year as many of us did and it was the same story, different year. The slow start of attendance early in the year killed the overall average.

That isn't a realistic statement about 07. Everyone knows ticket sales are most directly effected by the previous season. We stunk in 06. Season ticket sales (the foundation of any franchise's attendance) were up in 08. We stunk in 08, so no one went to the games and people didn't renew their season tickets. The ones who did def got rid of them after the 09 fire sale so that the poor dolans didn't lose money. You have to put a consistent product on the field (winning one) to build up season ticket sales. Indians don't do that. This is on ownership, not the fans.

Ownership had their chance. They brought in more fans in 07 than they anticipated and they didn't do anything to improve the team. They signed: Jamey Carroll and Kobyashi.

Attendance is most positively impacted from season ticket sales. Those are typically based off of the previous season's success or failure and confidence in ownership to produce a product worth investing thousands of dollars into (something the Dolans don't even do...think about it, when you buy a ticket/merch/beer/hotdog/brauts, you are giving Larry and Paul Dolan money to pay players and employees. They don't use their own money, they use yours....something to think about).

anyways. That is why attendance wouldn't be "amazing" in 07, but it does explain why season ticket sales and pre-season single ticket sales were up prior to the 08 season. Then they stunk, so people stopped going to the games (because the Dolans didn't do anything with the extra money they got from the unexpected attendance boost and extra income from the playoffs and playoff money from the league).

Okay, but if it's all about season ticket sales...wouldn't our total attendance have gone up in 2006 (after we won 92 games in 2005) and in 2008 (after we won 96 in 2007)? If it was as simple as what you're saying, fans would have been buying season tickets PRIOR to 2006 and PRIOR to 2008. Therefore, our attendance records should have been up in 06 and 08 right? Nope. 23rd in 08 and 25th in 06.

It's such a catch-22 in baseball if you're not a major market team. There is absolutely no guarantee in cities like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Tampa, etc. that if you put a winner on the field, your attendance will go up to support your spending. That's why I truly feel that the only way we see a consistent winner here is if the Dolan family either sells the team to an owner that CAN spend at a deficit for a few years in order to improve the team and build the fan base back up, or at least look for some minority stake holders to invest in the company and buy up 50% of it or something.

" That is why attendance wouldn't be "amazing" in 07, but it does explain why season ticket sales and pre-season single ticket sales were up prior to the 08 season. Then they stunk, so people stopped going to the games (because the Dolans didn't do anything with the extra money they got from the unexpected attendance boost and extra income from the playoffs and playoff money from the league)."

But this is a direct contradiction of the idea that if you put a winner on the field in one year, your attendance numbers will go up the next. According to you, season tickets is what it's all about. If you buy season tickets, those ticket sales show up in attendance regardless if you go to one game or 80. So even though we stunk in 08, our season ticket sales still should have been large enough to put us higher than 23rd in attendance.

Becuase we stunk and no one went to the games after mid june-july. Sure if 100 people buy season tickets they are on the hook for the whole year, but I am not going to go to a game if they are horrible (like they were in 06 and 08).

Pre -Season (season and single game) ticket sales for the 08 season were up from the previous year's pre season ticket sales. (i don't remember about 06).

Maybe i didn't explain myself clearly before. We had more tickets sold for the 08 season before game #1, than we did the 07 season, before game #1.

don't worry, i am 100% right. Basically every person who understands ticket sales in sports agrees with me. It's cool, don't fight it...just lay back, accept it for it's correctness, and take it for the pleasurable experience that it is.

here read these, maybe you'll get a more clear pictures

http://www.ohio.com/sports/indians/sheldon-ocker-indians-fans-lack-of-trust-in-ownership-keeps-season-ticket-sales-attendance-down-1.306748

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-01/sports/sns-mct-sheldon-ocker-win-or-lose-object-of-owning-a-20120701_1_tribe-season-ticket-sales-indians

"don't worry, i am 100% right. Basically every person who understands ticket sales in sports agrees with me. It's cool, don't fight it...just lay back, accept it for it's correctness, and take it for the pleasurable experience that it is."

LOL LOL you don't have to be an idi0t about it, I am trying to have an intelligent conversation with you. Maybe that is my mistake for thinking you are capable of such conversation.

I know you think you understand everything there is to understand about attendance, but I can assure you--you do not. Why? Because nobody does. Attendance figures and drawing fans is an area of this sport that we still really do not understand a great deal. I actually had the pleasure of listening to a panel discussion about this topic at Boston U a week or so ago led by Dave Cameron. It was an excellent discussion that raised a ton of questions.

All I'm saying is that it's not as simple as "put a winner on the field and the fans will show up." If it was that simple, our season ticket sales would have been huge going into the 2006 and 2008 seasons. Maybe they increased as you say, but they couldn't have increased very much, because our total attendance figures were lower in 08 than they were in 07.

In my opinion, it's going to take at least 4-5 years of consistent winning--playoff teams--to really bring fans back to the ballpark. And by "bring the fans back" I mean an attendance at least in the top half of the league. In order to win 4-5 years in a row, in this day and age, I'd estimate it'll take a payroll in the top 15 in the league as well. What this means for the Dolans (or anybody perspective buyer) is that they have to be willing to endure 4-5 years of low attendance (and therefore low merchandise, vendor sales, etc.) while carrying a relatively high payroll before they can expect to see a real return on their investment. And even at that point, there is no guarantee we will ever pack the stadium.

I don't believe the Dolans are willing to do that. And I would wager that most millionaires, or even billionaires, would not be willing to do that either.