I would say that at least that you are not the tigers who are 0-7 on the season at least we won three games this year and they beat the braves and almost swept the phillies.

Were *you* there, David?

Wow, way to jump to conclusions after two games. Can we have a couple games (or a month or two) where game time temperature is above 50 degrees before making a judgement on attendance?

Oh, and your own Nats beat guy reported that season ticket holders number 18,000--so a crowd of 20,000 probably means most of the season ticket holders did go to the game, but there wasn't much of a walk-up crowd.

"...mildly chilly weather?" Were you anywhere near DC yesterday?!?!? Jeeziz, you make it sound like all you needed was a sweatshirt! Yesterday, and today for that matter, was not a day to be at an outdoor sporting event...on TV, it looked more like 10K, and those were hearty souls, all of them.

I found it disturbing that Kasten was expecting only around 20K for the weekend vs. the Braves. Methinks he was low-balling himself.

It was 49 degrees y'day and baseball fans complain. It'll be 85 in July. What will be your excuse then? Yet, football fans go out in the snow, rain, etc.

I was at the game last night and was disappointed at the crowd size. For as long as we yelled and screamed for a team and only 20,000 turn out? It's fine with me. I go to 60 plus games a year. Fewer people means shorter lines. However, I don't think you can just blame just the fans. The Lerners and Stan Kasten deserve a lot of the blame. Compared to RFK, tickets and food are too expensive, and compared to other teams the on-field product stinks. There's only one star. Ryan Zimmerman. And he ain't that good.

Don't forget about the NCAA title game. I'm sure plenty of people skipped the Nats game to watch that.

Uh, the majority of the economic development is coming whether there are 40,000 fans there or there are 4,000 fans there. The massive new city that is being built around the stadium is coming regardless of stadium attendance.

That massive new city is where the real $$ is - the actual money from ticket sales and such is just gravy.

So please, Washington Post, stop your hatin' on the Nats Stadium and just enjoy it. It's clear the WP has hated the idea of baseball in DC since day one. But now that it's here could you lighten up a tiny bit and perhaps put off your doom and gloom assessment until after more than the first couple of games?

Concerns about attendance are premature. I wouldnt have gone to that game if I had season tickets, and I certainly wouldnt have bought a ticket if I didn't . The weather was terrible and lots of teams have poor crowds this time of year (Cincinnati last night had 14,000, and they've had baseball for over 100 years).

Attendance will come along as the team and weather improves.

That said, I do think the pricing is too aggressive for a team still trying to build a following. I thought so when they first announced the prices, and I think the relatively low season ticket sales confirm it.

But last night proves nothing. As the other poster said, the numbers indicate that most season ticket holders did, in fact attend, and if there were ANY walkup buyers they deserve a medal.

I am a partial season ticket holder (20 games). Our tickets didn't apply to that game, so a few thousand of us weren't there. I think its way too premature to harp on attendance numbers. A good marker may be the All-Start break, but two games? Too early.

Just like all the wonderful coverage after the Nats on-the-field 3-0 start. All's well until you lose 5 straight.

Baseball is a marathon. Its OK to check in on the numbers every now and then, but the final tally, after 162 games, is what really counts.

Camden Yard was a tough ticket to get in the 90s. The Jake sold out 455 straight games from 95-01 and was pretty much at capacity from its opening in 94 for most of the next decade. How badly do Nats fans really want this thing? Doesn't it need to have at least some novelty status before wearing off?