Orioles and Nats: Beltway Battle?
Jason Bergmann is on me to get those questions and send them to him, so I'll try to do that during the game. Meanwhile, here's your Orioles lineup:
Chris Roberson -- 9
Freddie Bynum -- 6
Luke Scott -- 7
Mike Constanzo -- 5
Scott Moore -- 3
Adam Jones -- 8
Matt Wieters -- DH
Guillermo Quiroz -- 2
Eider Torres -- 4
Daniel Cabrera -- 1
Other pitchers you'll see for the Nats after John Patterson: Dennis TAnkersley, Ray King, Jon Rauch.
While we're at it: Do you think there's a Nats-O's rivalry? If not, will there ever be?
By Barry Svrluga |
March 1, 2008; 12:43 PM ET
Previous: A newsy start to Saturday |
Next: That Shawn Hill arm soreness? Not normal
Posted by: Positively Half St. | March 1, 2008 12:49 PM
I do not think that there is a real rivalry. It needs time to really develop, because too many people (myself included) followed the Orioles.
Will there be? I think so. First off, the ownership issue is the main reason one is developing right now. Secondly, once the current roster disappears from the O's (aided by their fire sale. Roberts and Mora maybe the last two important ones to go), then people will be able to focus more and more on the Nats as their favorite O's players retire or disappear.
Posted by: NattyDelite! | March 1, 2008 12:56 PM
Let me just say this first, growing up in DC I was a huge Ripken and Orioles fan. But I would say after a game in which Jeffrey Hammonds hit a game-winning single in the bottom of the ninth in '05 I have become a strict Nats fan, and I've actually grown to really dislike the Orioles. I remember one of my friends telling me midway through 05, "I think it's time to start not liking the Orioles." Right now I don't think O's and Nats fans have it for each other, but me and my friends went to every game of the Natties sweep of the O's last year and we're letting the O's fans have it. Best line of that series:
"Brady Anderson used to rollerblade to baseball games!!!" (It's true).
Posted by: Nats - O's Rivalry | March 1, 2008 12:58 PM
I for one can't stand the O's, but it is more to do with the way MASN/Angelos have treated the Nats. It may develope into something like the Mets/Yankees or the Cubs/White Sox rivalies because they are in the same city. However, if they ever meet in the World Series look out.
Posted by: BRothbart | March 1, 2008 12:58 PM
At beautiful HSCS, three rows in front of Barry sand the other scribes. There really isn't a bad seat in the park.
No sight of Capn Leatherpants yet.
Posted by: Trapper John | March 1, 2008 1:01 PM
Noticing a big number 10 to the right of the scoreboard on the webcam. Anybody know what that is for?
Posted by: NatPark | March 1, 2008 1:05 PM
I think for those of us who didn't grow up in the area, the rivalry is probably more real just because we didn't grow up idolizing Cal.
But in time I can't imagine it wont' become heated especially if both teams start playing better.
For me personally, the way MLB catered to Angelos and his cry baby attitude was enough for me.
Looking forward to the Bergmann responses...
Keep it up Barry
Posted by: CB | March 1, 2008 1:06 PM
I think how old you are helps determine the rivalry. For me, I'm old eneough to remember the Senators vs. the Orioles, and how the Orioles used to regularly thrash the Nats back then. I've hated the Orioles all my life, but have been a fan of a few of the former players, such as Ripken, Robinson (both of them) Palmer and such.
Posted by: SC Nats Fan | March 1, 2008 1:06 PM
One way animosity, yes. Rivalry, no.
I'm not sure there are any interleague rivals outside of NY. NY had a history of NL/AL world series, so NL fans disliked the NYY and carried that through to the Mets.
To have a rivalry, both sides have to enjoy when the other loses. I don't get the sense that Sun readers on their boards enjoy seeing the Nats fail or write in ripping the Nats. Here, I think most of the animosity is directed at Angelos. At most, there is one way animosity (why are you covering the O's, etc . . .).
There is more of a rivalry with the Phillies and Mets than the Os.
Posted by: jon lower case | March 1, 2008 1:08 PM
I doubt there will ever be a rivalry between the players of the two teams, but there is already a strong resentment among some fans for the other. While they both resent the other for having to share media coverage, the share one thing in common -- a mutual hatred for Peter Angelos.
Me personally, I gre up an Orioles fan. I thought it would be hard to give that up, but Angelos, steroids, and losing has helped me sever my ties to the Orioles. Now it is so hard to watch them play poorly that I can't see myself ever feeling strong sentiments for them again.
Posted by: NatBisquit | March 1, 2008 1:11 PM
Growing up in NOVA after the Senators left town, I rooted against the Os even as I went to a couple games a year at Memorial Stadium. Now that DC finally has a team, I root hard for the Nats to finish better than the birds, and so far we hold a 3-0 lead in MASN Cup championships.
As far as CB's comments about Cal, why does everyone always focus on Bonds huge head and never mention that Cal's blew up like a balloon after he started hanging out with Brady?
Posted by: PowerBoater69 | March 1, 2008 1:17 PM
I think it is hard (even for a Born-in-Washington-Washingtonian) for me to feel anything but respect for the Orioles up through the early 80's (and I grew up a Senators Fan... Those Nats did plenty wrong). The Orioles then were the epitome of excellence... Since then, they've become the epitome of greed, and I have all sorts of reasons to wish ill on them... and every Nats win against them in the Beltway Series furthers the rivalry, in my mind.
So, I guess as long as Darth Vader runs the show in Baltimore, I think it's a rivalry.
Posted by: Wigi | March 1, 2008 1:19 PM
the only rivalry that exists is between Washington and MASN (Mean Angelos Screws (the) Nationals. Two middling-to-bad teams that play only a half dozen times annually during the regular season because they're in different leagues does not a rivalry make. BTW - instead of the inane "Battle of the Beltways," can we come up with something better like the Parkway Classic?
Posted by: natsscribe | March 1, 2008 1:29 PM
I grew up a Cards fan, they're my Dad's team, family moved to DC I followed the O's and at one time though I was a fan but then the Nats came and it's Nat's 100%. The Nat's are my team, even my Dad's got to love that.. As far as rivalry, because of Free agency in all sports rivalries are dying. There are a few left in Baseball
NYY & Red Sox, Cards & Cubs.
O's and Nats, I think not...
Stop the O in the National anthem please...
Posted by: NiceNat | March 1, 2008 1:29 PM
Barry,
Regarding the Orioles' lineup, aren't they obligated to bring players people outside of Baltimore have actually HEARD of for exhibition games? I thought each team was supposed to bring at least three regulars on their traveling squads.
Posted by: natsscribe | March 1, 2008 1:34 PM
As much as Nats fans hate Angelos, it's nothing compared to what O's fans feel for him. That being said for everyone whining about Angelos, what Kent Cooke did to Baltimore in football way even worse.
Honestly, I like MASN it allows an Oriole fan living in PG county to see all the O's games and a Nats fan in Howard Co. to do the same. Something that's currently true in football only for the Redskins (and seriously no one in Baltimore likes the Redskins at all). Not being able to see Ravens games when your 30 miles from the stadium is just nuts, be thankful that's not happening in baseball.
Here in NC though Time warner cable is refusing to air MASN unless they can do it on digital. This is something that should annoy both Nats and O's fans. As there is no way to watch any O's or Nats game (and no I don't want to have to pay even more to the cable companies for the 10 channels I actually want to watch).
Posted by: seak from Balto | March 1, 2008 1:36 PM
@seak,
I think what so annoys Nats fans about Peter the Grate is that he was never honest as to why he didn't want a team in Washington. It wasn't about that "there are no baseball fans in Washington - that's a fiction." What it is about is that Angelos wasn't worried about whether DC would support a team - but whether is economically depressed city could provide adequate crowds. As much as I hate to admit, I wandered up the BWP a few times each year just to satisfy my baseball quotient. And I always used to hear the Baltimorons grousing about "all those fans from Washington who come here." Well, now that we have our own team - which BTW has won more games the past three years than the Os Nos - Baltimorons can fill all of those good seats still available at OPCY.
Posted by: natsscribe | March 1, 2008 1:42 PM
Do I think there is a Nats/Os rivalry? NO.
Do I think there ever will be? NO.
Posted by: Pete/Gaithersburg | March 1, 2008 3:47 PM
Not having grown up in the area, I had no attachment to either the Os or the Senators. I've embraced the Nats from the moment they got here, and I have animosity towards the Os because of their owner's efforts to block and later hamstring my team (grrrr). Here's to another year of Nats dominance in the MASN Cup contest!
Posted by: natsfan1a | March 1, 2008 4:10 PM
I'm a former Expos fan who lives in Nebraska, so for me there is no rivalry with the Orioles. I'm much less fond of the Braves than the Orange Birds.
Posted by: JT | March 1, 2008 5:00 PM
No, not really. We'll keep pretending there's a rivalry, but it won't stick. I foresee (hope?) there's one with Philly. Same division rivalry makes sense.
Posted by: NatsNut | March 1, 2008 5:07 PM
Can't we all just get along?
Posted by: Unidentified Motorist | March 1, 2008 6:18 PM
I have found over the last 3 years that there is much more bitterness from O's fans towards the Nats than the other way around, at least from those that I encounter. I think it is a combination of anger toward Petey G. and jealousy as our scrappy, low-budget, no-name Nats have somehow been slightly better than the O's each year. And now that they are finally rebuilding and our Nats are improving at lightning speed, watch out!!!
Posted by: Capital Punisher | March 1, 2008 8:20 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.

OK-
Here's my self-serving theory:
The Nats took on a number of problem cases and perceived malcontents. One of them was bound not to work out. That one is Maekawa. All done, full speed ahead.
I have to admit I didn't understand why Bowden was bothering, since Maekawa didn't even have good numbers in Japan.