I know this probably doesn't concern you (considering this is a baseball blog), but DC United couldn't move to FedEx Field at Jack Kent Cook Stadium. It doesn't meet the minimum-size standards for a sanctioned league game. It use to barely meet the minimum standards, but since Danny installed the two rows of "dream seats" a couple of years ago it's no longer wide enough to play soccer...at least not using professional or international standards.

Anyways...the analogy to Fenway is flawed. They'd build a stadium in Boston if Fenway wasn't in the middle of an already congested area. They can't easily (or cheaply) find enough property without moving to a temporary facility for a couple of years (to knock down Fenway & rebuild a new stadium at the same location) or move out of the city (and that's not happening). And with the SCOTUS considering an eminent domain case right now...they'll probably going to loose they only option to obtain a downtown stadium. However, they can still compete because their fans will pay the extremely high ticket prices, sell out every game, buy a ton of merchandise, and the team almost controls the entire New England TV & radio area.

None of this holds true in DC. They have the land...heck, if they didn't already have a plot of land, they could just build a new stadium in lot 8 next to the existing stadium without too much difficulty. They don't have several generations of fans who are willing to sit and watch a game in small seats with poor sight lines, without any of the many amenities that a new stadium provides. As a general rule, DC fans are fickle and have been known to more readily support their real home-town teams when they arrive to play and not their adopted city teams (just ask Caps, Wizards or Baltimore fans when the Sox & Yankees are in town). They also have split media market and limited control of TV revenue. If you add in that RFK has no luxury box seating to offset other financial losses, it becomes readily apparent that they need a new stadium.