PSINet Stadium? `I'll tell friends I'm headed for the...


January 29, 1999

PSINet Stadium? `I'll tell friends I'm headed for the Aviary'

PSINet Stadium? I don't think so.

Yeah, the Ravens are going to be paid a lot of money for that name, but fans have to put up with it. It will be very uncomfortable responding to friends and family when they ask, "Where are you going this Sunday?"

"Oh, I'm going to the PSINet."

"The what?"

"The PSINet . . . the stadium, you know . . ."

What a conversation!

Personally, I'm going to tell my friends and family that I am going to the Aviary to see either the O's or Ravens!

Bob Haagenson, Millersville

Kudos to Michael Olesker, for his timely column ("What a crummy name for a football stadium," Jan. 26). At first, I thought I might be the only one to gag at yet another corporate name attached to a football stadium.

Where is this insanity going to end? I mean, in the Baltimore case, it's scarcely defensible, given the amount of public money that has gone for the new stadium.

Call me old-fashioned, but I'll take the names of the grand old NFL stadiums any day: Soldier Field, Lambeau Field, Memorial Stadium, Oakland Coliseum these are places where courageous players left pieces of themselves, commemorated in a setting that inspired greatness.

These soul-less corporate logo-namesare a travesty to everything that means anything, an absolute affront to human deeds.

Phil Stahl, Columbia

Heard that the stadium will be called PSINet Stadium and that the taxpayers will have $105 million of their stolen money returned to them. Oops! Did I say something wrong?

Fred A. Schumann, Timonium

The naming of the football stadium after the highest bidder has rightly touched a nerve in Baltimore. The obvious point that the stadium was publicly funded and should therefore not be privately named is justification for outrage. The entire process of how Baltimore got a team, built a stadium with public funds, then sold out does not demonstrate the best side of an otherwise proud community.

While the Modells and the Ravens organization tout the revolutionary nature of the agreement with PSINet, I wonder if an outstanding opportunity for economic development has been lost.

Naming a football stadium after a corporation could be viewed as a unique bargaining chip for attracting a new business to downtown Baltimore. Had the Modell's demanded that PSINet move its 2,000 employees to Baltimore in exchange for naming the stadium, rather than the huge sum of money exchanged, the full economic development potential of the new football stadium would have been realized.

That sort of deal, not a new Web site, would have been revolutionary.

Stephen D. Sisson, Baltimore

Government investment in stocks a very bad idea

The idea of having the government invest the Social Security trust fund in the stock market is perhaps the craziest of the many to come out of the Clinton administration.

Admittedly, the trust fund's yield could improve materially, but is there any sane person who can't see the opportunity for mischief in the proposal?

For those who can't, all they have to do is look at what the administration calls "targeted tax cuts" that only go to those who take part in programs endorsed by the government.

With billion of dollars to invest, a corrupt administration or a group of ideologically driven bureaucrats could buy stocks in such a way that would allow the government to, in effect, nationalize all, or nearly all, of the Fortune 500 corporations.

What criteria would bureaucrats use to determine into which companies to invest? Would they invest in the evil "big tobacco?" Or "big oil" that pollutes the atmosphere? Or Microsoft, which has been labeled a monopoly? Or the builders of sport utility vehicles, which are out of favor with the administration?

How would such a bureaucracy handle the periodic ups and down of the stock market? Would we beneficiaries continue to receive our benefits regularly?

I don't know the answer to saving Social Security, but giving the government a stake in the stock market, using our money, certainly is not it.

Chuck Frainie, Woodlawn

Keep Carroll Mansion, make it the mayor's home

I was very disappointed to read of the city government's intention to sell the historic Carroll Mansion ("Take Carroll Mansion off the block," Opinion Commentary, Jan. 26).

As a significant link to Baltimore and America's past, it is crucial that this structure be preserved.

One possible solution would be for the city government, with financial assistance from the state or private sector, to restore the mansion and maintain it as the official residence of Baltimore's mayor.

Thomas F. Cotter


Don't-ask, don't-tell policy seemed to work well for all

Every time I write in response to a letter such as that of Ted L. Pearson ("Support of gays, lesbians shows governor's courage", Jan. 14), who wrote in favor of a law prohibiting bias against gays , I stop short of sending it for fear that no one will believe how much I truly sympathize with the plight of homosexuals.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.