Skip to content

The Braves own the Nationals. It must be true, Wikipedia said so.

Apr 15, 2014, 4:00 PM EDT

At least it did for a while on Sunday evening and Monday morning. From Fox Sports South:

A sweep at the hands of the Braves has apparently promoted an ownership change for the Nationals.

On the franchise’s Wikipedia page, owner has been changed to Atlanta Braves, a tongue-in-cheek nod to the fact that the Braves have won five of six games against the National League East rivals and 18 of the last 25.

The photographic evidence, such as it was until it was changed back:


Frankly, I think giving them the NL East crown as the Expos in 1981 is more dubious than naming the Braves their owners was. They had the best record in the second half of that strike-shortened split-season. Overall they had the second best record.

  1. tbird05 - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:09 PM

    Don’t get me wrong, I am loving every minute of the recent beatings the Braves have put on the Nationals, but I remember pretty much every year prior to 2013. They had their turn, now it’s our turn. It also makes it that much better when the Nats keep saying things like “We are better than them…”

  2. johnnysoda - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:09 PM

    Well, officially, they were the co-NL East champions that year. You don’t have to agree with it (I don’t), but that’s the way it is in the record books.

  3. David Proctor - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:14 PM

    Vandalizing wikipedia isn’t cool or funny. Maybe that makes me lame…

    • El Bravo - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:16 PM

      Lame? No. Just uncool and not funny.

      • emdash01 - Apr 15, 2014 at 5:05 PM

        If there’s anything that’s cutting edge and cool, it’s Wikipedia-based humor.

    • daveitsgood - Apr 15, 2014 at 6:00 PM

      Considering Wikipedia is user-edited for factual correctness, somebody was just trying to make sure that the Natinals page had the correct information. Not seeing the issue here?

      • provguard - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:55 PM

        Maybe NBC????

  4. El Bravo - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:15 PM


  5. brandotho - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:21 PM

    “They had the best record in the second half of that strike-shortened split-season. Overall they had the second best record.”

    Yeah, the Reds had the best overall record. I think they used to hang a banner for that despite the fact they didn’t make the playoffs that year. The Expos did too in 1994

  6. recoveringcubsfan - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:22 PM

    Those 6 games are truly definitive. Why bother playing the rest of the season? Nats should just quit, because it would be awful for Craig if they, for one example, happened to spank the Braves for the majority of the remaining games. That would be so embarrassing. This kind of smugness never, ever comes back to haunt the people who revel in it!

    • tbird05 - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:34 PM

      Kind of like its kicking the Nats in the butt right now? I get it, every dog has his day…and the Braves will eventually have another tough stretch against the Nats, but in the meantime…I’m reveling in it.

  7. stex52 - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:39 PM

    If that doesn’t put the curse on the Barves, nothing will. Nothing like big April talk to lead to a summer of regret.

    • realgone2 - Apr 15, 2014 at 6:06 PM

      Yup because the big april they had last year didn’t amount to anything either? right? Right?!

  8. schmedley69 - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:41 PM

    Yes, the Phillies had the best overall record in the NL East in 1981. It’s about time they were recognized as the division champs. Thanks, Craig.

    • dodger88 - Apr 15, 2014 at 5:08 PM

      No, that would be the Cardinals. Combined winning percentage of .578, better than the Spos and Phils. Without the split, the Cards take the NL east division. Same for the Reds, whose combined winning percentage was .611 and best in the NL West (best in MLB too).

      • schmedley69 - Apr 15, 2014 at 5:28 PM

        Damn you and your facts!

  9. Francisco (FC) - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:42 PM

    This isn’t the first time. I’m pretty sure this has happened before.

  10. Kevin Gillman - Apr 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM

    Danny Espinoza STILL believes his Nationals are better than Braves.

    • NatsLady - Apr 15, 2014 at 6:38 PM

      Espinosa. Fixed it.

      • Kevin Gillman - Apr 16, 2014 at 3:04 PM

        My apoligies, Danny Espinosa. :)

  11. chiadam - Apr 15, 2014 at 5:07 PM


    fixed it.

  12. nymets4ever - Apr 15, 2014 at 6:49 PM

    Screw the Nats and the Braves…let’s go METS!

  13. renaado - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:02 PM

    No wonder I love wikipedia.

    • aresachaela - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:20 PM

      What is that it?!

      • renaado - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:26 PM

        Huh?? Yeah, well if your talking other net related stuffs I love all of em lol..

      • aresachaela - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:31 PM


      • renaado - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:48 PM

        Yes yes.. If it ever existed.

  14. provguard - Apr 15, 2014 at 9:56 PM

    Who do you trust more NBC or Wikipedia??? Just inquiring…..

  15. campcouch - Apr 15, 2014 at 10:20 PM

    oh no,you said Braves! Riot!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3150)
  2. G. Stanton (2544)
  3. M. Teixeira (2478)
  4. H. Olivera (2399)
  5. Y. Cespedes (2375)
  1. J. Fernandez (2345)
  2. K. Medlen (2176)
  3. Y. Puig (2122)
  4. G. Perkins (2082)
  5. J. Eickhoff (2058)