By Alana Pelosi

On Tuesday, the Mets announced that despite speculation, the name Citi Field stays. Citigroup says that none of the $45 billion bailout package will go toward the price tag of the stadium, but many believe that $400 million could be spent better elsewhere. Like towards all the job cuts Citigroup is making.

While corporate sponsorship is commonplace throughout the league, many ballparks manage to stand without it. The Yankees and Dodgers most notably play in stadiums bearing their own monikers; the newer ballparks are doing the same. After spending their first three seasons in RFK stadium, the league’s newcomer, the Washington Nationals, became homeowners when they opened the gates to Nationals Park for the 2008 season. In 2012, Floridians will be greeted with two stadiums aptly named, Rays Ballpark and Marlins Ballpark.

While many companies like AT&T, PNC Bank and Petco see naming rights as a responsible advertising strategy and getting their names promoted, Citigroup’s name is already out there. And while the contract they signed with the Mets is indeed binding, it is starting to reflect negatively on both sides.

Prior to corporate sponsors, parks often where named after location, like Cleveland Stadium, and team owners, like Ebbets Field. There may not be room for two name-bearing stadiums in the five boroughs, but it may be time for the Mets to start rethinking their options. Queens Ballpark and Wilpon Field might not have a bad ring to them after all.