New Stadiums: MLB

palindrome

palindrome

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
2,266
Reaction score
117
Oakland A's:
oakbpk01.jpg

oakbpk02.jpg

oakbpk03.jpg

cisco750.jpg


Minnesota Twins:
2_544.jpg

1_148.jpg

mntwinspark02rc6.jpg


New York Mets:
NewMets2.jpg

mets_ballpark_large_03.jpg

mets_ballpark_large_05.jpg

800px-Citi_Field_Construction_7-28-07.jpg


New York Yankees:
nyybpk02.jpg

nyybpk03.jpg

stadium.533.jpg




I did not take any of these pictures. All pictures belong to their respective copyright owners.
 
I personally like the Minnesota stadium the best because it isn't retro.
 
If I understand correctly, the Oakland A's are moving out of Oakland, from an easily BART-accessible location to the middle of nowhere (and no longer in Oakland).

The Twins groundbreaking was supposed to be yesterday, but was postponed for obvious reasons.
 
Which brings up a good point about Minnesota Ron. The stadium was subsidized by the taxpayers for about $387m. Maybe that money should have gone to repairing all the bridges in Minnesota first....
 
Super, and Boston is stuck with Fenway, quaint, but thoroughly embarrasing. We should be replacing its replacement by now.
 
kmp1284 said:
Super, and Boston is stuck with Fenway, quaint, but thoroughly embarrasing. We should be replacing its replacement by now.
Click to expand...
HELL NO! Fenway is the best damn park! If their is one historic thing that Boston has to keep, it is Fenway. Fenway is an amazing ballpark, and every time I go there I can feel the history of it. Maybe it is old and small, but it is still an awesome ballpark, and I really can't see the Sox playing anywhere else.
 
It's a dump, I was just there a few weeks ago and furthermore have been going to ball games there for my entire life. You are right, there(not their) is a lot of history at Fenway, but there is history at the current Yankee Stadium and that history even involves winning. The fact of the matter is, Boston could profitably sustain a much larger ballpark, something like the new Citi Field in Brooklyn. There's only so far a product can go before it goes from quaint and unique to inferior. The money in pro sports doesn't some in the cheap $50 bleacher seats that any Joe Schmoe can get but the suite and premium clubs. Kraft has realized this at Gillette with the well designed suites and Fidelity Clubhouse, but JWH has done nothing except paint the bathroom sized "luxury suites" and open up the former .406 club. I know Fenway's not going anywhere between the Red Sox crazies and historic register folks, but an opportunity for a world class facility is being lost.
 
Well even with a new stadium, we wouldn't have to tear down fenway. It could be rearanged for concerts and such.

Imagine a nice new ballpark on the waterfront. :shock:
 
palindrome said:
Imagine a nice new ballpark on the waterfront. :shock:
Click to expand...

Bingo.

Saving Fenway for concerts might seem ideal, but I think the better bet would be to tear it down for redevelopment. A concert venue is not going to get enough usage to justify the waste of that much space.
 
kmp1284 said:
...JWH has done nothing except paint the bathroom sized "luxury suites" and open up the former .406 club.
Click to expand...
This isn't true at all, and I suspect you know it. They've opened up spaces throughout the ballpark to make it less cramped for fans--among these are the concourse in right field, the first base patio space, the new area this year along the third base line. They've also added new seating options such as the monster seats and the right field roof deck.

Certainly the park has problems--primarily the seats are too cramped and the right field seats face the wrong way. (Though I suspect they have plans to fix this latter issue once they've added more seats in the new upper-deck spaces.) But there is no place in the world I'd rather watch baseball (and, yes, I've been to Camden Yards, AT&T Park, and other new stadiums).

For a long time I felt it needed to be torn down. I even did my graduate thesis working with the previous ownership on new ballpark issues. However, this new ownership group has made me a believer.
 
...

.... i've been to plenty of the popular ball parks across the nation. Most are very nice and comfortable. But NONE was an EXPERIENCE. Are they more 'refined' than fenway? Of course. More comfortable? Yup. Bigger? Definitely. More food choices, and more space? Yes also.

But are they better? I would say no. For the most part, these new stadiums have the feeling of malls, surrounding a baseball diamond. They may be luxuriously comfortable, but for the most part, unless the Red Sox are playing there, they are terribly boring and cookie cutter.

I'd much rather see Sox vs. Devil Rays at Fenway than any other matchup anywhere else.

Fenway is an original, an original that many of these new ballparks try to emulate. To tear it down for another historical disney recreation (and yea, thats what we'd get in boston) would seem shortsighted.

Can fenway be improved? I think so, and i think current ownership has been doing that, and will continue to do so, but to tear it down for the simple desire for a 'new' ballpark is downright unbostonian.

Really, does any diehard red sox fan really want to go to home games somewhere OTHER than the Fens? A ballpark on the waterfront! oh how original. We can even have our very own McCovey Cove. With a nice recreation of the green monster in left (again, I guarantee any new ballpark in boston would have a useless green monster impersonator). Oh, at least there's sure to be plenty of parking. And you know what? The only legitimate reason for a new ballpark (lower ticket prices) would never actually materialize because the cost of these behemoths would keep the team in the red for such a long time, no matter how many luxury boxes they have.... which of course don't exactly attract the average fan anyways....

I'd rather keep my trusty old ballpark than have a spankin' new waterfront ballpark that just further turns boston into anyplace, usa. (of course, that ballpark would be right at home on the SBW, but thats another discussion)
 
Coincidentally enough, here's something from boston.com on the merits of Fenway:

It doesn?t flush

Mike Dee, the Sox chief operating officer, was unaware that Orioles broadcaster Joe Angel had referred to Fenway Park as ??a toilet?? over the weekend.

??Certainly everyone is entitled to his own opinion,?? said Dee, ??but there are a lot of great fans here who have come 300-something consecutive sellouts that would beg to differ with him.

??It?s not a new ballpark. He?s comparing, I?m sure, the creature comforts of a new facility, but there are a lot of new facilities, without question, that lack the character of Fenway Park.

??The great ballparks have both. We?re working hard to improve Fenway.

??I?m disappointed that he would say that. He?s been around a long time. He?s a respected announcer and he?s certainly been here a number of times. Maybe his emotions got the best of him, seeing all the Red Sox fans down in Baltimore.

??I?m from Baltimore. I watched Camden Yards being built. I was a season ticket-holder at Camden Yards. I love Camden Yards. It?s a different flavor of ice cream. Camden Yards is digital, Fenway is classic rock. There?s certainly room for both.??
Click to expand...
taken from the Extra Bases blog.. http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

And lol at the digital-analog comparison (he implied analog even if he didn't say it).
 
merper said:
.... i've been to plenty of the popular ball parks across the nation. Most are very nice and comfortable. But NONE was an EXPERIENCE. Are they more 'refined' than fenway? Of course. More comfortable? Yup. Bigger? Definitely. More food choices, and more space? Yes also.

But are they better? I would say no. For the most part, these new stadiums have the feeling of malls, surrounding a baseball diamond. They may be luxuriously comfortable, but for the most part, unless the Red Sox are playing there, they are terribly boring and cookie cutter.

I'd much rather see Sox vs. Devil Rays at Fenway than any other matchup anywhere else.

Fenway is an original, an original that many of these new ballparks try to emulate. To tear it down for another historical disney recreation (and yea, thats what we'd get in boston) would seem shortsighted.

Can fenway be improved? I think so, and i think current ownership has been doing that, and will continue to do so, but to tear it down for the simple desire for a 'new' ballpark is downright unbostonian.

Really, does any diehard red sox fan really want to go to home games somewhere OTHER than the Fens? A ballpark on the waterfront! oh how original. We can even have our very own McCovey Cove. With a nice recreation of the green monster in left (again, I guarantee any new ballpark in boston would have a useless green monster impersonator). Oh, at least there's sure to be plenty of parking. And you know what? The only legitimate reason for a new ballpark (lower ticket prices) would never actually materialize because the cost of these behemoths would keep the team in the red for such a long time, no matter how many luxury boxes they have.... which of course don't exactly attract the average fan anyways....

I'd rather keep my trusty old ballpark than have a spankin' new waterfront ballpark that just further turns boston into anyplace, usa. (of course, that ballpark would be right at home on the SBW, but thats another discussion)
Click to expand...

AMEN! The perfect description! I feel exactly the same :D
 
I love Fenway park from two standpoints: historical and atmosphere. The Historical aspects of Fenway are great with the Green Monster, the scoreboard, the triangle out in center, the fans close to the action, etc. You don't get the feel of being on top of the game in many other parks.

The atmosphere at Fenway is great, it's probably my favorite aspect of going to a game there. I was at the game tonight with Lester pitching at home for the first time since being diagnosed with cancer and then a come from behind win in the ninth to beat the Rays 2-1...the place was crazy all night. Even in an era where casual fans go to the game just because it's a "cool" thing to do and because it's a place to see and be seen, the place is still rocking and going crazy on every pitch in close games.

Saying that I don't think it's even close to being the best ballpark. Camden Yards in Baltimore is the best ballpark in my opinion, hands down. From being able to park about 40 feet from the stadium for $10 (yes, $10!!!) to having comfortable and spacious seats, to tons of amenities, not to mention the build of the park with the warehouse--it all seems like a throw back park with modern amenities.

In the end though, I wouldn't trade Fenway for Camden Yards. I remember how much of shit hole the Boston Garden was towards the end, but when I was in 4th grade I went to a Bruins/Devils playoff game and the place was so loud when I went to sleep that night my ears were still ringing. The Fleetcenter/TD Bank North Garden (whatever) is a much cleaner, better place to watch a game. But like I've said before: it's like going to a mall and having a hockey game breaking out. The atmosphere has been sucked out of the building. Some of it has to do with the Bruins sucking for awhile now, but even when they were the #1 seed in the East a few years back that type of crazed enthusiam was no where to be seen. I don't want to lose that atmosphere in Fenway for more comfortable/bigger seats, more bathrooms, more food stands, etc.

I like the fact that the ownership has explored and found options to add on seats to the park that not only make it asthetically pleasing, (how fucking awesome are the monster seats?) but also keeping the feeling of Fenway and the history that goes with it.

However sooner or later down the road Fenway will have to be replaced. In most of our life times, we're going to see the Red Sox play in a stadium that isn't Fenway Park. We'll have to come to grips with that eventually, but for now? Who cares. I'm enjoying going to games at a historal ballpark where people are into every pitch, and that is jam-packed not only because the team is good but because the people here LOVE the baseball and the Red Sox.

What good is having a Camden yards if no one goes? Fenway may be a "toilet" but at least it's getting flushed. Camden yards (when the Sox don't play there) is a brand new top of the line Kohler that no one wants to use.

I went to Camden this year while in Baltimore to see a Blue Jays/Orioles games...I've seen more lively crowds at funerals.
 
NEVER, EVER, say anything about Fenway being torn down. And it's worse that you would take the Sox out of Fenway. That is WRONG!

The Red Sox architect, Janet whoever, is incredible! Fenway is the perfect ballpark. With renovations to the concourses, it could easily be the best park in the league. In my architecture course at school, we brainstormed all the different ways to update Fenway, and came out with the sickest model any of us ever saw!

And of those other ballparks, the Oakland one is best, the Yankees is worst. Not just from a Sox fan point of view, either. It really is despicable.
 
I have many more pictures of these stadiums and other teams plans on photobucket here:







 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top