U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-26-2012, 12:35 PM
 
Location: The City
19,357 posts, read 16,714,040 times
Reputation: 5787

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by po-boy View Post
Location makes a huge difference in how enjoyable a ballpark is. As you say downtown ballparks are great (especially if served by public transportation), but if not downtown then neighborhoods are nice too.

The worst is a sea of parking lots with nothing to do before or after the games. Turner Field is like that. I think it is a gorgeous ballpark on the outside and pretty nice on the inside, but it is in a terrible location (always thought it should have been where the Georgia Dome was built near Centennial Olympic Park and easily accessible from the MARTA, and the Georgia Dome should have been where Turner Field was built).

My favorite ballparks combine attractive exterior architecture, comfortable interior architecture, and easily accessible locations with activities before and after the game (see Camden Yards in Baltimore).
CBP is actually very well served by the subway despite its location (the highest capacity single line subway station in the nation, can load and depart 30K passengers in 20 minutes) but agree other locations are better. Last year the subway delivered ~1 million attendees to Phillies games alone, not too shaby

this area has gotten a little better with Philly Live but still not so great, ample parking though....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-27-2012, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Chicago
3,146 posts, read 3,043,965 times
Reputation: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by po-boy View Post
Location makes a huge difference in how enjoyable a ballpark is. As you say downtown ballparks are great (especially if served by public transportation), but if not downtown then neighborhoods are nice too.

The worst is a sea of parking lots with nothing to do before or after the games. Turner Field is like that. I think it is a gorgeous ballpark on the outside and pretty nice on the inside, but it is in a terrible location (always thought it should have been where the Georgia Dome was built near Centennial Olympic Park and easily accessible from the MARTA, and the Georgia Dome should have been where Turner Field was built).

My favorite ballparks combine attractive exterior architecture, comfortable interior architecture, and easily accessible locations with activities before and after the game (see Camden Yards in Baltimore).
Contrast that with AT&T which has a similar location in regards to DT SF as Turner does with DT Atl. AT&T is a gem any way you look at it, including the fact that you won't see a parking lot in sight around the ballpark, packed in to its tights spot surrounded by vintage renovated warehouses, highly textured new construction, open space to the north and China Basin and bay water to the east. You have to cross the bridge to get to the parking lots and even those areas will be redeveloped without open surface parking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2012, 05:53 AM
 
Location: Chicago
3,146 posts, read 3,043,965 times
Reputation: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by gichicago View Post
Design wise, i like Kauffman in Kansas City the best, after the renovations. Kauffman created its own style, not having to rely on the retro-bandwagon queues of recent stadiums. As cool as stadium quirkiness and dimensions are, I like Kaufmans clean symmetry, the sloping shape of the stadium on the outside, the smooth top roof covering the upper desk seats is almost an ode to cookie cutter concrete stadiums built around the same time, but somehow molded really well, kind of like the exterior ala JFK TWA airport terminal.

Inside, the jumbotron smack dab in the middle of centerfield, the towering poles for the lights and how integrated seats with the fountains, nice open air feeling, wide concourses complete it for me
how KC got it right when it built the then Royals Stadium is amazing. This was the one park that defied the cookie cutter era. How it could have emerged from a time of Bush II, Riverfront, 3 Rivers, Vet, Shea, Atlanta, RFK, etc. is amazing.

Kaufamn's renovations worked so well because of the original product.

Another place where I think renovations have really worked well is at the Cell. But those renovations had to work much harder. The new Comiskey had so many things wrong with it and they got exposed one year into its existence when Camden Yards came on the seen. Sox Park became the punching boy of MLB parks after that.

Remarkably, IMHO, all the renovations made have actually turned it into a pretty good ballpark, one that is refreshingly symmetrical and straight forward in contrast to all the forced quirkiness of the retro era.

Of all the parks in MLB, the one that is most similar in its configuration to the Cell is Yankee Stadium and, quite frankly, I prefer the down-to-earth feel of the Cell over the corporate madness that is the new YS.

Now I say this as being primarily a Cubs fan (although the Sox are my second favorite team....I really do like both which makes me a very untypical Chicagoan) and one who truly believes that Wrigley is as great as it gets.....yet fully recognizes how the Cell has improved and is a good park today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2012, 11:03 AM
 
1,084 posts, read 1,204,056 times
Reputation: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
how KC got it right when it built the then Royals Stadium is amazing. This was the one park that defied the cookie cutter era. How it could have emerged from a time of Bush II, Riverfront, 3 Rivers, Vet, Shea, Atlanta, RFK, etc. is amazing.

Kaufamn's renovations worked so well because of the original product.

Another place where I think renovations have really worked well is at the Cell. But those renovations had to work much harder. The new Comiskey had so many things wrong with it and they got exposed one year into its existence when Camden Yards came on the seen. Sox Park became the punching boy of MLB parks after that.

Remarkably, IMHO, all the renovations made have actually turned it into a pretty good ballpark, one that is refreshingly symmetrical and straight forward in contrast to all the forced quirkiness of the retro era.

Of all the parks in MLB, the one that is most similar in its configuration to the Cell is Yankee Stadium and, quite frankly, I prefer the down-to-earth feel of the Cell over the corporate madness that is the new YS.

Now I say this as being primarily a Cubs fan (although the Sox are my second favorite team....I really do like both which makes me a very untypical Chicagoan) and one who truly believes that Wrigley is as great as it gets.....yet fully recognizes how the Cell has improved and is a good park today.
Unfortunately, I only went to the cell prior to the renovations/first phase when i lived in Chicago. What I've heard from others was the renovations did wonders, and made an uninspiring stadium great. I spent almost all my time at Wrigley but i quite enjoyed the Cell because for the contrast alone. Full disclosure im a Tigers fan, so i dont care for the White Sox being division rivals. I have a soft spot for the Cubs, since I lived in that area and spent many afternoons getting standing room tickets the day of.

I've been to the new Yankee stadium and its nice, clean, open, nicer bathrooms but nothing spectacular. I hear great things about the Audi/Private Suites and im sure the lazy-boy seats close to home plate are nice, but nothing inspiring. The history and allure of the old yankee stadium is just not there for me.

What i like about the retro park movement is that people are starting to focus on the design. However, i dont like is the pure replication of retro park features. Nostalgia goes hand in hand with baseball, but I'd like to see a something new. Its like building a new skyscraper that looks like the empire state building.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2012, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,146 posts, read 3,043,965 times
Reputation: 2409
Quote:
Originally Posted by gichicago View Post
What i like about the retro park movement is that people are starting to focus on the design. However, i dont like is the pure replication of retro park features. Nostalgia goes hand in hand with baseball, but I'd like to see a something new. Its like building a new skyscraper that looks like the empire state building.
the retro era got a little "forced", didn't it? some of the quirks were a bit over the top. i'm not a fan of quirks for the state of quirkiness. that's what I like about AT&T....that short right field wall is there because of the bay.

as for "but I'd like to see a something new." I think you're getting it....with Target, of course, but even more so in the Marlins' new ballpark.

Quote:
The history and allure of the old yankee stadium is just not there for me.
leave it to the Yankees to make sure it's not only "not there for me", it's not anywhere. You can be sure that the Yankees wanted the old place torn down and forgotten, nothing remaining; they weren't about to leave part of the "real Yankee Stadium" when they built their replacement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2012, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
2,833 posts, read 3,400,556 times
Reputation: 2615
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAM88 View Post
Nike is making the gloves and catcher equipment. Every manufacturer places their logo on their products.
I've been watching some other games lately, dodgers giants. And angels, orioles. The nike swoosh isn't prominent on every pitching glove. Maybe it just shows up more on certain ones.

AT&T park looks pretty good. I don't know about the palm trees, but the rest of it looks like it really fits into san francisco. I think a good ball park would make a postcard for the city it represents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2012, 08:44 AM
Status: "This Space For Rent" (set 3 days ago)
 
Location: Bel Air, California
10,500 posts, read 8,490,589 times
Reputation: 13379
some exterior pictures of Target Field (designed by HOK Sports of Kansas City), The Kasota Limestone (from Mankato, MN) was not in the original design and was part of $15M in enhancements provided by the Pohlad Family...









and inside...
I like how they hid the lights in the canopy...















Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2012, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Mequon
6,861 posts, read 12,295,215 times
Reputation: 3027
Judging by your pictures and from others which I have seen, Target Field is one of my favorites and I haven't even been there yet. I'll have to make a Top 5 ballparks that I like but for now I have to do some more research.

Rough Sketch:

1.Camden Yards
2.Target Field
3.PNC
4.Safeco
5.Comerica
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2012, 02:26 PM
 
Location: New Orleans
1,222 posts, read 1,051,420 times
Reputation: 982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghengis View Post
some exterior pictures of Target Field (designed by HOK Sports of Kansas City), The Kasota Limestone (from Mankato, MN) was not in the original design and was part of $15M in enhancements provided by the Pohlad Family...

and inside...
I like how they hid the lights in the canopy...
Thanks for the pics! Target looks really nice. Hope to make it there sometime. In fact, I'd like to see all 30. So far I've only been to seven (plus some older ones no longer in use), so I have a long way to go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 08:16 PM
 
Location: S.W.PA
1,289 posts, read 1,447,388 times
Reputation: 871
Its odd to me that baseball has been dominated by these new "retro " stadiums whereas football has not. Sure baseball has a long and colorful history, but so does football. I like modern stadiums. I really like the new soccer stadiums- which are typically modern and looking forward.
That said, I like the look of what was Jacobs field in Cleveland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Baseball
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 AM.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top