Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
While I have not been inside the new Busch Stadium, I dislike it for several reasons.
A: I think baseball is a stupid game. Please don't kill me for that statement.
B: It's a knockoff of other stadiums. Camden Yards started the retro look years ago and while it was well done I think St. Louis should have gone modern.
C: Gov't gave the Cardinals money. The owners are already wealthy. They threaten to move the team and stadium out of the city and of course, here come the subsidies, tax breaks and broken promises. But from what I know, the city brokered a better deal that most other cities.
To be fair, there are some parts of it that are supposed to be a part of the city.
For example, at the front entrance, the tall, skinny arches are a tribute to Cupple Stations and over the third base entrance the bridge-looking thing is a tribute to Eads Bridge. I like the new stadium. In my opinion, it's more modern and there's more breeze. And I don't think Old Busch was all that beautiful anyway. New Busch isn't somewhat retro and like other stadiums, but the red brick kind of fits in with the city better and you get a better view of the city from being home plate.
Fenway is by far the best place to watch a game. There are other stadiums that are designed better, have more space, etc. It's the whole ambience of Fenway. The love the fans have for that team, the history behind the team/stadium. The city as a whole. A beautiful place to watch a ball game, if you can get tickets. I've been to about 20 or so games there. Sometimes you have to bite the bullet and buy tickets from a ticket agency. Or buy them long in advance.
I was never at the old Tigers Stadium, but my favorite ball park is Comerica Park. For a new stadium, it has so much character. It seems like a true home of the Tigers unlike Turner Field which to me seems very artificial. I don't like that park - it seems like you could change a couple of signs and it could belong to any ball team. Kinda commercialized. I don't care for traveling in Atlanta neither, so I know that is a factor. Great American in Cincy is an ok park. There's nothing grand about it though and considering it is a newer park, there should be some "wow" factor and there isn't.
On Baseball: Playing the ballpark rating game | Philadelphia Inquirer | 05/25/2008 (http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/phillies/20080525_On_Baseball__Playing_the_ballpark_rating_ game.html - broken link)
That place is a monstrosity for baseball. Its like a shopping mall with an artificial turf baseball field in the middle. Not my idea of a baseball atmosphere at all.
I've actually grown tired of the retro parks. It was very cool at first, but now every new stadium that opens is just a carbon copy of the last one. Think about it..........everyone has the giant scoreboard with the team logo, everyone has some kind of city or water view in the outfield, everyone has the same 40,000ish capacity, everyone has the same design for the stands.
I would like to see a completely new, futuristic design happen for some team in the future. Teams that could jump on this include Toronto, Florida, and Oakland. All the other teams have fairly new parks, are about to get new parks that have already been designed, or play in legendary older parks that we don't want to see go.
I've actually grown tired of the retro parks. It was very cool at first, but now every new stadium that opens is just a carbon copy of the last one. Think about it..........everyone has the giant scoreboard with the team logo, everyone has some kind of city or water view in the outfield, everyone has the same 40,000ish capacity, everyone has the same design for the stands.
I would like to see a completely new, futuristic design happen for some team in the future. Teams that could jump on this include Toronto, Florida, and Oakland. All the other teams have fairly new parks, are about to get new parks that have already been designed, or play in legendary older parks that we don't want to see go.
So what do you propose? A George Jetson stadium? A return to the ugly bowls of the 60s and 70s like Riverfront, Three Rivers, the Vet, etc?
Of course the views will be of the waterfront or the skyline, etc. Would you rather a view of the ghetto or of a sewage treatment plant or something....
Of course most new stadiums will be similar...how much different can you make a baseball stadium from one to the next? Just like the stadiums I mentioned above....they were even more similar to each other than today's stadiums are alike. Other than seat color, there was no difference whatsoever between them.
Look at the majority of modern skyscrapers.......they have breathtaking, futuristic designs that are on the cutting edge. Why can't at least ONE baseball team build a stadium in that mold, rather than do a replica of every other stadium built since Camden Yards opened in 1992? It was cool at first, but it's become redundant. And no, I'm not talking about going back to the "bowl" stadiums.
George Jetson stadium? Actually, I was thinking more like "Neo, Trinity, Morpheus Field".
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
