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.
Says the kid at his dads house in San Jose, a city with little vestige of anything classic. Go sit in a strip mall and fantasize about the dirdon site and the A's. Let the grown ups talk about classic stadiums.
Blah blah blah, a couple of old farts talking about what's classic and what's not. Dodger Stadium is older than The Beatles and The Godfather. Are those not revered as "classic" in their respective fields? Yankee Stadium in any form was/is an oppressive dump.
If you had any idea what you're talking about, that might have been a relevant comment. You just don't like Yankee Stadium, that's all. (I don't especially care for the current version, either. But you notice I also don't rant and rave. First you need to read up on some baseball history, and then tone it down a little).
Why has Dodger Stadium always been looked at as some kind of classic, while Shea Stadium was always considered a dump? Dodger Stadium and Shea are nearly identical in style, the only major differences I could see were color scheme and Dodger Stadium having a nicer backdrop. That's it. Otherwise, they are the same style from the same era, just as the Vet, Three Rivers, Riverfront, Busch, etc were almost identical early 70's multipurpose bowls.
Says the kid at his dads house in San Jose, a city with little vestige of anything classic. Go sit in a strip mall and fantasize about the dirdon site and the A's. Let the grown ups talk about classic stadiums.
I live in my own house, built 1922, in California's oldest city. In that case, it puts even the old Yankee dump to shame by a year. Please, don't tell me what's classic. Blah blah blah, look how easily your argument against Dodger Stadium fell apart. Anything older is inherently better!
Best park in all of MLB to watch a game. I've been to the Old Yankee Stadium, Wrigley, Camden, Sky Dome, Busch or whatever the Cards call it now, Arlington, Old Shea and New, Miami, Tropicana, and Atlanta and none of them have the same feel as Fenway.
Why has Dodger Stadium always been looked at as some kind of classic, while Shea Stadium was always considered a dump? Dodger Stadium and Shea are nearly identical in style, the only major differences I could see were color scheme and Dodger Stadium having a nicer backdrop. That's it. Otherwise, they are the same style from the same era, just as the Vet, Three Rivers, Riverfront, Busch, etc were almost identical early 70's multipurpose bowls.
These were often called "cookie cutter" stadiums and for good reason.
Why has Dodger Stadium always been looked at as some kind of classic, while Shea Stadium was always considered a dump? Dodger Stadium and Shea are nearly identical in style, the only major differences I could see were color scheme and Dodger Stadium having a nicer backdrop. That's it. Otherwise, they are the same style from the same era, just as the Vet, Three Rivers, Riverfront, Busch, etc were almost identical early 70's multipurpose bowls.
Well, I think there are several reasons.
For one, Dodger Stadium, have been blessed to be in that beautiful, Southern California climate. The temps are nice and mild, all year long. Shea on the other hand, have to deal with 4 seasons- two of which can be very extreme.
Shea, also had some lean times back in the 1970's. Shea was owned by the City of New York, and we all know how NYC was, back in those days.
Lastly, Dodger Stadium, is a very nice ballpark. It is the premier park of NL, in the West Coast. Shea, had the unfortunate luck, of being located in the same city as arguably, the most famous park in sports.
For one, Dodger Stadium, have been blessed to be in that beautiful, Southern California climate. The temps are nice and mild, all year long. Shea on the other hand, have to deal with 4 seasons- two of which can be very extreme.
Shea, also had some lean times back in the 1970's. Shea was owned by the City of New York, and we all know how NYC was, back in those days.
Shea Stadium was not a "dump," and the fact that it was owned by the City of New York has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. The main problem with Shea was, quite simply, that it was just another one of the cookie-cutter stadia put up during the 1960s. It was totally undistinguished.
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.
