Petco Park is overrated (Pittsburg: apartments, condo, hotels)

[WizardOfRadical]

Was recently down in SD this summer to see Mets vs Padres.


For the life of me, I can not understand why SD homers think it is one of the best ball parks in the country.

Now the food and beer selection is great. But really the actual stadium is not impressive. Not even in the top 10, not even close.

Fenway, Wrigley, LA, SF, Baltimore, Yankees, Detroit, St. Louis, PNC, DC are all way better.

The biggest sell is the skyline, which says something.

And the fans? Do the fans exist? It was like a Mets home game. You go to LA and they never let Mets fans take over, even docile SF doesn't let that fly.

It's certainly a good park, top 15 to be sure. But I left wondering what the hype was all about. It was like the White Sox stadium, but more sterile.

[GSR13]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

Was recently down in SD this summer to see Mets vs Padres.


For the life of me, I can not understand why SD homers think it is one of the best ball parks in the country.

Now the food and beer selection is great. But really the actual stadium is not impressive. Not even in the top 10, not even close.

Fenway, Wrigley, LA, SF, Baltimore, Yankees, Detroit, St. Louis, PNC, DC are all way better.

The biggest sell is the skyline, which says something.

And the fans? Do the fans exist? It was like a Mets home game. You go to LA and they never let Mets fans take over, even docile SF doesn't let that fly.

It's certainly a good park, top 15 to be sure. But I left wondering what the hype was all about. It was like the White Sox stadium, but more sterile.

You're assuming SD homers are widely traveled.

[malcorub16]

This list has it at #5.

Ranking all 30 MLB ballparks | CSN Mid-Atlantic

This list at #1.
All 30 MLB stadiums, ranked | For The Win

The Canadians rank it at 7th best.

MLB's best and worst stadiums ranked from 1-30 | BASEBALL | Baseball | Sports |

In any current list on the net, it generally tends to be in the top 10.

[bloom]

You're right that the outfield of Petco Park opening up to the city is really nice, but otherwise the architecture of the park is nothing, esp if you compare to the SF Giants stadium.
The reason there is very limited fans is that the owners do not invest in putting together winning team; rather, they invest in greedily lining their pockets as much as possible.

[hitman619]

Originally Posted by bloom

You're right that the outfield of Petco Park opening up to the city is really nice, but otherwise the architecture of the park is nothing, esp if you compare to the SF Giants stadium.
The reason there is very limited fans is that the owners do not invest in putting together winning team; rather, they invest in greedily lining their pockets as much as possible.

This.
Sorry Wizard, you're not going to get too many people in this forum that is going to disagree with you.
This thread, like the Padres season will slowly sink to the bottom of the page.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by bloom

You're right that the outfield of Petco Park opening up to the city is really nice, but otherwise the architecture of the park is nothing, esp if you compare to the SF Giants stadium.
The reason there is very limited fans is that the owners do not invest in putting together winning team; rather, they invest in greedily lining their pockets as much as possible.

I used to think that for a few years after Petco opened, that the architecture was kind of bland/cold and it didn't have that more distinct retro look/vibe like AT&T. But now I realize that retro look is kind of overrated when the concourses are too narrow , hard to navigate, and AT&T is really cheesy (the Coca Cola bottle? Cable Car? come on....) I appreciate that more modern/minimalist design now, its cleaner and less kitschy than AT&T. Even though AT&T is only 4 years older it shows its age a lot more and I don't think it is aging as well.

SFgate (the SF Chronicles free website) has been featuring a condo "looking out" to AT&T park but basically it just looks at the front of the stadium, no view of the field at all. I don't think any building has a view of the field unlike Petco where you have a ton of condo's/apartments, offices, a hotel, and a rooftop bar that look directly down into Petco Park. Plus the surrounding neighborhood is so much more vibrant, fun, and interesting that what surrounds AT&T. Most of my family and friends that visited me in SD preferred Petco to AT&T and even the one's that didn't readily admit it (all Giants fans) still did admit it had advantages over AT&T like the Gaslamp and weather.

[eastcoastbias]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

Was recently down in SD this summer to see Mets vs Padres.


For the life of me, I can not understand why SD homers think it is one of the best ball parks in the country.

Now the food and beer selection is great. But really the actual stadium is not impressive. Not even in the top 10, not even close.

Fenway, Wrigley, LA, SF, Baltimore, Yankees, Detroit, St. Louis, PNC, DC are all way better.

The biggest sell is the skyline, which says something.

And the fans? Do the fans exist? It was like a Mets home game. You go to LA and they never let Mets fans take over, even docile SF doesn't let that fly.

It's certainly a good park, top 15 to be sure. But I left wondering what the hype was all about. It was like the White Sox stadium, but more sterile.

First, I don't think the skyline is the biggest sell. If they rotated the park with the bay being in the background from Outfield - I think you have your sell.

The park has some nice features. The Western Metal building is pretty unique, the park at the park option in center is unique and offers a great option for families, the old beach area was removed but I like the decking added in the outfield with the beer area. There are very few "bad" seats.

The food as you mentioned, an adult beverage options - really imo Top notch- very pricey though. Hodads Phils, etc.

The park is easy to get to - as a resident it sits along a trolley line. Out of towners can stay in hotels nearby- one of the hotels is actually connected to the park. There are good restaurant and bar options just outside the park.

Now as you pointed out the what I call "fandom" is lacking a bit. I have no problem with this as my team is not the padres.

I really liked PNC in Pittsburgh, and old Yankee Stadium was very cool, but I've been to others like Progressive Field, Camden, Angels Stadium, Coors Field, Kaufman Stadium, Tigers Stadium and have seen others on TV - I'd be hard pressed to NOT include Petco in at least the Top 8

[elchevere]

No issue with the ballpark. I had some issues when it first opened but those have been worked out and it is a nice place to catch a game, albeit in the presence of sedated, non-excitable hometown fans. Look at it this way--management has had to compensate for the lack of on field talent by coming up with an off field attraction (stadium and its environs) that keeps the faithful entertained.

[NYSD1995]

LA has drunken rowdy scary fans. Fenway is too hard to get tickets. Baltimore, Detroit, St. Louis ... are in Baltimore, Detroit and St. Louis. Petco is a nice modern facility and all the seats are great. Not overrated, just expensive

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Anyone that has followed the Pads know they suck and no amount of "stadium" will change that. The one good lesson from it is we didn't build one for greedy Spanos.