PDA

View Full Version : Ed Sherman looks at the Cell - 20 years later


Fenway
07-25-2011, 01:51 PM
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3ad6cb46f4-5489-42cc-ba7c-0f84d1fd50eb&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest


and

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3a50277774-c93a-4e80-bfdc-7dabfb2470a0&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

palehosepub
07-25-2011, 04:00 PM
I think this is a very fair and insightful article, I have always said that the direction of the ballpark (not facing the skyline because of "wind current studies") as well as the heightening of the park due to the overabundance of club level / suite seating were the two major design flaws. The Sox did a good job investing the $68 million of naming rights (green color scheme etc) but the first two flaws most likely could never be corrected with out a teardown. I have traveled to over 20 ballparks past and present and I know I am may not be entirely objective but I think US Cellular is in the middle of the pack of all the stadiums I have visited. It is still my favorite place to watch a game.

Lip Man 1
07-25-2011, 04:40 PM
Nice job on the U.S. Cellular story. Agree with many of Ed's points.

Keep in mind one thing though, it was JR who directly turned down the option of building a "Camden Yards" version according to the HOK folks in the book, "Ballpark: The Building of Camden Yards." They are quoted directly as saying they offered it to him and he didn't want it. Also if not for selling the naming rights NOTHING would have been done to change things, JR was not about to spend one penny of his own money rectifying the mistakes he made.

Not trying to come down hard on JR just pointing out the facts.

I love the park, was there for three games last year at this time sat in the radio / TV area for two of them thanks to Bob Grim (I was working on a story for the web site) and I think it's beautiful.

I know at one time the Sox had a Hall of Fame type area around home plate with artifacts, uniforms etc and they took it out to expand some vendor areas.

That's a shame as fans should have a chance to see some of their history. Maybe someday they'll put it back...I keep bugging Bob about that!

Lip

Hitmen77
07-26-2011, 12:43 PM
Good article. I also agree with many of Ed's points. He're my :twocents: on some of the likes/dislikes about the park:

- I agree with the Sox overreaching with too many skyboxes...some of which were never filled. Do the Sox still have empty space in the skybox levels? But, I don't have a problem with the Club Level. I like that their is a premium seating area that is only slightly more expensive than regular tickets and are thus more accessible to average fans.

- I disagree with the "ballpark facing away from the city" issue. This has been a very popular gripe over the years, but it's vastly overrated IMO. Just imagine for a moment if the Cell were magical turned 90 so that homeplate was on the SW corner. You still wouldn't get much of a view of the skyline from within the ballpark! Lower deck seats wouldn't see any the skyline over the scoreboards and Fundamentals deck. The only place you'd perhaps get a view of the skyline would be from the 1B side of the upper deck. People are comparing the Cell to other ballparks that are right downtown in other cities. This would be more of an issue if the Cell was in the "South Loop" area. It's not really a big issue at the distance of 35th St.

- I dislike how the exposed ramps look too. On the plus side, they have dismantled 1/2 the ramp that was on the north side of 35th. Now, the view from the Ryan shows more of the park itself and isn't all ramps.

- One "improvement" from 20 years ago that I'd like to add has nothing to do with park renovations. It's that the neighborhood has vastly improved since 1991. No, it isn't Wrigleyville...and I don't want it to be another Wrigleyville. But anyone who still goes around saying the Sox play in the ghetto and that the neighborhood around the park is dangerous and run down is totally living in the past. I only expect this to improve in the coming years.

34rancher
07-26-2011, 12:51 PM
My thoughts/wishes
1.city facing would have made upper deck seats a nicer "cell"
2. Brick facade/green seats from the get go.
3. Location. I really wanted a joint soldier field/sox stadium on the lakefront with a sliding roof shared between the facilities (only covering one at a time). Imagine the northerly island taking off too.

Just my wish that there had been a little foresight.

DSpivack
07-26-2011, 01:09 PM
My thoughts/wishes
1.city facing would have made upper deck seats a nicer "cell"
2. Brick facade/green seats from the get go.
3. Location. I really wanted a joint soldier field/sox stadium on the lakefront with a sliding roof shared between the facilities (only covering one at a time). Imagine the northerly island taking off too.

Just my wish that there had been a little foresight.

My favorite proposal came from Sam Smith ~15 years ago, when the plans for a re-designed Soldier Field were being initially discussed. He said the Bears should move into Comiskey Park and just wrap the upper deck the whole way around, while Soldier Field should have been renovated and the Sox use the columns as a major design element, as a baseball team wouldn't have to use as much seating as a football stadium, then the columns wouldn't have to be dwarfed by the spaceshipy nonsense that the Bears eventually built. I have no idea how that would have practically worked, but I loved the idea of a Sox stadium along the lakefront.

My biggest grief in reviews of the park nowadays is how often people criticize the upper deck. Upper decks at many newer parks are much worse, especially at all of the retractable roof stadiums. No, US Cellular Field isn't as good as AT&T Park or PNC Park, but it's a lot better than the retractable roof stadiums I've been to, Miller Park and the Rogers Centre, and I would guess than the rest of the retractable roof stadiums, as well (Arizona, Seattle, Houston).

Hitmen77
07-26-2011, 01:11 PM
Nice job on the U.S. Cellular story. Agree with many of Ed's points.

Keep in mind one thing though, it was JR who directly turned down the option of building a "Camden Yards" version according to the HOK folks in the book, "Ballpark: The Building of Camden Yards." They are quoted directly as saying they offered it to him and he didn't want it. Also if not for selling the naming rights NOTHING would have been done to change things, JR was not about to spend one penny of his own money rectifying the mistakes he made.

Not trying to come down hard on JR just pointing out the facts.

I love the park, was there for three games last year at this time sat in the radio / TV area for two of them thanks to Bob Grim (I was working on a story for the web site) and I think it's beautiful.

I know at one time the Sox had a Hall of Fame type area around home plate with artifacts, uniforms etc and they took it out to expand some vendor areas.

That's a shame as fans should have a chance to see some of their history. Maybe someday they'll put it back...I keep bugging Bob about that!

Lip

Yes, this was removed to expand the main gift shop. I agree that the Sox should find room somewhere in the park to honor Sox history and great players/moments in Sox history.

I'd like to see them have some sort of official Sox Hall of Fame so that they can honor great players from the past like Ventura and Allen who are a great part of Sox history, but not retired number or statue-worthy.

Noneck
07-26-2011, 01:22 PM
Yes, this was removed to expand the main gift shop. I agree that the Sox should find room somewhere in the park to honor Sox history and great players/moments in Sox history.

I'd like to see them have some sort of official Sox Hall of Fame so that they can honor great players from the past like Ventura and Allen who are a great part of Sox history, but not retired number or statue-worthy.

And this should be assessable by all park patrons not just the fortunate ones in the lower deck

hi im skot
07-26-2011, 01:28 PM
Yes, this was removed to expand the main gift shop. I agree that the Sox should find room somewhere in the park to honor Sox history and great players/moments in Sox history.

I'd like to see them have some sort of official Sox Hall of Fame so that they can honor great players from the past like Ventura and Allen who are a great part of Sox history, but not retired number or statue-worthy.

Yep. Screw the stupid "team store" outside of gate 5; build an independent White Sox hall of fame that folks can visit year round.

Some of the stuff you used to see in the "hall of fame" that was attached to the gift shop on the main concourse has been moved to a display in the scout seats lounge, but of course 99% of the park will never see it.

TheOldRoman
07-26-2011, 01:39 PM
My favorite proposal came from Sam Smith ~15 years ago, when the plans for a re-designed Soldier Field were being initially discussed. He said the Bears should move into Comiskey Park and just wrap the upper deck the whole way around, while Soldier Field should have been renovated and the Sox use the columns as a major design element, as a baseball team wouldn't have to use as much seating as a football stadium, then the columns wouldn't have to be dwarfed by the spaceshipy nonsense that the Bears eventually built. I have no idea how that would have practically worked, but I loved the idea of a Sox stadium along the lakefront.That very well might have killed the franchise. Soldier Field is at a picturesque location but a horrible location. I don't go to more Bears games because there is no parking and no easy way to get there with public transit without having to walk over two miles. It works for the Bears because they play 10-12 times a year (including preseason). However, put the Sox at that location and they would be drawing Expos-like numbers barring them putting up a '90s Indians-type dominance of the division. People just wouldn't put up with the hassle of getting to Soldier Field 81 times a year.

Fenway
07-26-2011, 01:44 PM
My observations of how The cell compares...

We have the 2 'museum' parks in Fenway and Wrigley. They share a history now that no other parks have. Fenway at least has been renovated. It is 1000% better than ten years ago.

The really great new parks
Camden Yards
PNC Park
AT&T Park
Petco
Citizens Bank Park

(I have yet to make it to Target Field - the Red Sox opened the place last year and I couldn't make it but will this year - I have had several media friends say Target is the best of them all)

Unique
Safeco
Miller Park
Chase Field
Rogers Centre
Trop
( I have not been to Minute Maid)

Rogers Centre is really Three Rivers Stadium with a roof - last of the cookie cutter stadiums. It has aged badly in 21 years.

The Trop is roughly the same age as Skydome - it has issues

good not great
Great America Park
Progressive Field
Comerica Park
US Cellular Field
Kauffman Stadium
Busch Stadium
Citi Field
Ballpark at Arlington
Turner Field

All of the above are good parks - but not spectacular. I didn't like Comerica because it did not have the intimate feel of Tiger Stadium for example.

Oakland is simply horrible - by far the worst in baseball.

The Cell is much, much better today than 20 years ago.

I think what must be remembered most is that it save the franchise from moving to Florida. That fact alone forgives many of the mistakes.

TD Garden in Boston is much like The Cell - it isn't as nice as many of the new arenas that were built, and the designers had issues they had to work around. When it was built, it was only 18 inches from the old Garden on one side, and the elevated Interstate 93 was 2 feet away on the other.

But it my home arena just like The Cell is the home of the White Sox.

Johnny Mostil
07-26-2011, 02:00 PM
That very well might have killed the franchise. Soldier Field is at a picturesque location but a horrible location. I don't go to more Bears games because there is no parking and no easy way to get there with public transit without having to walk over two miles. It works for the Bears because they play 10-12 times a year (including preseason). However, put the Sox at that location and they would be drawing Expos-like numbers barring them putting up a '90s Indians-type dominance of the division. People just wouldn't put up with the hassle of getting to Soldier Field 81 times a year.

Even worse, it would tie up that portion of the lakefront and the surrounding museums as many as 81 times each year, no? For that reason, I think it's bad enough that the Bears play there 10-12 times each year, but I'm guessing most won't agree with me.

34rancher
07-26-2011, 02:06 PM
That very well might have killed the franchise. Soldier Field is at a picturesque location but a horrible location. I don't go to more Bears games because there is no parking and no easy way to get there with public transit without having to walk over two miles. It works for the Bears because they play 10-12 times a year (including preseason). However, put the Sox at that location and they would be drawing Expos-like numbers barring them putting up a '90s Indians-type dominance of the division. People just wouldn't put up with the hassle of getting to Soldier Field 81 times a year.

I guess I disgree. The lakefront there is accessible from a lot of directions. I could easily see tourism of the museums and parks increasing the numbers by "making a family/tourism day of it". Plus I could see the business people walking over from the south loop. I also think the idea of harbor parking with the northerly isle concerts would have been sweet. I just see that area as easy to adjust/add other entertainment parking ideas.

34rancher
07-26-2011, 02:12 PM
Even worse, it would tie up that portion of the lakefront and the surrounding museums as many as 81 times each year, no? For that reason, I think it's bad enough that the Bears play there 10-12 times each year, but I'm guessing most won't agree with me.

30,000-35,000 people going to a baseball game is a whole different idea than 60,000 going for a 7-8 hour football tailgate/game. The parking lots at McCormick/Waldron deck along with the north parking lot could have easily taken care of every sox game with no need for 35th st lot or using the grant park shuttle buses. The traffic would have been so much less that with a little urban planning 22-23 years ago it would have been fine. Remember they rerouted LSD around soldier field too. Plus the novelty of the boat parking could have been huge too.

PaleHoser
07-26-2011, 02:17 PM
IIRC, one of the reasons the park faces southeast is because ownership wanted home plate to remain at the corner of 35th and Shields.

DSpivack
07-26-2011, 02:28 PM
IIRC, one of the reasons the park faces southeast is because ownership wanted home plate to remain at the corner of 35th and Shields.

Ballparks pretty much have to face either NE or SE, right? So if they wanted to face downtown home plate would have to be along 31st, not 35th.

30,000-35,000 people going to a baseball game is a whole different idea than 60,000 going for a 7-8 hour football tailgate/game. The parking lots at McCormick/Waldron deck along with the north parking lot could have easily taken care of every sox game with no need for 35th st lot or using the grant park shuttle buses. The traffic would have been so much less that with a little urban planning 22-23 years ago it would have been fine. Remember they rerouted LSD around soldier field too. Plus the novelty of the boat parking could have been huge too.

Yeah, I didn't mean that a park there made logistical sense, I just liked the idea of the old columns being used as a centerpiece for the design, as well as having the ballpark right on the lake.

Hitmen77
07-26-2011, 02:33 PM
My observations of how The cell compares...

We have the 2 'museum' parks in Fenway and Wrigley. They share a history now that no other parks have. Fenway at least has been renovated. It is 1000% better than ten years ago.

The really great new parks
Camden Yards
PNC Park
AT&T Park
Petco
Citizens Bank Park

(I have yet to make it to Target Field - the Red Sox opened the place last year and I couldn't make it but will this year - I have had several media friends say Target is the best of them all)

Unique
Safeco
Miller Park
Chase Field
Rogers Centre
Trop
( I have not been to Minute Maid)

Rogers Centre is really Three Rivers Stadium with a roof - last of the cookie cutter stadiums. It has aged badly in 21 years.

The Trop is roughly the same age as Skydome - it has issues

good not great
Great America Park
Progressive Field
Comerica Park
US Cellular Field
Kauffman Stadium
Busch Stadium
Citi Field
Ballpark at Arlington
Turner Field

All of the above are good parks - but not spectacular. I didn't like Comerica because it did not have the intimate feel of Tiger Stadium for example.

Oakland is simply horrible - by far the worst in baseball.

The Cell is much, much better today than 20 years ago.

I think what must be remembered most is that it save the franchise from moving to Florida. That fact alone forgives many of the mistakes.

TD Garden in Boston is much like The Cell - it isn't as nice as many of the new arenas that were built, and the designers had issues they had to work around. When it was built, it was only 18 inches from the old Garden on one side, and the elevated Interstate 93 was 2 feet away on the other.

But it my home arena just like The Cell is the home of the White Sox.

What category would you put the new Yankee Stadium in?

doublem23
07-26-2011, 02:33 PM
I don't go to more Bears games because there is no parking and no easy way to get there with public transit without having to walk over two miles.

It's not even 1 mile to the Roosevelt Red/Orange/Green Line station and the nearest Metra line is even closer than that.

I agree, though, with your overall assessment, however. If our lazy ass fanbase can't even be bothered to find a way to make it to the Cell they're surely not going to go to Soldier Field.

Fenway
07-26-2011, 02:49 PM
What category would you put the new Yankee Stadium in?

This is year 3 of the 'House That Greed Built' - it just doesn't feel right

Hitmen77
07-26-2011, 03:05 PM
Ballparks pretty much have to face either NE or SE, right? So if they wanted to face downtown home plate would have to be along 31st, not 35th.

Actually, home plate would have been near 37th and Princeton. The "main entrance" would be approximately where Gate 2 is now, which is near the elementary school and the public housing area that is just south of the park.

CHISOXFAN13
07-26-2011, 03:10 PM
This is year 3 of the 'House That Greed Built' - it just doesn't feel right

Agreed. I've been to 19 of the current parks and will add Target Field next weekend. Yankee Stadium is a middle of the road park for me, but I definitely think I like Progressive Field more than you do.

soxgirl617
07-26-2011, 03:42 PM
- I dislike how the exposed ramps look too. On the plus side, they have dismantled 1/2 the ramp that was on the north side of 35th. Now, the view from the Ryan shows more of the park itself and isn't all ramps.
.

I agree that the exterior view looks better without the eastern-most ramp on the north side of 35th. However, speaking as someone who regularly exits the stadium using those north ramps, it is a safety concern with only one ramp. I am surprised the Fire Department allowed that second ramp to be destroyed. Everyone on that entire side now exits at one point: if there was an emergency, that could be disastrous. I don't like the exterior ramps, but I'd rather have exterior ramps than no ramps. (Of course, that just points out that the ramps shouldn't have been exterior in the first place!)

I am overall very happy with U.S. Cellular as it exists now, following the renovations. I can remember being disappointed back in 1991: it was so sterile and looked "cheap". I think the Sox and the Illinois Stadium Authority (or whatever it's called) have done a great job renovating the park. Now I really like it.

Gavin
07-26-2011, 03:43 PM
It's almost a mile from Roosevelt to Solider Field, and definitely feels a lot longer because of all the down and up and up. It's never been a problem for me the few times I went there, but it's been noticeably more of a pain in the ass than going to USCF.

soxgirl617
07-26-2011, 03:50 PM
I guess I disgree. The lakefront there is accessible from a lot of directions. I could easily see tourism of the museums and parks increasing the numbers by "making a family/tourism day of it". Plus I could see the business people walking over from the south loop. I also think the idea of harbor parking with the northerly isle concerts would have been sweet. I just see that area as easy to adjust/add other entertainment parking ideas.

FWIW, I disagree. I work downtown, and it's much much easier to get to The Cell (Red Line or Green Line) than it is to Soldier Field. I was at Soldier Field last week for the Fire/Man U game, and it just reminded me how much of a pain it can be to get to Soldier Field. Call me lazy, but the walking is a pain (and I walk everywhere, every day).

Also, people from the burbs rightfully complain that it's not easy to drive to The Cell, when you take into account traffic, etc. It would be 10 times worse to drive to the Soldier Field area. People wouldn't do it for 81 games.

You might pick up a few people who made it a museum/sports day, but not enough to make an appreciable difference. Kids are in school for roughly half the baseball season, limiting any uptick from the museums to weekends.

It's gorgeous by the lake, but not easy.

BainesHOF
07-26-2011, 04:40 PM
The park absolutely sucked when it first opened, but the Cell is a good ballpark now thanks to all of the renovations. The upper deck is still awful though. The few times I've sat there it doesn't even feel like I'm at a game.

The Cell could definitely use a sizeable Hall of Fame. There's really no excuse not to have one that's accessible to all fans.

34rancher
07-26-2011, 04:53 PM
FWIW, I disagree. I work downtown, and it's much much easier to get to The Cell (Red Line or Green Line) than it is to Soldier Field. I was at Soldier Field last week for the Fire/Man U game, and it just reminded me how much of a pain it can be to get to Soldier Field. Call me lazy, but the walking is a pain (and I walk everywhere, every day).

Also, people from the burbs rightfully complain that it's not easy to drive to The Cell, when you take into account traffic, etc. It would be 10 times worse to drive to the Soldier Field area. People wouldn't do it for 81 games.

You might pick up a few people who made it a museum/sports day, but not enough to make an appreciable difference. Kids are in school for roughly half the baseball season, limiting any uptick from the museums to weekends.

It's gorgeous by the lake, but not easy.
I understand, and agree with your points the way that the area is right now. I just think that had there been some Urban planning, there could have been some routing/construction that could have really turned the Monroe Harbor through McCormick Place into one of the absolute premium destinations in the world. I'm not thinking small. I'm thinking bigger than Millennium Park. Had it happened, there might have been a different marketing campaign and enticement for the Olympics too. I'm thinking Pac Bell water area before Pac Bell. Closing Meigs earlier (I know political hurdle/impossibility before 9/11) and turning out a stadium for the Sox that would have been a true destination. The planned revitalization of the South Loop would have been accelerated and magnified. Just my pipe dream thoughts. But that being said, I truly love the renovations throughout the last decade to the Cell. About the only thing I think that they need is the scoreboard from KC in left field (but two-sided for advertising on the Ryan).

34rancher
07-26-2011, 04:55 PM
The park absolutely sucked when it first opened, but the Cell is a good ballpark now thanks to all of the renovations. The upper deck is still awful though. The few times I've sat there it doesn't even feel like I'm at a game.

Have you ever sat in other stadiums upper decks? They all suck. The Cell is not one of the worst 10 upper decks IMO.

HomeFish
07-26-2011, 04:57 PM
The murals on the upper deck are a very nice touch and make it feel a lot more alive than many other upper decks. And the team has improved amenities up there: there's a speed pitch now for example.

Parrothead
07-26-2011, 05:49 PM
My observations of how The cell compares...

The really great new parks
Camden Yards
PNC Park
AT&T Park
Petco
Citizens Bank Park

(I have yet to make it to Target Field - the Red Sox opened the place last year and I couldn't make it but will this year - I have had several media friends say Target is the best of them all)



I only have both texas, fla, NY and Az to go see. I know everyone has their own opinion, which is based upon many factors. But I highly disagree with your opinion.

The twins new park and Petco are ok, was not impressed with Philly. To me they are on the same level as the Cell. To me all the new ones are starting to feel the same. PNC is by far the best of the them all. No one else is even in the team photo.

Gavin
07-26-2011, 05:54 PM
Have you ever sat in other stadiums upper decks? They all suck. The Cell is not one of the worst 10 upper decks IMO.

I kind of like the Upper Deck, for the reasons of cost, cooler (in hot weather), decent view, easy to get group seats, etc. Definitely has some flaws, but really it's hardly a bad experience.

soxgirl617
07-26-2011, 06:09 PM
I kind of like the Upper Deck, for the reasons of cost, cooler (in hot weather), decent view, easy to get group seats, etc. Definitely has some flaws, but really it's hardly a bad experience.

I agree that the upper deck at The Cell isn't any worse than any other upper deck. I don't sit in the upper deck regularly, but I don't mind it---IF you're between the bases. It's awful out in the corners, but then so are most upper decks.

I sat in the upper deck at Soldier Field last week. Great view, but scary as hell getting up and down. I swear it feels much steeper than the upper deck at The Cell, prior to renovation. There were a number of little kids who were clearly uncomfortable walking up and down the stairs.

Brian26
07-26-2011, 06:54 PM
Read the comments to the article to see Rich L (I'm assuming it's Lindberg) schooling a bunch of Reinsdorf bashers. Rich knows his Sox history like nobody else.

34rancher
07-26-2011, 06:59 PM
I agree that the upper deck at The Cell isn't any worse than any other upper deck. I don't sit in the upper deck regularly, but I don't mind it---IF you're between the bases. It's awful out in the corners, but then so are most upper decks.

I sat in the upper deck at Soldier Field last week. Great view, but scary as hell getting up and down. I swear it feels much steeper than the upper deck at The Cell, prior to renovation. There were a number of little kids who were clearly uncomfortable walking up and down the stairs.

That's because it is steeper. The cell has never been one of the ten steepest baseball parks in MLB. It and soldier field made a mistake of illusion by having you enter at the bottom of the deck. If they had entered in the middle of the deck, the illusion is not as bad. But the cell got a bad wrap, as many of those "great" stadiums were actually steeper.

hi im skot
07-26-2011, 07:07 PM
The upper deck at Miller Park is just as steep, if not steeper, than US Cellular.

SI1020
07-26-2011, 08:01 PM
Read the comments to the article to see Rich L (I'm assuming it's Lindberg) schooling a bunch of Reinsdorf bashers. Rich knows his Sox history like nobody else. Rich knows his Chicago history like nobody else. I was going to be Rich Lindberg when I grew up, but it didn't work out. He is a tremendous author, researcher, and historian. Nobody is 100% accurate, but he comes close.

DSpivack
07-26-2011, 11:16 PM
The upper deck at Miller Park is just as steep, if not steeper, than US Cellular.

Along with, at the very least, every single other retractable roof stadium.

Actually, home plate would have been near 37th and Princeton. The "main entrance" would be approximately where Gate 2 is now, which is near the elementary school and the public housing area that is just south of the park.

You're right, I have on idea how I made that mistake. I was picturing one thing in my head, and typed another.

BainesHOF
07-26-2011, 11:47 PM
I don't care about the upper decks at other parks. They don't make the Cell's any better. The first row of the Cell's upper deck is further away from the field than the last row of Comiskey's upper deck. Screw the skyboxes and club level.

DSpivack
07-26-2011, 11:49 PM
I don't care about the upper decks at other parks. They don't make the Cell's any better. The first row of the Cell's upper deck is further away from the field than the last row of Comiskey's upper deck. Screw the skyboxes and club level.

You don't like the team you root for getting revenue?

BainesHOF
07-27-2011, 12:07 AM
You don't like the team you root for getting revenue?

Hey, for one, some of those skyboxes are empty. Two, I think there's a chance that it would have been financially better for the team to have fewer skyboxes and no club level. That would have made the upper deck seats better and more popular.

Fenway
07-27-2011, 06:46 AM
Old Yankee Stadium, Skydome and the Vet also had brutal upper decks.

Part of the perception problem is old Comiskey had the best upper deck in baseball. I fell in love with those seats in the 80's.

The Cell's upper deck is a hard sell which is a big reason the White Sox draw a lot of 27,000 crowds. Fans would rather stay home than go up there. A big part of it is the second class feel where fans are stuck there and can not wander. No other park does it to that extent.

dwitt76
07-27-2011, 07:44 AM
I hope the sox redo the center field jumbotron like Miller Park redid theirs. That thing is HUGE and crystal clear.

Hitmen77
07-27-2011, 07:44 AM
I don't care about the upper decks at other parks. They don't make the Cell's any better. The first row of the Cell's upper deck is further away from the field than the last row of Comiskey's upper deck. Screw the skyboxes and club level.

.....and old Comiskey had a ton of seats with obstructed views.....So, what's your point? That the first row of the upper deck at the Cell sucks?:scratch: Have you ever even sat in those seats? 1st row of UD between 1B and 3B are great seats with a good view of the game.

Hitmen77
07-27-2011, 07:52 AM
Old Yankee Stadium, Skydome and the Vet also had brutal upper decks.

Part of the perception problem is old Comiskey had the best upper deck in baseball. I fell in love with those seats in the 80's.

The Cell's upper deck is a hard sell which is a big reason the White Sox draw a lot of 27,000 crowds. Fans would rather stay home than go up there. A big part of it is the second class feel where fans are stuck there and can not wander. No other park does it to that extent.

I agree on the 2nd class feel thanks to the no entrance to the 100 level policy. I know some people here get all huffy when people complain about this policy, but I do believe it keeps some fans from even considering UD tickets...even if they don't end up using the LD much when they're at the game.

I think the biggest problem with the Cell's upper deck is that no other stadium in MLB took a constant pounding in the media about the steep upper deck for about 10 or 15 years. The complaints faded after the renovation put the roof on and lopped off the top 1/3 of the deck, but the perception has been cemented.

....another problem is that many other parks with just-as-steep and just-as-high-up upper decks have concourse entrances about 1/2 up the stands. The Cell has the entrance at the very bottom and it really feels like a long haul up to the seats for people above row 10 or so.