PDA

View Full Version : Braves Leaving Turner Field


Over By There
11-11-2013, 08:33 AM
Plan to build a new park (http://m.ajc.com/news/sports/baseball/braves-plan-to-build-new-stadium-in-cobb/nbpNQ/) in Cobb County, which is closer to Marietta.

Huisj
11-11-2013, 09:11 AM
The first of the new stadiums to be replaced. Does this set the new standard for how quickly a stadium becomes obsolete? Kind of crazy.

soxfanatlanta
11-11-2013, 09:13 AM
Totally out of the blue. I hope ownership knows their demographics well; they just gave a big **** off to the fans on the East, and Northeast side of the city.

The stadium is less than 20 years old, what the hell?

TomBradley72
11-11-2013, 10:15 AM
What a waste of resources-

ChiSoxFann
11-11-2013, 10:50 AM
Wow. It wasn't my favorite looking ballpark, but it definitely should have many more years left. I can't imagine it needs as much maintenance as they say in the article.

HomeFish
11-11-2013, 11:14 AM
Sounds like an absolutely stupid idea to me, but what do I know, I've never owned a sports team.

LoveYourSuit
11-11-2013, 11:29 AM
Times must be great in Atlanta. The 25 year old Georgia Dome is also obsolete according to the Falcons.

beasly213
11-11-2013, 11:38 AM
Totally out of the blue. I hope ownership knows their demographics well; they just gave a big **** off to the fans on the East, and Northeast side of the city.

The stadium is less than 20 years old, what the hell?

Check out the map of season ticket holders. They do know where their fans are:

http://deadspin.com/reports-braves-leaving-atlanta-for-cobb-county-1462167449

vinny
11-11-2013, 11:46 AM
This makes no sense to me whatsoever. There's only marginal public transit service to Cobb County, and it's a pain to drive there during rush hour. I know the team claims their fanbase is in the northern suburbs:

http://siextramustard.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/heat-map.jpg

but for those who live in north Fulton County and Gwinnett County, travel to Smyrna/Cumberland Mall is gonna suck ass.

mrfourni
11-11-2013, 11:50 AM
Check out the map of season ticket holders. They do know where their fans are:

http://deadspin.com/reports-braves-leaving-atlanta-for-cobb-county-1462167449

If someone was going to hand me $500m and free land to build a ballpark, I'd probably take it too.

I think it would be interesting to see that map of ticket buyers for the sox and cubs.

thomas35forever
11-11-2013, 12:14 PM
If Turner Field isn't broken, why do they bother to look elsewhere? If teams everywhere start replacing stadiums this quickly, a lot of money is going down the tubes. Does this mean the Cell will be gone in 10 years? Makes no sense to me.

mrfourni
11-11-2013, 12:43 PM
If Turner Field isn't broken, why do they bother to look elsewhere? If teams everywhere start replacing stadiums this quickly, a lot of money is going down the tubes. Does this mean the Cell will be gone in 10 years? Makes no sense to me.

Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

LITTLE NELL
11-11-2013, 01:34 PM
Classic case of show me the money, Cobb county is coming up with 450 million to make the deal go. Atlanta said no way.

doublem23
11-11-2013, 02:02 PM
Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

Yeah, I agree, frankly, I think there might only be a few parks replaced before the Cell. Crazy as it is, it's the 9th oldest park in MLB now, Fenway and Wrigley aren't going anywhere. Neither is Kauffman. I doubt Dodger Stadium is, either, but this new ownership group is a real wild card.

So that leaves Angel Stadium, the Oakland Coliseum, Tropicana, and Skydome as the last 4 older parks. All of those seem likely to be replaced in the next 15 years, but after that, it has to be the Cell next in line, I'd think.

It will also be interesting to see what style ballpark the Braves end up building; wonder if they'll replicate their division rivals in Miami and build another contemporary park or if they'll go back to Retro Modern/Classic that has dominated MLB since Camden Yard opened.

Moses_Scurry
11-11-2013, 02:09 PM
Just looking over some of the previous ball-parks for teams that are now in "new" parks, it looks like 30-40 years of use is pretty normal.

Pirates (3 Rivers) - 30 years
Phillies (Veterans) - 31 years
Cardinals (Busch) - 39 years
Twins (baggie dome) - 27 years
Orioles (Memorial) - 37 years (though the park was there for 10 years before)
Braves (Fulton County) - 30 years
Brewers (County Stadium) - 37 years
Mets (Shea) - 44 years
Giants (Candlestick) - 40 years

While most of these were multi-purpose stadiums that were the cool new things when they were built and hated by the '90's, there is no reason to think that the shelf life of the newer stadiums isn't limited either, especially with how technology moves so much faster today.

LITTLE NELL
11-11-2013, 02:16 PM
Just looking over some of the previous ball-parks for teams that are now in "new" parks, it looks like 30-40 years of use is pretty normal.

Pirates (3 Rivers) - 30 years
Phillies (Veterans) - 31 years
Cardinals (Busch) - 39 years
Twins (baggie dome) - 27 years
Orioles (Memorial) - 37 years (though the park was there for 10 years before)
Braves (Fulton County) - 30 years
Brewers (County Stadium) - 37 years
Mets (Shea) - 44 years
Giants (Candlestick) - 40 years

While most of these were multi-purpose stadiums that were the cool new things when they were built and hated by the '90's, there is no reason to think that the shelf life of the newer stadiums isn't limited either, especially with how technology moves so much faster today.

County Stadium in Milwaukee was around for 47 years, 1953-2000, you forgot the Braves played there after moving from Boston.

Moses_Scurry
11-11-2013, 02:25 PM
Map of the new Braves Stadium:

http://i.imgur.com/N1qKhSw.jpg

DSpivack
11-11-2013, 02:35 PM
Classic case of show me the money, Cobb county is coming up with 450 million to make the deal go. Atlanta said no way.
Absolutely. This is all about the Braves taking advantage of a deal too good to be true.

And if the Braves do rebrand, maybe they can have a new team song:

awHWColYQ90

Irishsox1
11-11-2013, 03:51 PM
I don't buy this for a second. Sounds like they just want a cut on the amount of the lease.

Steelrod
11-11-2013, 03:52 PM
Nothing surprises any more. The Cubs, being one of the most profitable teams in baseball are currently complaining how they are cash short and need to raise more money before doing anything. And their fans are buying it!

Hitmen77
11-11-2013, 06:28 PM
:?: Huh? Makes no sense to me.

What a waste of resources-

Agreed. I'm glad Cobb County has $500M burning a hole in their pocket and doesn't have better ways to use those resources (lower taxes, investment in infrastructure/education/social services, etc.).

Check out the map of season ticket holders. They do know where their fans are:

http://deadspin.com/reports-braves-leaving-atlanta-for-cobb-county-1462167449

If someone was going to hand me $500m and free land to build a ballpark, I'd probably take it too.

I think it would be interesting to see that map of ticket buyers for the sox and cubs.

In the late 1980s when JR and EE where planning to move the Sox to Addison, they said that a big chunk of Sox season ticket holders lived in DuPage County. That was one of their justifications for moving to Addison. Even if that was true, the Addison move was a lousy idea.

Yeah, I agree, frankly, I think there might only be a few parks replaced before the Cell. Crazy as it is, it's the 9th oldest park in MLB now, Fenway and Wrigley aren't going anywhere. Neither is Kauffman. I doubt Dodger Stadium is, either, but this new ownership group is a real wild card.

So that leaves Angel Stadium, the Oakland Coliseum, Tropicana, and Skydome as the last 4 older parks. All of those seem likely to be replaced in the next 15 years, but after that, it has to be the Cell next in line, I'd think.

It will also be interesting to see what style ballpark the Braves end up building; wonder if they'll replicate their division rivals in Miami and build another contemporary park or if they'll go back to Retro Modern/Classic that has dominated MLB since Camden Yard opened.

I doubt the Angels will be leaving Angels Stadium any time soon. They are quite successful there. It doesn't have the charm of the new retro parks, but it's a pretty good baseball-only stadium that went through a major renovation in the late 90s. The other 3 stadiums you mentioned, are definitely obsolete, though.

The first of the new stadiums to be replaced. Does this set the new standard for how quickly a stadium becomes obsolete? Kind of crazy.

I doubt it. The other new parks are still quite popular, aren't "outdated", and most state/local governments (except for Cobb Co. apparently) aren't going to be throwing $500M and up around on a team with a perfectly good ballpark and pretty much no leverage to move (where would a team go?).

Just looking over some of the previous ball-parks for teams that are now in "new" parks, it looks like 30-40 years of use is pretty normal.

Pirates (3 Rivers) - 30 years
Phillies (Veterans) - 31 years
Cardinals (Busch) - 39 years
Twins (baggie dome) - 27 years
Orioles (Memorial) - 37 years (though the park was there for 10 years before)
Braves (Fulton County) - 30 years
Brewers (County Stadium) - 37 years
Mets (Shea) - 44 years
Giants (Candlestick) - 40 years

While most of these were multi-purpose stadiums that were the cool new things when they were built and hated by the '90's, there is no reason to think that the shelf life of the newer stadiums isn't limited either, especially with how technology moves so much faster today.

Comparing the 60s/70s era ballparks to the post 1991 MLB ballparks is comparing apples and oranges IMO. Today's parks with their popular designs and popular downtown locations are nowhere near as outdated the multipurpose eyesores of the past. Plus, I think the era of state/local governments spending big bucks on insanely expensive ballparks is, with a few exceptions, over.

doublem23
11-11-2013, 10:13 PM
I doubt the Angels will be leaving Angels Stadium any time soon. They are quite successful there. It doesn't have the charm of the new retro parks, but it's a pretty good baseball-only stadium that went through a major renovation in the late 90s. The other 3 stadiums you mentioned, are definitely obsolete, though.


Yeah, I mean, you're probably right but also, if you'd had told me last week that the Braves would be building a new stadium to replace their 20-year-old ballpark, I'd have thought that was pretty crazy, too

All it takes is one crazy county or town to make something happen, and there's plenty of well-to-do enclaves in Southern California

DSpivack
11-11-2013, 10:18 PM
Yeah, I mean, you're probably right but also, if you'd had told me last week that the Braves would be building a new stadium to replace their 20-year-old ballpark, I'd have thought that was pretty crazy, too

All it takes is one crazy county or town to make something happen, and there's plenty of well-to-do enclaves in Southern California
Yeah, but even Orange County most likely doesn't have the money nowadays to pay for a new ballpark.

I thought Rembert Browne's article was good.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/82022/saying-good-bye-as-the-braves-leave-atlanta-for-atlanta

Luis11
11-11-2013, 11:56 PM
Tampa needs a new stadium; maybe they can be Atlanta's American League Franchise.

BleacherBandit
11-12-2013, 12:28 AM
Anybody from Atlanta or the south that can explain the logistics behind this aside from season ticket statistics?

From what I've heard, public transportation is a non-factor in Atlanta. There isn't a MARTA spur near Turner to begin with so the fact that the new stadium will be 2 miles outside ATL city limits without a MARTA stop is irrelevant in comparison. But I want to know about the financial burden Turner field supposedly is. Does it need any of those aforementioned repairs? Would stripping every chair and replacing some of the lights really amount to $150 Million? That seems like a ridiculous overestimation to me. These stadiums are becoming disposable to the point where major overhaul is just as daunting as a change of scenery.

DSpivack
11-12-2013, 12:56 AM
Anybody from Atlanta or the south that can explain the logistics behind this aside from season ticket statistics?

From what I've heard, public transportation is a non-factor in Atlanta. There isn't a MARTA spur near Turner to begin with so the fact that the new stadium will be 2 miles outside ATL city limits without a MARTA stop is irrelevant in comparison. But I want to know about the financial burden Turner field supposedly is. Does it need any of those aforementioned repairs? Would stripping every chair and replacing some of the lights really amount to $150 Million? That seems like a ridiculous overestimation to me. These stadiums are becoming disposable to the point where major overhaul is just as daunting as a change of scenery.

This announcement came out of the blue, the stadium is all of 17 years old; Cobb County is giving them a ridiculous amount of money which they don't really have. I have a hard time believing the Braves' cost estimations to refurbish Turner Field.

As for the public transportation question, Cobb County does not currently and has not ever wanted MARTA, so I think that's a non-starter. Atlanta is one of the most car-dependent metro areas in the country. And while some cities are building out public transportation systems now (LA's subway expansion is a rather large one, while Denver is building a network of light rail lines), Atlanta is well behind other locales. A local option-sales tax to build out light rail circling the city failed (the Belt Line project is currently just a multi-use one for bikers, walkers, etc.).

vinny
11-12-2013, 12:09 PM
http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/11/11/5092546/a-desperate-trip-into-the-ruins-of-turner-field

:rolling:

Southsider101
11-12-2013, 12:28 PM
http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/11/11/5092546/a-desperate-trip-into-the-ruins-of-turner-field

:rolling:
Thank you! That was awesome.
Best line: "I bet they had only one Waffle House in here, I thought out loud to my self."

thomas35forever
11-12-2013, 12:54 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9965245/turner-field-demolished-atlanta-braves-leave-new-stadium-2017-mayor-says
I suppose it's good to have a plan for the land, but it still seems like a major waste to put the wrecking ball to a park that still seems new (at least to me).

kittle42
11-12-2013, 02:58 PM
If you ever take a trip down to Cobb County, Georgia, you'd better read the signs, respect the law and order.

beasly213
11-12-2013, 03:12 PM
If you ever take a trip down to Cobb County, Georgia, you'd better read the signs, respect the law and order.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-G5G9JvM43gI/Tkxw3dF9PwI/AAAAAAAACIU/ln1f7uJvV68/s1600/big%2Bbossman.jpg

Steelrod
11-12-2013, 03:49 PM
Its always about money. I was raised in a time where stadiums never became obsolete, they were just upgraded and became civic treasures where memories came from.

The Immigrant
11-12-2013, 03:53 PM
Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

Not sure how "locked into" the lease they really are given that they pay little to no rent. I imagine they could get out of the lease without too much trouble, since the landlord's termination damages shouldn't be prohibitively high. The bigger question is why would they? They have a sweet deal from a financial standpoint and make bucketloads of money when the team is even halfway decent. Unless a crazy billionaire buys the team and is willing to spend truckloads of his own money to fund a new stadium, it ain't happening.

ChicagoG19
11-12-2013, 07:20 PM
Not sure how "locked into" the lease they really are given that they pay little to no rent. I imagine they could get out of the lease without too much trouble, since the landlord's termination damages shouldn't be prohibitively high. The bigger question is why would they? They have a sweet deal from a financial standpoint and make bucketloads of money when the team is even halfway decent. Unless a crazy billionaire buys the team and is willing to spend truckloads of his own money to fund a new stadium, it ain't happening.

I certainly hope that doesn't happen, at least not a move to the suburbs like the Braves.

DSpivack
11-12-2013, 07:52 PM
I certainly hope that doesn't happen, at least not a move to the suburbs like the Braves.

If the Sox moved to Addison in the 80s, I'd probably be a fan of the team on Addison, instead. :o:

kobo
11-12-2013, 08:04 PM
One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

DSpivack
11-12-2013, 09:04 PM
One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

It's not like there's anything wrong with it for baseball, though. It was substantially re-built after the Olympics to specifically become a ballpark. It's design and layout is very similar to Coors Field (and I also found Nats Park to be similar in some ways, too).

asindc
11-13-2013, 08:00 AM
One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

Actually, it was designed from the beginning so that it would be immediately converted to a baseball-only park immediately after the Olympics, which makes this decision all the more bizarre. I wonder if USOC had known the Braves would want to bolt after 17 years if they would have made such a huge accommodation. As it was, IOC and USOC officials weren't thrilled with the design concept, but it wasn't a major disruption to the Olympics. If I'm Atlanta civic officials, I'm more upset with the fact that it can't be used as a multi-sport stadium. Ah well, IOC money built it, so who the hell cares, right?

SaltyPretzel
11-13-2013, 08:44 AM
Maybe the Sox can get a discount on their Jumbotron.

MeteorsSox4367
11-13-2013, 09:58 AM
Judging by the one game I saw at Turner Field, I thought it was a solid baseball venue. Granted, we were in the last rows of the upper deck behind the plate, but I thought it was a good place to watch a ballgame.

Another thing that I thought was cool was that the site of Fulton County Stadium was across the parking lot. I liked the fact that I could see the spot where Hank Aaron hit his historic home run and also where the Falcons and the Peach Bowl called home.

Hitmen77
11-13-2013, 10:35 AM
Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

Yes, I could see the White Sox clamoring for a new stadium at that time. I doubt the state is going to give them anywhere close to such a sweetheart deal at the Cell when this lease is up. Reinsdorf would be in his 90s and it's very likely the Sox will have a new ownership group by then. Even with the successful fixes that have been made to the Cell in the last decade, I could see a new ownership group saying 40 years at the Cell is enough and wanting to start from the ground up to get the ballpark completely right this time. The Cell is JR's baby - a new owner won't necessarily feel any sentimentality to it.

That being said, this would only happen if Sox ownership comes up with a way to privately finance almost all the cost of a new park. There's no way the State is going to be giving the Sox much in the way of public funding again.

Also, my guess is that any new ballpark would be built just north of the Cell on the site of Old Comiskey. I just don't think they're going to find any better site available for a new park.

As far as any of the other MLB parks that were built after the Cell, I expect all of them (except Turner Field) to be still in use in 2029. How long is the Marlins' lease? Maybe they'll be looking to move by 2029 if their lease is up and they continue to draw poorly over the next 2 decades.

kittle42
11-13-2013, 01:42 PM
Judging by the one game I saw at Turner Field, I thought it was a solid baseball venue. Granted, we were in the last rows of the upper deck behind the plate, but I thought it was a good place to watch a ballgame.

I went in September. There were maybe - maybe - 5,000 people at a game involving a first-place team. Really got to explore the park, which was nice. I would say it was middle of the road of the "newer" places I have been. Citizens Bank, for one, is better, as is Busch.

vinny
11-13-2013, 07:03 PM
Ah well, IOC money built it, so who the hell cares, right?

Well, that and Coca-Cola money.

Hitmen77
11-13-2013, 08:32 PM
Maybe the Sox can get a discount on their Jumbotron.

We don't need it because our scoreboard was state of the art in 2003!

DSpivack
11-14-2013, 01:23 PM
More on the deal:

http://deadspin.com/heres-how-cobb-county-will-pay-for-the-braves-ballpar-1464404976

SaltyPretzel
11-15-2013, 08:01 AM
We don't need it because our scoreboard was state of the art in 2003!

I think the screen in my living room is bigger.

mrfourni
11-15-2013, 10:04 AM
More on the deal:

http://deadspin.com/heres-how-cobb-county-will-pay-for-the-braves-ballpar-1464404976

Diverting $8m a year from property taxes leads me to believe this has a long way to go before it gets final approval.

DSpivack
11-19-2013, 02:48 PM
http://deadspin.com/the-braves-new-ballpark-will-have-less-parking-than-tu-1467646026?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitte r&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

doublem23
11-19-2013, 02:50 PM
http://deadspin.com/the-braves-new-ballpark-will-have-less-parking-than-tu-1467646026?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitte r&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

This is the kind of story that really makes you realize the only difference between well-connected politicians here in Illinois and everywhere else is that at least ours get caught.

DSpivack
11-19-2013, 04:18 PM
This is the kind of story that really makes you realize the only difference between well-connected politicians here in Illinois and everywhere else is that at least ours get caught.
Well, I guess we just have more here who are too dumb to know how to do it legally (not that we don't have plenty of those).

gobears1987
11-20-2013, 10:02 AM
Nothing surprises any more. The Cubs, being one of the most profitable teams in baseball are currently complaining how they are cash short and need to raise more money before doing anything. And their fans are buying it!

The ownership of the Cubs has large debt.

The fact is that the Sox and whatever they draw are more profitable right now than the Cubs so long as the Ricketts family has to pay back loans they took out.

roylestillman
11-20-2013, 10:55 AM
The ownership of the Cubs has large debt.

The fact is that the Sox and whatever they draw are more profitable right now than the Cubs so long as the Ricketts family has to pay back loans they took out.

This is the part people don't realize. The Cubs have a ton of debt that they need to pay down annually, they have a fraction of the parking revenue, limited ad revenue,and maintenance of that 100 year old money pit they call home. All stadium maintenance of the Cell is picked up by the State. I would bet the Cubs are down $30-40 million vs. The Sox before they open the doors every year.

gobears1987
11-22-2013, 01:45 AM
This is the part people don't realize. The Cubs have a ton of debt that they need to pay down annually, they have a fraction of the parking revenue, limited ad revenue,and maintenance of that 100 year old money pit they call home. All stadium maintenance of the Cell is picked up by the State. I would bet the Cubs are down $30-40 million vs. The Sox before they open the doors every year.

The Sox also have the advantage of making more money from TV telecasts as more of their games are on CSN. CSN pays more per game than WGN does.

If you want to know why teams have started spending like crazy, it's all rooted in the revenue from TV deals with RSN's. Let's hope the Sox get a good deal when they renegotiate. With the Cubs likely to bolt, you can bet the Sox will be looking to get a nice payday from CSN when their current contract expires.

Heck, given JR's age and the fact his son doesn't want the team, expect them to use it as leverage when JR eventually sells.

doublem23
11-22-2013, 06:04 AM
This is the part people don't realize. The Cubs have a ton of debt that they need to pay down annually, they have a fraction of the parking revenue, limited ad revenue,and maintenance of that 100 year old money pit they call home. All stadium maintenance of the Cell is picked up by the State. I would bet the Cubs are down $30-40 million vs. The Sox before they open the doors every year.

Well I can't wait until the Sox raise their Best Bottom Line Banner next year.