PDA

View Full Version : Idea for Renovations


FightingBillini
10-08-2004, 01:43 AM
Yes, this is one of those seemingly endless threads on renovations. Let me say that the reducing of the upperdeck did WONDERS for the park. However, there are still a few problems with the UD. The new height has turned the park into a lanuching pad, and the upper deck is still steep, that scares away the fairweathers. Here is what I think will solve the problem. Mind you, this would most likely be excessively expensive, and therefore, not happen.

The upper deck is so steep becuase it is so high up. There must be an unobstructed sightline between home plate and the last row of the upperdeck behind it. I have heard that the unused top row of skyboxes will be converted to another use. They could extend the upper deck to cover up that area, so the upperdeck will begin a few feet above the entries to the mazanine suites. If they raise the entry ways into the upperdeck by building 2-3 foot ramps, this will resemble upperdecks in most other parks. This would also correct one of the biggest mistakes both functionally and aesthetically, IMO, of the new park- no overhang with the upperdeck. This would leave the upperdeck with the same steepness. Therefore, we can move homeplate forward ten feet. That would enable us to extend the upperdeck outwards at least ten feet, thus, reducing the steepness.

Becuase that would create logistical problems with the seating, the field would need to be dropped 5 to 10 feet. That would probably reduce homeruns, as they wouldnt catch that jetstreams. The dropping of the field would allow them to add several rows of seats around foul territory. That would make up for a few rows up outfield seats that would be removed. The dimensions would be the same or slightly shorter, but the fences would be 10 feet high instead of 8. While the math may not be exact, you guys get the idea.

What do you guys think? Am I insane? Genious? Keep in mind, as pricey as it would be, this would both reduce the steepness of the upperdeck and make the park less of a launching pad. Discuss.

pinwheels3530
10-08-2004, 03:10 AM
Yes, this is one of those seemingly endless threads on renovations. Let me say that the reducing of the upperdeck did WONDERS for the park. However, there are still a few problems with the UD. The new height has turned the park into a lanuching pad, and the upper deck is still steep, that scares away the fairweathers. Here is what I think will solve the problem. Mind you, this would most likely be excessively expensive, and therefore, not happen.

The upper deck is so steep becuase it is so high up. There must be an unobstructed sightline between home plate and the last row of the upperdeck behind it. I have heard that the unused top row of skyboxes will be converted to another use. They could extend the upper deck to cover up that area, so the upperdeck will begin a few feet above the entries to the mazanine suites. If they raise the entry ways into the upperdeck by building 2-3 foot ramps, this will resemble upperdecks in most other parks. This would also correct one of the biggest mistakes both functionally and aesthetically, IMO, of the new park- no overhang with the upperdeck. This would leave the upperdeck with the same steepness. Therefore, we can move homeplate forward ten feet. That would enable us to extend the upperdeck outwards at least ten feet, thus, reducing the steepness.

Becuase that would create logistical problems with the seating, the field would need to be dropped 5 to 10 feet. That would probably reduce homeruns, as they wouldnt catch that jetstreams. The dropping of the field would allow them to add several rows of seats around foul territory. That would make up for a few rows up outfield seats that would be removed. The dimensions would be the same or slightly shorter, but the fences would be 10 feet high instead of 8. While the math may not be exact, you guys get the idea.

What do you guys think? Am I insane? Genious? Keep in mind, as pricey as it would be, this would both reduce the steepness of the upperdeck and make the park less of a launching pad. Discuss.

Your Insane!!!!:D: Actually the steepness of the UD works now that the new roof hangs over about 20 feet up, so you still get a great view from the last row of the upper deck.

My renovation plan would have them adding family restaurants for me and my little one, and some bars for the Hangar 18 types outside along 35th st. where the current offices are located. This idea is still a possibility in the near future.

SOXSINCE'70
10-08-2004, 07:23 AM
MOVE THE FENCES BACK!!!!!:angry: :angry:(Yeah,right).:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

wdelaney72
10-08-2004, 08:30 AM
The upper deck is not any steeper than Jacobs Field, Miller Park, or any of the other newer parks. I think it's fine the way it is.

MOVE THE FENCES BACK!

Tekijawa
10-08-2004, 08:47 AM
Move the ences back??? I say move them in!!! I want Willie to hit 20 next year!

mweflen
10-08-2004, 09:57 AM
Move the ences back??? I say move them in!!! I want Willie to hit 20 next year!
I don't think 250 down the lines and 350 to center would be a very respectable park to play in. And he'd still only have 5 or 6 (tripling his output!)

mdep524
10-08-2004, 11:06 AM
The upper deck is so steep becuase it is so high up. There must be an unobstructed sightline between home plate and the last row of the upperdeck behind it. I have heard that the unused top row of skyboxes will be converted to another use. They could extend the upper deck to cover up that area, so the upperdeck will begin a few feet above the entries to the mazanine suites. If they raise the entry ways into the upperdeck by building 2-3 foot ramps, this will resemble upperdecks in most other parks. This would also correct one of the biggest mistakes both functionally and aesthetically, IMO, of the new park- no overhang with the upperdeck.
Wow, this is kind of eerie because I had this EXACT same idea when I was at the Cell for the last time a few weeks ago. Those ridiculous skyboxes (or whatever the hell they are) that sit right below the UD are a terrible, terrible waste of space, and an eyesore. I thought that perhaps that section could somehow be seamlessly connected to the existing UD, creating more usable seats and an aesthetically pleasing overhang. Great minds think alike! :D:

Clembasbal
10-08-2004, 11:24 AM
Fences, at most can go back 5 feet. And this can't happen down the left field line (Sox Bullpen) and right field line (Bullpen Sports Bar). Homeruns are flying out because the roof has been flattened out and a screen is in the place of a wall. Because of this, the swirling winds of the past are not present and never will be. The dynamics of the stadium was changed when the roof was changed. It will always be that way because the fences can't be moved back 15 feet (which would be nice).

FightingBillini
10-08-2004, 12:06 PM
Great minds think alike! :D:
Word.

santo=dorf
10-08-2004, 12:18 PM
Fences, at most can go back 5 feet. And this can't happen down the left field line (Sox Bullpen) and right field line (Bullpen Sports Bar). Homeruns are flying out because the roof has been flattened out and a screen is in the place of a wall. Because of this, the swirling winds of the past are not present and never will be. The dynamics of the stadium was changed when the roof was changed. It will always be that way because the fences can't be moved back 15 feet (which would be nice).
I agree that the left field line can't be pushed back, but can't they remove the tables at the bottom of the sports bar (sorry Hangar) to push the right field line back a little bit?

If they are going to remove the seats this offseason, I recommend eliminate a few rows in left center allowing the fences to be pushed back much more than 5 feet. It would be harder to do this with the right-center field because of the patio area underneath it.

Instead of a homerun deck in right field like Arlington's or Old Comiskey, how about building a deck with no roof similar to Miller Park's? I would put bleachers in that second, and have the back of the deck partially hang over the concourse area with an entrance to the open deck be a rampway near the front of the concourse.

I know it might sound a little confusing.:nuts:

Rush20
10-08-2004, 01:23 PM
Makes you wonder if any of the SOX brass responsbile for the ballpark rennovations reads the posts on this website. The reason I ask is that we have had many, many threads on the how cool an upper home run deck in right field would be, etc. but I never heard anyone suggest that building a minature baseball clinic field on top of the LF concourse would increase attendance.


I hope the "experts" get this one right. The same "experts" that suggested a two-tier luxery suite design. JR should knock down some walls and sell some racquet ball court time during games...

Baby Fisk
10-08-2004, 02:28 PM
Move the ences back??? I say move them in!!! I want Willie to hit 20 next year!Imagine how much media attention and boosted attendance the Sox would get if Thomas and Konerko engaged in a year-long battle to see who could hit 100 HRs in a season?! :cool:

C-Dawg
10-09-2004, 07:23 AM
Those ridiculous skyboxes (or whatever the hell they are) that sit right below the UD are a terrible, terrible waste of space, and an eyesore.

The cheap solution to that eyesore would be to just paint the silhouttes of lots of happy fans on the glass, so it won't look so much like an abandoned area.

Better hope JR DOESN'T read this messageboard - if he does the fans will be painted on the glass for sure!

pinwheels3530
10-09-2004, 08:08 AM
I agree that the left field line can't be pushed back, but can't they remove the tables at the bottom of the sports bar (sorry Hangar) to push the right field line back a little bit?

If they are going to remove the seats this offseason, I recommend eliminate a few rows in left center allowing the fences to be pushed back much more than 5 feet. It would be harder to do this with the right-center field because of the patio area underneath it.

Instead of a homerun deck in right field like Arlington's or Old Comiskey, how about building a deck with no roof similar to Miller Park's? I would put bleachers in that second, and have the back of the deck partially hang over the concourse area with an entrance to the open deck be a rampway near the front of the concourse.

I know it might sound a little confusing.:nuts:

That's exactly what there going to do, remember Comiskey is being renovated by HKSinc who build Miller Park.

santo=dorf
10-09-2004, 02:09 PM
That's exactly what there going to do, remember Comiskey is being renovated by HKSinc who build Miller Park.
Really? :Rocker:

HomeFish
10-09-2004, 02:52 PM
Anyone who complains about our Upper Deck should take a quick trip to St. Louis before they knock Busch down. That should shut them up.

OEO Magglio
10-09-2004, 03:04 PM
The upper deck isn't steep at all. Go to yankee stadium, now that is steep, the UD at the cell is just fine, imo.

batmanZoSo
10-09-2004, 05:37 PM
Yes, this is one of those seemingly endless threads on renovations. Let me say that the reducing of the upperdeck did WONDERS for the park. However, there are still a few problems with the UD. The new height has turned the park into a lanuching pad, and the upper deck is still steep, that scares away the fairweathers. Here is what I think will solve the problem. Mind you, this would most likely be excessively expensive, and therefore, not happen.

The upper deck is so steep becuase it is so high up. There must be an unobstructed sightline between home plate and the last row of the upperdeck behind it. I have heard that the unused top row of skyboxes will be converted to another use. They could extend the upper deck to cover up that area, so the upperdeck will begin a few feet above the entries to the mazanine suites. If they raise the entry ways into the upperdeck by building 2-3 foot ramps, this will resemble upperdecks in most other parks. This would also correct one of the biggest mistakes both functionally and aesthetically, IMO, of the new park- no overhang with the upperdeck. This would leave the upperdeck with the same steepness. Therefore, we can move homeplate forward ten feet. That would enable us to extend the upperdeck outwards at least ten feet, thus, reducing the steepness.

Becuase that would create logistical problems with the seating, the field would need to be dropped 5 to 10 feet. That would probably reduce homeruns, as they wouldnt catch that jetstreams. The dropping of the field would allow them to add several rows of seats around foul territory. That would make up for a few rows up outfield seats that would be removed. The dimensions would be the same or slightly shorter, but the fences would be 10 feet high instead of 8. While the math may not be exact, you guys get the idea.

What do you guys think? Am I insane? Genious? Keep in mind, as pricey as it would be, this would both reduce the steepness of the upperdeck and make the park less of a launching pad. Discuss.

It's way too expensive. Moving on...

Unless we become "The Chicago White Sox, brought to you by Pepsi."

Magglios_Girl
10-09-2004, 05:49 PM
Better hope JR DOESN'T read this messageboard - if he does the fans will be painted on the glass for sure!:roflmao: LMAO:roflmao:

Ol' No. 2
10-09-2004, 06:29 PM
Yes, this is one of those seemingly endless threads on renovations. Let me say that the reducing of the upperdeck did WONDERS for the park. However, there are still a few problems with the UD. The new height has turned the park into a lanuching pad, and the upper deck is still steep, that scares away the fairweathers. Here is what I think will solve the problem. Mind you, this would most likely be excessively expensive, and therefore, not happen.

The upper deck is so steep becuase it is so high up. There must be an unobstructed sightline between home plate and the last row of the upperdeck behind it. I have heard that the unused top row of skyboxes will be converted to another use. They could extend the upper deck to cover up that area, so the upperdeck will begin a few feet above the entries to the mazanine suites. If they raise the entry ways into the upperdeck by building 2-3 foot ramps, this will resemble upperdecks in most other parks. This would also correct one of the biggest mistakes both functionally and aesthetically, IMO, of the new park- no overhang with the upperdeck. This would leave the upperdeck with the same steepness. Therefore, we can move homeplate forward ten feet. That would enable us to extend the upperdeck outwards at least ten feet, thus, reducing the steepness.

Becuase that would create logistical problems with the seating, the field would need to be dropped 5 to 10 feet. That would probably reduce homeruns, as they wouldnt catch that jetstreams. The dropping of the field would allow them to add several rows of seats around foul territory. That would make up for a few rows up outfield seats that would be removed. The dimensions would be the same or slightly shorter, but the fences would be 10 feet high instead of 8. While the math may not be exact, you guys get the idea.

What do you guys think? Am I insane? Genious? Keep in mind, as pricey as it would be, this would both reduce the steepness of the upperdeck and make the park less of a launching pad. Discuss.While they're at it, can they turn the whole field so that home plate is in the SW corner where it's supposed to be?:rolleyes:

FightingBillini
10-10-2004, 03:34 AM
I realize that the upperdeck isnt any steeper than in any of the newer "retro" parks. I go to a dozen games a year, many of them in the upper deck. My point is, fairweather fans have this perception of it being so steep, that reducing the slope would help. I also said I knew it would be expensive, and most likely not happen. I just posted it as a possibility.
I do, however, believe they will extend the upperdeck downwards to cover up the top rox of skyboxes. I heard that the top row is almost never used, and that they didnt even use all of them for the All-Star Game. If you cant fill them for the All Star Game, you need to think of something you can put in their place that could make you money. Even if the park is full and those seats are necessary for only 5-10 games a year, its better to make some money than none. Besides, this alone would make the park look much better. The lack of overhang with the upperdeck has always been its biggest problem, not the steepness. People bash the Cell's upperdeck becuase its trendy. The UD at Jacobs field is MUCH worse. Its just as steep, and I hear from others that its even steeper. They have three rows up luxury suites separating the two decks, and they only have 2 decks on the 3rd base side. Look at a picture of the Jake and that 100 ft wall between the lower and upper decks. Its ridiculous.This is a horrible design flaw, but nobody pays attention to it becuase they arent told to. This is what all ballparks should aspire to be.

pinwheels3530
10-10-2004, 03:35 AM
:roflmao: LMAO:roflmao:
That's right go Cardinals!!!!!

Parrothead
10-10-2004, 05:45 AM
Anyone who complains about our Upper Deck should take a quick trip to St. Louis before they knock Busch down. That should shut them up.
Try the upper deck at Skydome or Dogder Stadium. Yikes !

The only renovations I want to see is moving the fences back by taking out that wall that gives about a 5 foot buffer between the field of play and a homer. Also, I would like a World Series Championship of course would require a huge renovation to the team.