PDA

View Full Version : More seats for Fenway


Fenway
02-10-2005, 09:34 AM
Looks like Fenway Park not being replaced anytime soon
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/02/10/more_expansion_eyed_at_fenway/

http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Globe_Graphic/2005/02/10/1108025751_2998.gif

Clembasbal
02-10-2005, 10:55 AM
Is that even safe? I mean how many people can they keep putting on the roof before it caves in? Talk about money hungry.

Build a bigger stadium with the same field design.

rdivaldi
02-10-2005, 10:59 AM
Is that even safe? I mean how many people can they keep putting on the roof before it caves in? Talk about money hungry.

I've heard many times that the Bo Sox have done a much better job keeping Fenway in shape as opposed to what the Flubbies have done with the Urinal.

I can't blame 'em for adding new seats, there is such a huge demand for tickets. Didn't they go over 100% capacity in 2004?

34 Inch Stick
02-10-2005, 11:50 AM
Two ****hole stadiums aggrandized by sentimentalists.

SOXintheBURGH
02-10-2005, 11:55 AM
Two ****hole stadiums aggrandized by sentimentalists.

No ****. I can't wait for the day these abominations get torn down and replaced with real fields.

Clembasbal
02-10-2005, 02:07 PM
No ****. I can't wait for the day these abominations get torn down and replaced with real fields.

On the other hand, having been to both of these stadiums I will say that nothing, and I mean nothing, beats baseball at Fenway park. It is the best stadium, next to Camden Yards, that I have been to.

Wrigley, I will agree that that needs to go. It smells and it is falling apart. Fenway is kept up nicely, but I am upset that they are milking it for what it is worth. They should have kept it how it was 5-10 years ago - then that would have been really nostalgic.

chisoxmike
02-10-2005, 02:10 PM
Sooner or later these two "shrines" will have to go. Then all we will hear from fans and ESPN will be crying that these two palaces will no longer be with us.
:violin:

SOXintheBURGH
02-10-2005, 02:27 PM
On the other hand, having been to both of these stadiums I will say that nothing, and I mean nothing, beats baseball at Fenway park. It is the best stadium, next to Camden Yards, that I have been to.

Wrigley, I will agree that that needs to go. It smells and it is falling apart. Fenway is kept up nicely, but I am upset that they are milking it for what it is worth. They should have kept it how it was 5-10 years ago - then that would have been really nostalgic.

Is it the same legendary shrine that it has always been if you keep building on new wings to it and adding 4,000 seats every off season? People say Yankee Stadium doesn't count as an old place anymore since it was renovated 30 years ago, why not Fenway Park? Putting seats on top of the Green Monster? Rubbish, IMHO. I've never been there and have no desire to do so. I have the real best park in the league in my backyard, and you can get inside the park for less than $200 a seat.

Clembasbal
02-10-2005, 02:58 PM
Is it the same legendary shrine that it has always been if you keep building on new wings to it and adding 4,000 seats every off season? People say Yankee Stadium doesn't count as an old place anymore since it was renovated 30 years ago, why not Fenway Park? Putting seats on top of the Green Monster? Rubbish, IMHO. I've never been there and have no desire to do so. I have the real best park in the league in my backyard, and you can get inside the park for less than $200 a seat.

I will agree that adding on to it will diminish its nostalgia. But I went 5 years ago before they started really renovating it. I still think that Yankee Stadium is an old stadium. Most historic buildings in Chicago and probably in your city, have been renovated so that they do not fall apart. They are rehabbed and are still considered historic. It is a part of life. If you want something to survive you have to maintain it. Concrete does not last forever. Wrigley has not been maintained like Fenway. I hate their lastest additions and I hate what they have done to it, it has lost a lot of its appeal to me but it is still a historic ballpark and will be until it is destroyed.

SoxWillWin
02-10-2005, 03:06 PM
Sooner or later these two "shrines" will have to go. Then all we will hear from fans and ESPN will be crying that these two palaces will no longer be with us.
:violin:

unless they do what detroit is doing with old tigers stadium......let it sit and rot and hope that someone comes along with enough money to turn them into museums

Foulke You
02-10-2005, 03:23 PM
Trust me guys, I've been to Fenway Park 6 times (3 times in '02 and 3 times in '03...both times watching our White Sox win both series:smile: ) and I can tell you that the only thing Wrigley has in common with it is that they are both old. That's it.

Fenway is far superior to Wrigley Field in every regard. The sightlines are great for an old park (providing you aren't behind a post), it doesn't smell, the concourse doesn't jam up like at Wrigley, the streets after ballgames don't become a cluster**** like they do in Wrigleyville, the red brick exterior of the park is beautiful unlike the blah concrete/fence facade of Wrigley, the fans are way more knowledgable and passionate about baseball than fans you find at "the shrine", and the expansions they've done already fit in well with the rest of the ballpark look. The neighborhood surroundings fit in better with the ballpark too and while there are bars around there, it isn't the overwhelming focal point of going to Fenway like it is at Wrigley. I can honestly say, I wasn't disappointed in the slightest in my visits to Fenway and am looking forward to going back this August to see our White Sox kick some Carmine butt again.

Bottom line, Wrigley should be torn down and replaced, Fenway is truly a baseball gem and I hope it stays standing another 50 years.

Clembasbal
02-10-2005, 04:10 PM
Trust me guys, I've been to Fenway Park 6 times (3 times in '02 and 3 times in '03...both times watching our White Sox win both series:smile: ) and I can tell you that the only thing Wrigley has in common with it is that they are both old. That's it.

Fenway is far superior to Wrigley Field in every regard. The sightlines are great for an old park (providing you aren't behind a post), it doesn't smell, the concourse doesn't jam up like at Wrigley, the streets after ballgames don't become a cluster**** like they do in Wrigleyville, the red brick exterior of the park is beautiful unlike the blah concrete/fence facade of Wrigley, the fans are way more knowledgable and passionate about baseball than fans you find at "the shrine", and the expansions they've done already fit in well with the rest of the ballpark look. The neighborhood surroundings fit in better with the ballpark too and while there are bars around there, it isn't the overwhelming focal point of going to Fenway like it is at Wrigley. I can honestly say, I wasn't disappointed in the slightest in my visits to Fenway and am looking forward to going back this August to see our White Sox kick some Carmine butt again.

Bottom line, Wrigley should be torn down and replaced, Fenway is truly a baseball gem and I hope it stays standing another 50 years.

Finally, somebody else who has been there and is coming out and saying it is not Wrigley. Thank you!

FightingBillini
02-10-2005, 04:23 PM
People say Yankee Stadium doesn't count as an old place anymore since it was renovated 30 years ago, why not Fenway Park?

Yankee Stadium is a flaming pile of crap, thats why. It is NOTHING like it was originally. There were three version of Yankee Stadium, the original until 1936, the classical version until 1973, and the modern version since 1976. See the different versions on this page: http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/YankeeStadium.html
Its a great site, they have diagrams of all the ballparks, old and new.

Yankee Stadium was absolutely gutted. It barely resembles what it looked like in the 50's and 60's. They took a great stadium and turned it into something every bit as ugly, cold, and sterile as New Comiskey was when it opened. First of all, the seats and walls are all blue, yuck. The batter's eye is an old seating section painted black with the seats removed. You would think they would be able to build something over that in the last 30 years, but no. It looks like they ran out of funds and couldnt finish the batters' eye, so they painted it black. The outfield is nothing like it was back in the day. Much smaller, without the extreme dimensions. Oh, and who could forget "monument park". What a disgraceful excuse for a monument. It looks small and completely out of place. The outside used to have a dark brick exterior with a classical looking entrance like Comiskey or Fenway, and now it is all white with a spaceship looking bubble as an entrance.

Yankee Stadium = New Soldier Field

Except New Soldier Field is actually a great stadium from the inside. Yankee Stadium is hideous all around. It may be a great place to watch a game, but do you consider New Soldier Field a historic stadium anymore?

The Yankees know its a POS, and they are milking it for all it's worth. They were pushing hard for a new stadium back in the 80s when nobody went to their games. Its not historic anymore, its a joke.

34 Inch Stick
02-11-2005, 08:53 AM
The site lines at Fenway are great. Sitting down the third base line your seat is positioned perfectly to look at the right fielder the entire game.

MarkZ35
02-11-2005, 08:33 PM
Can You Still Get Tours Of Old Tiger Stadium Because I May Go Up There This Summer To See The Sox Play And I Thought It Would Be Neat To See The Old Tiger Stadium.

Fenway
02-11-2005, 08:40 PM
Wrigley, I will agree that that needs to go. It smells and it is falling apart. Fenway is kept up nicely, but I am upset that they are milking it for what it is worth. They should have kept it how it was 5-10 years ago - then that would have been really nostalgic.

Problem is the new owners paid $700 M for the team and 80% of NESN. The debt service alone is running them 2 M a month.

Harrington was planning on a new stadium next door but the city ( the mayor ) was against it.

Brian26
02-11-2005, 08:44 PM
The site lines at Fenway are great. Sitting down the third base line your seat is positioned perfectly to look at the right fielder the entire game.

Heh exactly. And if you're in the rightfield corner, forget about it. You're starting at the centerfielder.

batmanZoSo
02-11-2005, 08:52 PM
Yankee Stadium is a flaming pile of crap, thats why. It is NOTHING like it was originally. There were three version of Yankee Stadium, the original until 1936, the classical version until 1973, and the modern version since 1976. See the different versions on this page: http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/YankeeStadium.html
Its a great site, they have diagrams of all the ballparks, old and new.

Yankee Stadium was absolutely gutted. It barely resembles what it looked like in the 50's and 60's. They took a great stadium and turned it into something every bit as ugly, cold, and sterile as New Comiskey was when it opened. First of all, the seats and walls are all blue, yuck. The batter's eye is an old seating section painted black with the seats removed. You would think they would be able to build something over that in the last 30 years, but no. It looks like they ran out of funds and couldnt finish the batters' eye, so they painted it black. The outfield is nothing like it was back in the day. Much smaller, without the extreme dimensions. Oh, and who could forget "monument park". What a disgraceful excuse for a monument. It looks small and completely out of place. The outside used to have a dark brick exterior with a classical looking entrance like Comiskey or Fenway, and now it is all white with a spaceship looking bubble as an entrance.

Yankee Stadium = New Soldier Field

Except New Soldier Field is actually a great stadium from the inside. Yankee Stadium is hideous all around. It may be a great place to watch a game, but do you consider New Soldier Field a historic stadium anymore?

The Yankees know its a POS, and they are milking it for all it's worth. They were pushing hard for a new stadium back in the 80s when nobody went to their games. Its not historic anymore, its a joke.

What a weirdly shaped ballpark. It's on a lot that doesn't call for assymetrical quirkiness, but they stretched left field out anyway. It just doesn't look natural. And those have to be god awful seats in the left center bleachers. Christ, you're a hundred feet from the outfield fence. I don't understand why they never changed that. It wouldn't be hard to do.

It's clearly not the gem that Fenway is, but I don't share the same opinions as you. It's very majestic and proud looking, it really reflects the Yankees great history. And to me the blue works at this park. It's very clean and unpretentious, much like the team uniforms.

batmanZoSo
02-11-2005, 08:53 PM
I have a question. How could a glass structure behind home plate cause hitters to hit fewer home runs? :?:

I must've missed something.

Brian26
02-11-2005, 08:58 PM
www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/YankeeStadium.html (http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/YankeeStadium.html)
Its a great site, they have diagrams of all the ballparks, old and new.


Awesome site!

FightingBillini
02-11-2005, 10:13 PM
Awesome site!

Yeah, I stumbled upon it probably a year ago. Also, I sent in the pictures on the Cell's page.

Jabroni
02-11-2005, 10:15 PM
Can You Still Get Tours Of Old Tiger Stadium Because I May Go Up There This Summer To See The Sox Play And I Thought It Would Be Neat To See The Old Tiger Stadium.Can You Stop Capitalizing The First Letter Of Every Word In Your Posts? :tongue:

Brian26
02-11-2005, 11:10 PM
Just browsing this guy's site a little more...

He ranks New Comiskey (1991 visit) BELOW Montreal's Olympic Stadium. :?:

Foulke You
02-12-2005, 04:06 AM
I have a question. How could a glass structure behind home plate cause hitters to hit fewer home runs? :?:

I must've missed something.

Some Red Sox players complained that the large structure changed the wind patterns in the ballpark which hindered their home run hitting ability in their opinion. I suppose it is not without merit...look what a renovated upper deck did the wind patterns at New Comiskey. We went from a pitcher's park to a hitters haven overnight.

Foulke You
02-12-2005, 04:10 AM
The site lines at Fenway are great. Sitting down the third base line your seat is positioned perfectly to look at the right fielder the entire game.

I didn't say they were comparable to a modern stadium, I said they were great for an old park. If you sit in the lower deck at Fenway and the lower deck at Wrigley, Fenway wins hands down as far as sight lines go. When a ball is hit in the air at Wrigley, the view of the ball is immediately lost in the overhang of the Upper Deck (not that Cub fans were paying attention to the game anyway), Fenway has no such problem. In the seats I've been in, I haven't had any trouble seeing the game.

I will admit though that the seats near "Pesky's Pole" have a funny angle to them but nothing a little shift to the left in your seat couldn't cure.

Fenway
02-14-2005, 05:32 PM
I will admit though that the seats near "Pesky's Pole" have a funny angle to them but nothing a little shift to the left in your seat couldn't cure.

The difference between Section 9 (excellent) to Section 8 (awful ) is amazing

Keep in mind the right field seats were built in 3 months before the 1934 season as the park had burnt down during renovation

http://www.ci.boston.ma.us/bfd/journal/fenway_fire.htm

http://www.bpl.org/store/IMGs/STMedium/tm_st11145.jpg
http://www.bpl.org/store/IMGs/STMedium/tm_st10189.jpg

TheBull19
02-14-2005, 05:36 PM
I've never been there and have no desire to do so.

Then how do you know its a rubbish park? Fenway's a great place to see a game, and it WILL be a shame when it's torn down, just like when Comiskey and Tiger Stadium were put away.