PDA

View Full Version : New Busch Stadium, what do you think?


WinOrDyeTrying
01-04-2006, 03:01 PM
Heres some mock-ups of what the new Busch Stadium is going to look like, if anyone is intrested. They have a feature here (http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/stl/ballpark/index.jsp) where you can view what the field will look like at different seats throughout the field. Personally, I think it is one of the best new stadiums built in the last 10 years. The sightlines seem pretty good, not too many goofy "retro" gimmicks *cough minute maid park cough*, and I especially love the score board. White Sox, take note. I want a score board similar! You can see more pictures here (javascript:void(window.open('/NASApp/mlb/mlb/photogallery/season_2003/1202_cards_future_stadium/page_01.jsp','','width=685,height=435,location=no, menubar=no,scrollbars=no,status=no,toolbar=no,resi zable=no'));). What do you guys think of the new stadium?

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/mlb/photo/photogallery/season_2003/1202/03.jpg

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/mlb/photo/photogallery/season_2003/1202/06.jpg

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/mlb/photo/photogallery/season_2003/1202/14.jpg

http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/mlb/photo/photogallery/season_2003/1202/17.jpg

Professor
01-04-2006, 03:25 PM
Since I live in St. Louis now, I am very pleased with the new stadium...I will get to frequent it often! I drive past it everyday on my way to work, and I like what I see thus far. I'm especially anxious to see the first White Sox-Cards interleague game played there...

HomeFish
01-04-2006, 03:30 PM
The top of the scoreboard, with the two Cardinals, looks pretty sweet. The top of the upper deck looks US Cellularish.

What I don't like is the exterior. It looks exactly like every other "retro" park with the bricks and what not.

Baby Fisk
01-04-2006, 03:34 PM
The "bullseye" pitcher's mound is a throwback to ol' Sportsman's Park, where the Cardinals and Browns used to play. Nice touch, assuming it doesn't get lost on the way from the sketch to the field. :thumbsup:

http://www.dugout-memories.com/goffspo1.jpg

Jerko
01-04-2006, 03:51 PM
I hate that pitcher's mound. Otherwise, it looks pretty nice.

Chicken Dinner
01-04-2006, 04:00 PM
Did they raise the beer price??

SouthSide_HitMen
01-04-2006, 04:20 PM
Looks like a major upgrade with great views of downtown St. Louis - the one major aspect the White Sox screwed up when designing their park (the views of downtown Chicago are great - on the exit ramp of the upper deck :(: ).

CubKilla
01-04-2006, 04:23 PM
Did they raise the beer price??

Hope not. $7+ for a Buttwiper should be a crime.

ChiSoxRowand
01-04-2006, 04:37 PM
They should have never tore down the old Busch stadium. That pitchers mound is awful.

TheOldRoman
01-04-2006, 04:41 PM
Hope not. $7+ for a Buttwiper should be a crime. I'd rather pay $7 for a Budweiser than $5.50 for a Swiller Lite anyday, but that is a topic for another thread.

I think the new park will look beautiful. Yes, there are bricks on the outside (and also a brick backstop), but it does not resemble any of the other parks. The architecture is very nice. The huge arches remind me slightly of Comiskey. The Cards have done everything right so far the the stadium.

It is also important to know that we wont see the real park for another couple years. All those gray blocks surrounding the park will become buildings. A new street and many other buildings will go in where the old park stood. I am particularly curious to see what goes up beyond center field. Im sure it wont be too tall, but it will dramatically effect the outfield view.

1951Campbell
01-04-2006, 04:43 PM
Geez, are there enough decks, sections, mezzanines, etc.? A little simplicity would go a long way.

CLR01
01-04-2006, 04:43 PM
They should have never tore down the old Busch stadium. That pitchers mound is awful.


With the new stadium the pitchers mound is crap but with the old stadium the entire facility was crap.

TheOldRoman
01-04-2006, 04:45 PM
They should have never tore down the old Busch stadium. That pitchers mound is awful.
Overreact much?
I don't particularly like the mound, but it is a throwback to Sportsman/Busch 1. I think it is very fitting.

Baby Fisk
01-04-2006, 04:47 PM
Geez, are there enough decks, sections, mezzanines, etc.? A little simplicity would go a long way.
Good point. Can't decide if there's four or five decks. Why the hate for the gratuitously-ringed pitcher's mound? :?: It's a classic old-style quirk that is the mark of all the best new stadiums.

maurice
01-04-2006, 04:52 PM
The first set of retro parks were nice, because they were different from their predecessors. The most recent batch (including this one) just looks like more of the same. OTOH, anything is better than that craphole they tore down.

Tekijawa
01-04-2006, 05:33 PM
St. Louis looks so much cleaner computer generated!

Law11
01-04-2006, 05:48 PM
Spent New Years in St. Louis with some friends. Saw the new place. Its Right off the expressway. i mean you could toss a ball out the car window and nail someone below. Looks like it will be a great place to see a game.

Thye have some great baseball fans down there who really hoped we would have played together in the WS. Maybe this year..

WinOrDyeTrying
01-04-2006, 06:25 PM
Looks like a major upgrade with great views of downtown St. Louis - the one major aspect the White Sox screwed up when designing their park (the views of downtown Chicago are great - on the exit ramp of the upper deck :(: ).

Dont worry. When I get elected mayor of Chicago (can't decide; teal or pink...), I will build a whole new skyline that fans at The Cell will enjoy. Part of it will be the world biggest churros stand, made from the rubble of Wrigley.

Fuller_Schettman
01-04-2006, 06:36 PM
St. Louis looks so much cleaner computer generated!

And yet, so beige.

What concerns me is those expressway ramps that suddenly end in the first picture. Probably just a retro throwback to the Loma Prieta...

1951Campbell
01-04-2006, 07:31 PM
And yet, so beige.

What concerns me is those expressway ramps that suddenly end in the first picture. Probably just a retro throwback to the Loma Prieta...

...or Milwaukee in the 80's.

doublem23
01-04-2006, 07:42 PM
St. Louis looks so much cleaner computer generated!

:rolling:

Frankfan4life
01-04-2006, 11:22 PM
Spent New Years in St. Louis with some friends. Saw the new place. Its Right off the expressway. i mean you could toss a ball out the car window and nail someone below. Looks like it will be a great place to see a game.

Thye have some great baseball fans down there who really hoped we would have played together in the WS. Maybe this year..The expressway does looks really close. Instead of fireworks after a homerun, the cars that are passing by can honk their horns (toot, toot).

Otherwise, I can't find too much wrong with the new stadium. The outer structure looks really huge. It looks like they can have a lot of activities in there.

C-Dawg
01-04-2006, 11:36 PM
Geez, are there enough decks, sections, mezzanines, etc.? A little simplicity would go a long way.

I feel the same way about Miller Park. But I've only been there twice - maybe if I went more often I'd know the way around it better.

SouthSide_HitMen
01-05-2006, 02:29 AM
Dont worry. When I get elected mayor of Chicago (can't decide; teal or pink...), I will build a whole new skyline that fans at The Cell will enjoy. Part of it will be the world biggest churros stand, made from the rubble of Wrigley.

You have my vote (and if you move the Churros stand inside Comiskey and save the Wrigley rubble somewhere else like a garbage dump I will volunteer for your campaign).

TheKittle
01-05-2006, 03:06 AM
It's so hard to tell how good a stadium is unless you actually go there. How can anybody tell if there are good sitelines unless you're at the game?

One thing I've noticed many people who rip Comiskey Park, have never actually been there. They believe in that hype and BS the media puts out. Yes it's not the retro stadiums but it is a very good place to watch a game.

Professor
01-05-2006, 09:02 AM
The expressway does looks really close. Instead of fireworks after a homerun, the cars that are passing by can honk their horns (toot, toot).

It is extremely close! Driving past it all the time, I keep thinking, That will be the most annoying feature of the park. I wonder if they have something planned to counter the noise from the expressway? When driving on 64 West past the park, you feel like you could stick your arm out and touch the place. It has also proved to be a pain in the ... with people slowing down in order to check out the new park as they go by (though I have been tempted myself, I refrain for the sake of my fellow commuters).

Hangar18
01-05-2006, 12:57 PM
I think the stadium looks phenomenal. Something the SOX shouldve built (but wouldve been too expensive back then) However, my problem is that the Cardinals simply have built the same park Baltimore built. And Texas built. And the Tigers built. and the Padres built. And the Pirates built.
This whole thing with everyone doing a warehouse/building thing is starting to get lame too. In the 60's and 70's, the un-pioneer like National League became guilty of building Cookie-cutter/mixed use stadiums that looked like concrete bowls (Braves, Pirates, Reds, Phillies, Giants, Cardinals, Mets)
they all looked alike and were all copies of each other. Now, those same teams are building parks that again All Look Alike and all Copies of each other.

1951Campbell
01-05-2006, 01:14 PM
I feel the same way about Miller Park. But I've only been there twice - maybe if I went more often I'd know the way around it better.

I've been to Miller Park. Yes, it is a little busy, but Busch II looks beyond the pale.

TheOldRoman
01-05-2006, 01:25 PM
I think the stadium looks phenomenal. Something the SOX shouldve built (but wouldve been too expensive back then) However, my problem is that the Cardinals simply have built the same park Baltimore built. And Texas built. And the Tigers built. and the Padres built. And the Pirates built.
This whole thing with everyone doing a warehouse/building thing is starting to get lame too. In the 60's and 70's, the un-pioneer like National League became guilty of building Cookie-cutter/mixed use stadiums that looked like concrete bowls (Braves, Pirates, Reds, Phillies, Giants, Cardinals, Mets)
they all looked alike and were all copies of each other. Now, those same teams are building parks that again All Look Alike and all Copies of each other.
The Cardinals park looks nothing like the parks in SD or Pittsburgh. PNC's exterior (and backstop) are made of limestone, IIRC. It certainly isn't the dark red brick that the other parks mentioned use. PETCO barely has any bricks (just enough to make some money selling the rights to people). The bricks they use are also very light - even lighter than the bricks the Sox use at the Cell. It is really nothing like the other parks you mentioned.
http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/nl/petco890.jpg

Also, Candlestick was not one of the cookie-cutter parks like you mentioned. At first, it wasn't enclosed in the outfield. Even after they enclosed the outfield, it still wasn't a donut like the other parks. Upperdeck seating along the baselines is not curved as in circular parks.

I really don't get people complaining about the new parks looking alike. Aside from most of them having brick exteriors, they don't look alike. They have different grandstands, different outfield dimensions, different "quirks", and different backdrops behind the outfield. It isn't a matter of every park copying the last. There are just certain things that all parks should be. Baseball parks should have bricks. Baseball parks should have exposed steel. Baseball parks should not have circular outfields with symmetric dimensions. After Oriole Park, everyone realized it. The Sox realized it, and have made appropriate changes.

Viva Medias B's
01-05-2006, 02:05 PM
I believe I used this feature over the summer. This link (http://www.kmov.com/stadiumcam/images/stadium_640.jpg) allows you to see a webcam of the new stadium. To me, the new Busch Stadium replicates the old Sportsman's Park (renamed Busch Stadium when Gussie Busch bought the Cardinals) where the Cardinals played before the recently demolished Busch Stadium.

SouthSide_HitMen
01-05-2006, 02:29 PM
I hope these two like it as much as Busch:

http://www.kmov.com/perl/common/video/wmPlayer.pl?title=www.kmov.com/051020_sadfans.wmv

TheKittle
01-05-2006, 03:07 PM
I really don't get people complaining about the new parks looking alike. Aside from most of them having brick exteriors, they don't look alike. They have different grandstands, different outfield dimensions, different "quirks", and different backdrops behind the outfield. It isn't a matter of every park copying the last. There are just certain things that all parks should be. Baseball parks should have bricks. Baseball parks should have exposed steel. Baseball parks should not have circular outfields with symmetric dimensions. After Oriole Park, everyone realized it. The Sox realized it, and have made appropriate changes.

Actually many of the new stadiums have the same basic design, then they modify it to the location of the stadium.

I want Mags back
01-05-2006, 04:54 PM
Il ike how the seats past 1st and 3rd are tilted, so you can see the infield without constantly turning. thats the one current **** up with the cell

chisox2005
01-05-2006, 07:51 PM
Geez, are there enough decks, sections, mezzanines, etc.? A little simplicity would go a long way.

I agree. The New Cardinals Stadium and Milwaukee will have a new rivalry to who has the most decks and mezzanines in the stadium.

The Critic
01-05-2006, 08:03 PM
I hope these two like it as much as Busch:

http://www.kmov.com/perl/common/video/wmPlayer.pl?title=www.kmov.com/051020_sadfans.wmv

That guy on the left is absolutely hilarious.

SouthSide_HitMen
01-05-2006, 08:16 PM
That guy on the left is absolutely hilarious.

Troy (guy on the right) is a close second and in a dead heat for third check out the guy and girl who pop in toward the end of the video behind the two Busch Stadium fans.

Troy and friend should be invited to throw out the first pitch at the new stadium (with their video shown during their introduction).

TomBradley72
01-05-2006, 10:26 PM
Most of the new "retro parks" look similar from a distance...but when you're actually at each ballpark their distinctions all jump out. I've been to: Comerica Park, PNC Park, Camden Yards, Miller Park, US Cellular Field, Pac Bell/SBC, Jacobs Field, Coors Field and The Ballpark at Arlington...and while there are similarities....they each have 100% unique features....but sometimes there are so many gimmicks it overwhelms the baseball game. Comerica is like that....Minute Maid in Houstons comes across the same way.

New Cardinals Park looks way better than Busch.

WagMan
01-05-2006, 10:53 PM
Having made my first and last trip to old Busch Stadium in 2005, I liked what I saw of the new stadium. I'm a big fan of all the new stadiums. The ones I've been to SBC and Comerica are great places to catch a game. Lookin forward to 2007 when the Sox should be playing in St. Louis! I'm already plannin the road trip! WooHoo!!!

soxfan123
01-05-2006, 11:12 PM
Looks pretty good. I think that could be a gem in a few years. Pac-Bell (AT&T :smile: ) -esque...Me likey.

batmanZoSo
01-05-2006, 11:35 PM
The Cardinals park looks nothing like the parks in SD or Pittsburgh. PNC's exterior (and backstop) are made of limestone, IIRC. It certainly isn't the dark red brick that the other parks mentioned use. PETCO barely has any bricks (just enough to make some money selling the rights to people). The bricks they use are also very light - even lighter than the bricks the Sox use at the Cell. It is really nothing like the other parks you mentioned.
http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/nl/petco890.jpg

Also, Candlestick was not one of the cookie-cutter parks like you mentioned. At first, it wasn't enclosed in the outfield. Even after they enclosed the outfield, it still wasn't a donut like the other parks. Upperdeck seating along the baselines is not curved as in circular parks.

I really don't get people complaining about the new parks looking alike. Aside from most of them having brick exteriors, they don't look alike. They have different grandstands, different outfield dimensions, different "quirks", and different backdrops behind the outfield. It isn't a matter of every park copying the last. There are just certain things that all parks should be. Baseball parks should have bricks. Baseball parks should have exposed steel. Baseball parks should not have circular outfields with symmetric dimensions. After Oriole Park, everyone realized it. The Sox realized it, and have made appropriate changes.

I agree with you. How can someone say Bank One, PNC, SBC, and Coors Field look alike? They look nothing alike. A few of the new parks are crappy--namely San Diego and Cincinnati in my opinion, and just aesthetically speaking--but most of them are beautiful. This new St Louis park looks fantastic. I wouldn't mind seeing the Sox play an interleague game there one bit.

It used to make me upset to see some of these new parks spring up and to think we could've had something like that, but I'll take a World Series any day of the week. And our park is great, so don't anyone misunderstand me (but honestly it's nothing close to something like SBC Park or whatever they call SF nowadays).