PDA

View Full Version : Have they started on the final renovations?


Red Barchetta
10-08-2006, 05:37 PM
Here's hoping that they get a jump start and finally finish the green seat renocavations. Believe, I would rather live with the blue seats a little longer due to post-season ball, however since that is not an option this year, hopefully they can finally complete the "final" renovations. Especially since they announced earlier the seats down the lines will be angled towards home plate.

Cuck_The_Fubs
10-08-2006, 05:42 PM
I only knew that they were changing the color of the seats. I didnt know that they were angling them..sweet!:supernana:

batmanZoSo
10-08-2006, 05:51 PM
I only knew that they were changing the color of the seats. I didnt know that they were angling them..sweet!:supernana:

Yeah, that will be a big, big difference down the lines. I don't see how or why they wouldn't be able to finish the seat replacements. The angled seats are no harder to put in than regular ones, they're just built differently to be pre-angled to give you a better sightline. It'll be like sitting down the line at Fenway where the grandstand faces the plate almost, only you don't lose sight of the OF corner.

soxchick20
10-08-2006, 06:34 PM
Especially since they announced earlier the seats down the lines will be angled towards home plate.

awesome, didn't know about that. that'll be cool.

thomas35forever
10-08-2006, 07:19 PM
I don't know if anyone else read this, but I heard they're moving the press box down the rightfield line and filling the old press box with more scouting seats.

jamokes
10-08-2006, 07:37 PM
When does the retractable roof go up?

thomas35forever
10-08-2006, 07:37 PM
When does the retractable roof go up?
In about 2050.

batmanZoSo
10-08-2006, 07:40 PM
I don't know if anyone else read this, but I heard they're moving the press box down the rightfield line and filling the old press box with more scouting seats.

Had no idea about that. Makes sense, I mean why use up prime real estate on the broadcasters?

FedEx227
10-08-2006, 07:49 PM
Had no idea about that. Makes sense, I mean why use up prime real estate on the broadcasters?

[imagine ultra teal] Where's Jay Marriotti going to sit?! [/imagine ultra teal]

Dan the Man
10-08-2006, 08:11 PM
I don't know if anyone else read this, but I heard they're moving the press box down the rightfield line and filling the old press box with more scouting seats.

Heard nothing of this. That will be interesting to see. Also, the angled seats will be NICE.

RedHeadPaleHoser
10-08-2006, 08:39 PM
Then rebuild McCuddy's inside the park, a HR porch, flags instead of banners....

shoelessshaun27!
10-08-2006, 09:24 PM
I can't wait to go to a game again. I miss going.

HotelWhiteSox
10-08-2006, 09:41 PM
Hangar for supervisor

NonetheLoaiza
10-08-2006, 09:41 PM
I don't know if anyone else read this, but I heard they're moving the press box down the rightfield line and filling the old press box with more scouting seats.

They are moving the press box into the 400 level stadium club, and making the old press box into a restaurant. They have already started to take out some of the outfield seats. Should be pretty neat when complete.

RedHeadPaleHoser
10-08-2006, 09:50 PM
Hangar for supervisor

Careful - can you imagine if the seat angling is held up by weather? If I have to read 13 more posts on caulk I will scream...

Kidding Hangar...I love your passion!!!

nasox
10-08-2006, 10:15 PM
They are moving the press box into the 400 level stadium club, and making the old press box into a restaurant. They have already started to take out some of the outfield seats. Should be pretty neat when complete.

Source?

Calcio23
10-09-2006, 12:21 AM
[imagine ultra teal] Where's Jay Marriotti going to sit?! [/imagine ultra teal]

On top of the foul pole. According to Ozzie, he should like it.

October26
10-09-2006, 08:31 AM
I can't wait to go to a game again. I miss going.


I do to. The season is only a week old and already I miss seeing my White sox on the field. :whiner: Spring training seems so far away.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 08:36 AM
They are moving the press box into the 400 level stadium club, and making the old press box into a restaurant. They have already started to take out some of the outfield seats. Should be pretty neat when complete.

Source?

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 08:39 AM
Hangar for supervisor

Yes, I'm going to be interviewing the 2 guys who will be installing the seats ..

jenn2080
10-09-2006, 08:52 AM
Here's hoping that they get a jump start and finally finish the green seat renocavations. Believe, I would rather live with the blue seats a little longer due to post-season ball, however since that is not an option this year, hopefully they can finally complete the "final" renovations. Especially since they announced earlier the seats down the lines will be angled towards home plate.

Where is this from? In the renovation plans on the Sox site it does not say anything about angling them.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:28 AM
Where is this from? In the renovation plans on the Sox site it does not say anything about angling them.



Thats because the SOX changed their minds .... you didnt get the memo?

BanditJimmy
10-09-2006, 09:29 AM
Not sure if any one is with me on this, but I find the fundamental deck a waste of good space for additional good seating.


There's got to me another place in the park where it can be used of kids.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:32 AM
Not sure if any one is with me on this, but I find the fundamental deck a waste of good space for additional good seating.


There's got to me another place in the park where it can be used of kids.

:rolleyes:

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:33 AM
Not sure if any one is with me on this, but I find the fundamental deck a waste of good space for additional good seating.


There's got to me another place in the park where it can be used of kids.


I was a big opponent of where it was placed, I wanted it moved back more.
However, they can add a similar area for seating (a mini-upper deck) above the seats in the RF area. That would look good and would be CLOSER to the field

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:35 AM
I was a big opponent of where it was placed, I wanted it moved back more.
However, they can add a similar area for seating (a mini-upper deck) above the seats in the RF area. That would look good and would be CLOSER to the field

You mean like a Home Run Porch? That is the first I've heard of this idea.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:37 AM
You mean like a Home Run Porch? That is the first I've heard of this idea.

I can tell you this for sure. The SOX want to add seats to the park soon ...

BanditJimmy
10-09-2006, 09:38 AM
I was a big opponent of where it was placed, I wanted it moved back more.
However, they can add a similar area for seating (a mini-upper deck) above the seats in the RF area. That would look good and would be CLOSER to the field


Some have said the reason they won't do anything in RF is due to an obstruction it would cause for the people in the stadium club when looking out to the scoreboard.

rdwj
10-09-2006, 09:40 AM
Speaking of the scoreboard, that thing could use a serious update.

chisoxmike
10-09-2006, 09:41 AM
They are moving the press box into the 400 level stadium club, and making the old press box into a restaurant. They have already started to take out some of the outfield seats. Should be pretty neat when complete.


You people that are making these claims need to tell us their source.

batmanZoSo
10-09-2006, 09:42 AM
I can tell you this for sure. The SOX want to add seats to the park soon ...

That would be stupid. You need a scarcity and it's not like they sold out every game.

chisoxmike
10-09-2006, 09:42 AM
Speaking of the scoreboard, that thing could use a serious update.


:?:

Both the jumbo-tron and the scoreboard are since 2003.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:46 AM
I can tell you this for sure. The SOX want to add seats to the park soon ...

Again, source?

Sure, the Sox would love to have 50,000 at every game but it ain't going to happen. Adding seats above RF will be a distraction and in my opinion, unnecessary. However, that is pretty much the only spot where a large number of seats could be added.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:46 AM
That would be stupid. You need a scarcity and it's not like they sold out every game.


You mean the less seats there are in the park, the better?
You should email the SOX and let them know how you feel about this ....

DumpJerry
10-09-2006, 09:47 AM
You mean the less seats there are in the park, the better?
You should email the SOX and let them know how you feel about this ....
The A's did this for the ALDS-they closed off the UD. Now they're in the ALCS.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:49 AM
The A's did this for the ALDS-they closed off the UD. Now they're in the ALCS.

...and they will continue to do this for the entire postseason.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:50 AM
Again, source?

Sure, the Sox would love to have 50,000 at every game but it ain't going to happen. Adding seats above RF will be a distraction and in my opinion, unnecessary. However, that is pretty much the only spot where a large number of seats could be added.


There are a couple things they can do. If you look in CF area of new Busch, they can do a smaller version of that. Or, if you've been to the Jake, Look at how they added seats down the lines in each direction, butting directly with the concourse. I thought that was pretty clever.
Its not a lot of seating, but definitely something that could easily be done.

Having a 38,000 seat stadium is nice. But having a 42 or 43,000 seat stadium would be much better for the SOX, especially if those seats are somewhere CLOSER to the field, which means more $$$$$. Thats what the SOX are thinking about

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 09:52 AM
The A's did this for the ALDS-they closed off the UD. Now they're in the ALCS.


They did this because nobody was sitting up there ....

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:56 AM
Having a 38,000 seat stadium is nice. But having a 42 or 43,000 seat stadium would be much better for the SOX, especially if those seats are somewhere CLOSER to the field, which means more $$$$$. Thats what the SOX are thinking about

What do you mean by "close to the field"? Field level? The Sox already ate up a good chunk of foul territory when they added the seats along the lines. The only other way to get seats close to the field would be to build above existing seating and that means obstructed views. They can't do it around the existing upper deck because it would block the suites. The only spot to do it is in the outfield and those seats wouldn't exactly be close to the field. Plus, support columns would block views and possibly interrupt the flow of traffic on the concourse.

Agreed, they might be able to add some seats here or there but they will not be able to add a large amount of seats without significant renovation.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 09:57 AM
They did this because nobody was sitting up there ....

You don't think people would pay to sit up there for World Series games? The A's are keeping it smaller on purpose.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:05 AM
What do you mean by "close to the field"? Field level? The Sox already ate up a good chunk of foul territory when they added the seats along the lines. The only other way to get seats close to the field would be to build above existing seating and that means obstructed views. They can't do it around the existing upper deck because it would block the suites. The only spot to do it is in the outfield and those seats wouldn't exactly be close to the field. Plus, support columns would block views and possibly interrupt the flow of traffic on the concourse.

Agreed, they might be able to add some seats here or there but they will not be able to add a large amount of seats without significant renovation.

Close to the field as in Nowhere-near-the-upper-deck. The SOX realized their colossal mistake with that upper deck, and how other stadiums are cleverly adding seats in other areas. The SOX will have to be creative, but they will be able to add some seats to that area. Aesthetically speaking, I'd like them to borrow a page from what the Indians did in the RF corner area, the deck would be as low as overhang that houses the lowest level skybox. If this moving of the pressbox thing is under consideration, they could easily move Restaurant over there, and simply have more room to work with with extra seats in RF

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:07 AM
You don't think people would pay to sit up there for World Series games? The A's are keeping it smaller on purpose.

If I'm an A's fan, and the A's decided to open up that deck for more fans, I think I'd be all over that. A World Series game only of course ....

rdwj
10-09-2006, 10:12 AM
:?:

Both the jumbo-tron and the scoreboard are since 2003.

Have you looked at it? It's nothing but a big billboard.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 10:16 AM
I'd like them to borrow a page from what the Indians did in the RF corner area, the deck would be as low as overhang that houses the lowest level skybox. If this moving of the pressbox thing is under consideration, they could easily move Restaurant over there, and simply have more room to work with with extra seats in RF

I must admit that I have not been to Cleveland but I am still having trouble trying to figure out what you are proposing. Are you suggesting that the bottom elevation of this new deck be at the same elevation as the bottom of the lowest suite? The height difference between the bottom of the lowest suites and the main concourse is very small. If a deck was built over the RF outfield seats, how far out do you see the deck protruding? All the way to the fences? If that was the case, the entire existing RF seats would be in shadow and significantly obstructed, especially for fly balls. If the deck only stuck out as far as the existing suites, the seats would be too far away from the field.

I took a look at the seating views at the Jake and they have a much different setup in RF. I don't see that working at the Cell.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:19 AM
Have you looked at it? It's nothing but a big billboard.


Heh heh. That is my problem with our current board. The SOX lost Bill Veecks concept of what that board was supposed to mean when he introduced it. (They also forgot to put the clock on top of it, and misplaced one of the pinwheels) Personally, the jumbo tron is a waste,
they dont even show replays.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 10:20 AM
Heh heh. That is my problem with our current board. The SOX lost Bill Veecks concept of what that board was supposed to mean when he introduced it. (They also forgot to put the clock on top of it, and misplaced one of the pinwheels) Personally, the jumbo tron is a waste,
they dont even show replays.

They show replays all the time. They just don't show replays of close plays on the bases, per White Sox policy.

batmanZoSo
10-09-2006, 10:21 AM
I'm really more concerned that they renovate the pitching staff. In the end, nobody gives a rat's ass about the park. Our attendance stayed pretty much the same each year during the renovations era following 2000. But then in 2005, there was a sudden spike and and even bigger one in 06. Scientists are baffled as to why this is.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:24 AM
I must admit that I have not been to Cleveland but I am still having trouble trying to figure out what you are proposing. Are you suggesting that the bottom elevation of this new deck be at the same elevation as the bottom of the lowest suite? The height difference between the bottom of the lowest suites and the main concourse is very small. If a deck was built over the RF outfield seats, how far out do you see the deck protruding? All the way to the fences? If that was the case, the entire existing RF seats would be in shadow and significantly obstructed, especially for fly balls. If the deck only stuck out as far as the existing suites, the seats would be too far away from the field.

I took a look at the seating views at the Jake and they have a much different setup in RF. I don't see that working at the Cell.


Hey man, these are all good questions. I have this currently sketched at home, I wish I could show it to you. Basically, my idea is influenced by the seating at The Jake, but also partly the upper deck at Petco. It would of course have to be cantilevered, and it wont be thousands of seats, but enough to warrant building this. It would also give the park a bit of character and the lines wouldnt make you think of a giant bowl. Next time I'm out having a drink, I'll bring it with me ....

rdwj
10-09-2006, 10:24 AM
...they dont even show replays.

or the score! Seems to me that the MAIN scoreboard should display the score by inning and the run/hit/error totals. That covered it when they build the fan deck. You'd think they would have a redesign in the works.

MrRoboto83
10-09-2006, 10:25 AM
I'm really more concerned that they renovate the pitching staff. In the end, nobody gives a rat's ass about the park. Our attendance stayed pretty much the same each year during the renovations era following 2000. But then in 2005, there was a sudden spike and and even bigger one in 06. Scientists are baffled as to why this is.


I have a theory......Dollar Dog Thursdays:cool:

soxchick20
10-09-2006, 10:26 AM
I'm really more concerned that they renovate the pitching staff. In the end, nobody gives a rat's ass about the park. Our attendance stayed pretty much the same each year during the renovations era following 2000. But then in 2005, there was a sudden spike and and even bigger one in 06. Scientists are baffled as to why this is.

like he said.

at this point, who cares what the jumbotron looks like, what matters is building a better team that will lead us into another postseason next year.

rdwj
10-09-2006, 10:29 AM
like he said.

at this point, who cares what the jumbotron looks like, what matters is building a better team that will lead us into another postseason next year.

Of course there are more important things that how the park looks, but generally, they're not written from the same checkbook. ...and it's not like KW will be spending his time looking at stadium mock-ups instead of trying to strengthen the team.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 10:29 AM
Hey man, these are all good questions. I have this currently sketched at home, I wish I could show it to you. Basically, my idea is influenced by the seating at The Jake, but also partly the upper deck at Petco. It would of course have to be cantilevered, and it wont be thousands of seats, but enough to warrant building this. It would also give the park a bit of character and the lines wouldnt make you think of a giant bowl. Next time I'm out having a drink, I'll bring it with me ....

What would you cantelever the seats off of? Huge columns would have to be built on the outfield concourse to support the seating. Even then, the seats would stick out far enough that those sitting near the rear of the seating area would get the shaft on fly balls. If the intent was to minimize obstructions, only a handful of rows would exist. I don't see the advantage to spending the millions of dollars to build this when it would either block a lot of views or only add a few hundred seats.

In any event, these seats would still be far away from the diamond.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:36 AM
like he said.

at this point, who cares what the jumbotron looks like, what matters is building a better team that will lead us into another postseason next year.


Thats why this particular thread was entitled "Have they started on the final renovations?"
general subject matter in this thread is discussion of the offseason renovations, and how they affect the park and fans.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:43 AM
What would you cantelever the seats off of? Huge columns would have to be built on the outfield concourse to support the seating. Even then, the seats would stick out far enough that those sitting near the rear of the seating area would get the shaft on fly balls. If the intent was to minimize obstructions, only a handful of rows would exist. I don't see the advantage to spending the millions of dollars to build this when it would either block a lot of views or only add a few hundred seats.

In any event, these seats would still be far away from the diamond.

Yes, a few in the back rows would have a somewhat obstructed view, but the majority of those seats WOULDNT be obstructed. The only people obstructed would be those on the concourse. Similar to those in LF. The intent here isnt to minimize obstructions, but to add seating. Thats what direction they would take if this comes about. The huge columns you speak of, wouldnt be so huge. They would be the same as the ones you currently see in LF concourse area. The back support posts would be at the back of the concourse. If youve been to Petco, you'd know how that works, they did an excellent excellent job with that park

FedEx227
10-09-2006, 10:45 AM
There are a couple things they can do. If you look in CF area of new Busch, they can do a smaller version of that. Or, if you've been to the Jake, Look at how they added seats down the lines in each direction, butting directly with the concourse. I thought that was pretty clever.
Its not a lot of seating, but definitely something that could easily be done.

Having a 38,000 seat stadium is nice. But having a 42 or 43,000 seat stadium would be much better for the SOX, especially if those seats are somewhere CLOSER to the field, which means more $$$$$. Thats what the SOX are thinking about

Ask Cleveland how this whole idea worked out?

Supply and demand Hangar... if the Sox only have 38,000 seats the demand is much much higher to get them, thus people will go out of their way to get season tickets. If you start making it easier to get tickets the appeal of season ticket plans is reduced greatly. Plus, we aren't going to be drawing out of our minds forever, thats just the truth of it, and the Mistake on the Lake is a perfect example of a team looking ridiculous playing in front of a gigantic stadium thats not anywhere near sold-out.

Scotty_T
10-09-2006, 10:45 AM
Having a 38,000 seat stadium is nice. But having a 42 or 43,000 seat stadium would be much better for the SOX, especially if those seats are somewhere CLOSER to the field, which means more $$$$$. Thats what the SOX are thinking about

Been there, done that.

More seats means value of my season tickets goes down.

I'd be pretty upset about that. Scarcity is a good thing, and will only help fill the stadium. Hopefully they realize that.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:47 AM
Of course there are more important things that how the park looks, but generally, they're not written from the same checkbook. ...and it's not like KW will be spending his time looking at stadium mock-ups instead of trying to strengthen the team.



YES, Some think Kenny Williams will be drafting designs and looking at drawings.
He will be strengthening the team. Theres another department that will be working on the stadium stuff.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 10:54 AM
Ask Cleveland how this whole idea worked out?

Supply and demand Hangar... if the Sox only have 38,000 seats the demand is much much higher to get them, thus people will go out of their way to get season tickets. If you start making it easier to get tickets the appeal of season ticket plans is reduced greatly. Plus, we aren't going to be drawing out of our minds forever, thats just the truth of it, and the Mistake on the Lake is a perfect example of a team looking ridiculous playing in front of a gigantic stadium thats not anywhere near sold-out.


I asked Cleveland how it worked out. They said all those years being in the playoffs, it worked phenomenal for them. They said that in the future, when/if they get to the post season, they will have the infrastructure already in place, and not have to get creative and come up with a bogus sliding ticket scale or renaming seats BOX to charge you more.

Also, lets not mistake why the seats were removed in the first place. That entire section of seats were removed because quite frankly, nobody wanted to sit in the sky, in the furthest seats away from the field as possible. The SOX werent looking at ticket scarcity as the reason. It was Aesthetics.

All Im saying, is if they have the chance to build seats that are quite closer to the field than the ones they replaced, why wouldnt they? Also, dont think for a minute, those new seats wouldnt cost more than the ones in the UD

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 10:58 AM
Yes, a few in the back rows would have a somewhat obstructed view, but the majority of those seats WOULDNT be obstructed. The only people obstructed would be those on the concourse. Similar to those in LF. The intent here isnt to minimize obstructions, but to add seating. Thats what direction they would take if this comes about. The huge columns you speak of, wouldnt be so huge. They would be the same as the ones you currently see in LF concourse area. The back support posts would be at the back of the concourse. If youve been to Petco, you'd know how that works, they did an excellent excellent job with that park

If the intent is to have the majority of the existing seats unobstructed, then most of the new seats would need to be built over the concourse or built high above the existing seating. These seats would be very far away from the action.

As for the support columns, they would have to be very large as there is nothing for the columns to tie back to. Fundamentals columns are for the most part supporting vertical loads and as such, they do not need to be particularly large. Once you start cantilevering loads, the vertical columns have to be massive and in this case, tie backs will be needed. This would result in a second set of columns outside of the stadium with horizontal members to transfer the seating load.

The other option would be two have two sets of vertical columns, one at the front of the concourse and the other at the back. Build seating above and only cantilever out a few rows. These cantilevered seats would be above the rows furthest back in the existing seating area.

I took a look at the seating vies for Petco. Are you referring to the LF outfield seating? Only a small portion of that seating is actually cantilevered. The bulk of the seating is supported from below.

In any event, there is not enough physical space on the concourse to add a significant amount of seating, especially if blocking existing seating is a concern. Again, these seats would still be far away from the field. You originally suggested seating closer to the field to bring in the big dollars.

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 11:00 AM
Been there, done that.

More seats means value of my season tickets goes down.

I'd be pretty upset about that. Scarcity is a good thing, and will only help fill the stadium. Hopefully they realize that.

I couldn't disagree more. Especially because as a poor college student, I can't afford season tickets or even good seats at the Cell unless someone else pays for them (like my Dad). More seats means more people can go to the games which means more people can enjoy the Sox. It sounds like you're trying to draw in some elite crowd and well, that's definately no fun.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:05 AM
If the intent is to have the majority of the existing seats unobstructed,

Again, these seats would still be far away from the field. You originally suggested seating closer to the field to bring in the big dollars.


Stop putting unobstructed as the main reasoning here. Most of the new seats wouldnt be unobstructed. I suggested seating closer the field, as compared to the seats in the last rows of the now shaved off UD. Any seat thats added to the lower level, its safe to say, will be closer the field.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 11:14 AM
Stop putting unobstructed as the main reasoning here. Most of the new seats wouldnt be unobstructed. I suggested seating closer the field, as compared to the seats in the last rows of the now shaved off UD. Any seat thats added to the lower level, its safe to say, will be closer the field.

Oh, I was never arguing that the NEW seats would be obstructed. Those will be fine. What will be obstructed are EXISTING seats.

And these new seats could hardly be considered Lower Level. These would be similar to Club Level, based on elevation but in reality be more like Upper Deck in terms of how far away from the field they would be. I feel seats there should be priced the same as Upper Box with no access to the Lower Level. But if the Sox did it, they would be "destination seats" and they would probably be priced the same as Lower Box and have full park access.

Again, how can seats built ABOVE and BEHIND (for the most part) existing outfield seats be consider "close to the field"?

TornLabrum
10-09-2006, 11:15 AM
What everyone seems to be missing is the following facts:

1) Additional seats near the field were added during phase one of the renovations.

2) If you want additional seats "near the field" now, the only place to put them is on the concourse, and I don't see that happening.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:21 AM
Oh, I was never arguing that the NEW seats would be obstructed. Those will be fine. What will be obstructed are EXISTING seats.

And these new seats could hardly be considered Lower Level. These would be similar to Club Level, based on elevation but in reality be more like Upper Deck in terms of how far away from the field they would be. I feel seats there should be priced the same as Upper Box with no access to the Lower Level. But if the Sox did it, they would be "destination seats" and they would probably be priced the same as Lower Box and have full park access.

Again, how can seats built ABOVE and BEHIND (for the most part) existing outfield seats be consider "close to the field"?

The existing seats your talking about, would probably be the first 4 or 5 rows. If these new seats were built, they would be significantly closer because:
1: The new seats wouldnt have to rise above 3 levels of skyboxes which..
2: Force the first row to be placed behind the last row which ...
3: Forces the trajectory of the seats to be akin to that of a roller coaster

Those seats would/could be able to extend all the way back to the concourse.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:24 AM
2) If you want additional seats "near the field" now, the only place to put them is on the concourse, and I don't see that happening.


.....and thats what were saying. Any newer seats will definitely be put there ...

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 11:26 AM
What everyone seems to be missing is the following facts:

1) Additional seats near the field were added during phase one of the renovations.

2) If you want additional seats "near the field" now, the only place to put them is on the concourse, and I don't see that happening.

Point #1 was not lost on this lowly PE.

What do you mean by "close to the field"? Field level? The Sox already ate up a good chunk of foul territory when they added the seats along the lines. The only other way to get seats close to the field would be to build above existing seating and that means obstructed views. They can't do it around the existing upper deck because it would block the suites. The only spot to do it is in the outfield and those seats wouldn't exactly be close to the field. Plus, support columns would block views and possibly interrupt the flow of traffic on the concourse.

:cool:

Point #2 is where the rubber meets the road. Based on the design of the park, it is simply impossible to add seats close to the field without significant structural modifications. The original park's "no obstructed view" design philosophy has boxed the Sox into a corner in terms of where large sections of seating can be added. Phase 1 renovations ate up the prime spots. I suppose a couple rows could be added to the front of the existing Upper Deck but would it really be worth it to add about 1,000 Upper Deck seats? More seats cannot be added to the Club Level or off of the suites without blocking views. Above the outfield concourse is the only real spot left but these seats would be very far away.

I forsee capacity staying roughly the same for the next several years.

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 11:29 AM
The existing seats your talking about, would probably be the first 4 or 5 rows. If these new seats were built, they would be significantly closer because:
1: The new seats wouldnt have to rise above 3 levels of skyboxes which..
2: Force the first row to be placed behind the last row which ...
3: Forces the trajectory of the seats to be akin to that of a roller coaster

Those seats would/could be able to extend all the way back to the concourse.

Okay, so above which existing row do you forsee the first row of this new seating starting? Lower Reserved is what, 30 rows deep? You got a choice between 1 and 30. Let's establish this baseline so we can continue this discussion with a touch of sanity.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:33 AM
.....The original park's "no obstructed view" design philosophy has boxed the Sox into a corner in terms of where large sections of seating can be added.

The SOX have thrown out their "no obstructed view" design philosophy the year Camden Yards was opened. The SOX wont be following the original standards, because, well, after 10 years the place was undergoing major renovations. The original concept was flawed right from the word GO (HOK even told them that) and the newer renovations quietly acknowledge this. If a few thousand seats are added, that is where they are going, and if a couple rows are minimally obstructed, so be it.

batmanZoSo
10-09-2006, 11:34 AM
The existing seats your talking about, would probably be the first 4 or 5 rows. If these new seats were built, they would be significantly closer because:
1: The new seats wouldnt have to rise above 3 levels of skyboxes which..
2: Force the first row to be placed behind the last row which ...
3: Forces the trajectory of the seats to be akin to that of a roller coaster

Those seats would/could be able to extend all the way back to the concourse.

I've watched many an inning from the Fundamentals deck and the view is great there. It would be the same if there was a tier of seats there or in RF like you suggest. I just don't see the need for more seats. Adding capacity would be a mistake.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:36 AM
Okay, so above which existing row do you forsee the first row of this new seating starting? Lower Reserved is what, 30 rows deep? You got a choice between 1 and 30. Let's establish this baseline so we can continue this discussion with a touch of sanity.


Im not the architect. But if I was, I'd start it about 5 rows down

tebman
10-09-2006, 11:41 AM
This whole discussion is interesting. A few things that occur to me:

* The Sox proved that winning fills the ballpark. The renovations are nice, but they're really side dishes to the main course. At the risk of provoking a Cub-fans-are-lemmings rant, I'll say that the Sox' record attendance this year simply demonstrates that Sox fans appreciate good baseball. Period.

* The architecture of USCF is what it is. Like TL said, there's really nowhere else to put seats in the lower deck. And I agree with itsnotrequired that a second level in right field (Upper deck? Home run porch? Juliet's balcony?) would be a major construction project that would provide very little gain both in seating capacity and would be a loss in aesthetics. The remodeling of the upper deck a couple of years ago was a huge improvement for the ballpark -- it looks better, feels better, and just is better. The cost was several thousand seats, but those were seats that were usually empty anyway.

* I don't understand why the scoreboard was reduced to being simply a Jumbotron. While it's true that the Fan Deck blocks the view of the lower part of the board, there's still plenty of room on its face to have the line score, ball/strike count, hit/error notification, and other basic baseball stuff that has now been scattered around the ballpark. It's a scoreboard, after all. Even the billboard ads on the board don't fill up the space. Everything on there is sponsored anyway, so the cost to make changes on it should be transparent to the club or to its landlord, the ISFA. I don't get it.

But hey, if the pitching staff can locate their operating manual next season and we go to the World Series again, I'm not too worried about the light bulbs in the scoreboard. :tongue:

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 11:48 AM
The SOX have thrown out their "no obstructed view" design philosophy the year Camden Yards was opened. The SOX wont be following the original standards, because, well, after 10 years the place was undergoing major renovations. The original concept was flawed right from the word GO (HOK even told them that) and the newer renovations quietly acknowledge this. If a few thousand seats are added, that is where they are going, and if a couple rows are minimally obstructed, so be it.

Whether the philosophy was abandoned or not is irrelevant once the original park was built. The stadium is simply not configured to easily expand seating.

I am in full agreement that the only spot to add a significant amount of seats is either on or above the outfield concourse. On the concourse doesn't make a lot of sense as these seats would block the views of those walking/standing on the concourse, a unique feature of the park. It would have to be above.

Im not the architect. But if I was, I'd start it about 5 rows down

Okay, so the first row of the new seats will be starting near the very back of the existing seats. Plus, the new seats will have to be at least 15 ft. above those existing seats. So basically, all the rest of the new seats will be above and behind the entire Lower Reserved seating area. Explain to me again how these seats are close to the field?

From a massing standpoint, the new seating area will more or less look the same as Fundamentals. I can't imagine the design adding more than 1500 seats. Is it really worth spending the money? I guess that's something the Sox will need to determine...and find funding for. IIRC, isn't most of the US Cellular money gone?

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:51 AM
* Like TL said, there's really nowhere else to put seats in the lower deck. And I agree with itsnotrequired that a second level in right field (Upper deck? Home run porch? Juliet's balcony?) would be a major construction project that would provide very little gain both in seating capacity and would be a loss in aesthetics.

The cost was several thousand seats, but those were seats that were usually empty anyway.

* I don't understand why the scoreboard was reduced to being simply a Jumbotron. While it's true that the Fan Deck blocks the view of the lower part of the board, there's still plenty of room on its face to have the line score, ball/strike count, hit/error notification, and other basic baseball stuff that has now been scattered around the ballpark. It's a scoreboard, after all.



On the contrary ...... a 2nd deck in RF, done right, would make the park much nicer, and again, cut down on the massive "bowl" effect. It would add seating "closer" to the field that was previously cut down (from the UD, which everyone hated). This wouldnt be as major as what it took to put Fundamentals Deck up. Im sure a "sponsor" would be contacted to name it (every park has done it already) to offset some of the "costs".

A hidden benefit to this, would that the Scoreboard in CF would be forced to show scores now, and maybe a billboard could now be replaced with the out-of-town scoreboard.

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 11:57 AM
So basically, all the rest of the new seats will be above and behind the entire Lower Reserved seating area. Explain to me again how these seats are close to the field?

From a massing standpoint, the new seating area will more or less look the same as Fundamentals. I can't imagine the design adding more than 1500 seats. Is it really worth spending the money? I guess that's something the Sox will need to determine...and find funding for. IIRC, isn't most of the US Cellular money gone?


The philosophy is relevant, as the SOX knew they needed to do something about the park. Im glad they threw the concept out, otherwise we'd still have blue seats too. Those seats im speaking of, would be CLOSER than the last rows of seats that were removed. You've been up there. Imagine standing up there, walking down the zillion rows of stairs, taking the ramp all the way down to the 1st level, where you would simply walk up a flight of stairs to your new seats. These seats would be similar to the 1st level of skyboxes. Can we agree that the 1st level of skyboxes are CLOSER than the last row of seats in the UD?

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 12:04 PM
The philosophy is relevant, as the SOX knew they needed to do something about the park. Im glad they threw the concept out, otherwise we'd still have blue seats too. Those seats im speaking of, would be CLOSER than the last rows of seats that were removed. You've been up there. Imagine standing up there, walking down the zillion rows of stairs, taking the ramp all the way down to the 1st level, where you would simply walk up a flight of stairs to your new seats. These seats would be similar to the 1st level of skyboxes. Can we agree that the 1st level of skyboxes are CLOSER than the last row of seats in the UD?

I was speaking about the shift in philosophy being irrelevant. Whether the Sox stayed with the no obstruction design or moved away from it doesn't matter now as the park is what it is. The original design has limited what they are able to do now. But that isn't that big a deal anyway as most stadiums aren't designed to add large amounts of seating in the future. Sure, some seats could be tucked in here or there but a stadium isn't going to be designed with large gaps in it to accommodate large amounts of future seating.

I'll agree that the proposed seats will be closer to the field but they will still be far away from the diamond. I guess I'd rather sit in the Upper Deck around the basepaths rather than 600' from home plate but hey, that's me.

AZChiSoxFan
10-09-2006, 12:08 PM
I don't see how or why they wouldn't be able to finish the seat replacements.

Well, haven't the last several days in Chicago been quite cold? Well, whatever the temps have been, it's been too cold for the epoxy to hold, so they've had to put off the seat change out, indefinitely. Also, the ONE guy who has been working on it, well...his mother got sick so he hasn't been able to come into work recently. He changes out about 3 seats a day, so now they are way behind schedule.

Note: not sure if that should have been in teal or not.

Hitmen77
10-09-2006, 01:12 PM
Where is this from? In the renovation plans on the Sox site it does not say anything about angling them.

It was in the Trib and was discussed here at the end of August.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=78034

Vernam
10-09-2006, 01:15 PM
* I don't understand why the scoreboard was reduced to being simply a Jumbotron. While it's true that the Fan Deck blocks the view of the lower part of the board, there's still plenty of room on its face to have the line score, ball/strike count, hit/error notification, and other basic baseball stuff that has now been scattered around the ballpark. It's a scoreboard, after all. Even the billboard ads on the board don't fill up the space. Everything on there is sponsored anyway, so the cost to make changes on it should be transparent to the club or to its landlord, the ISFA. I don't get it.My pet peeve is that pitchers' stats are only shown momentarily when they first come into the game. Blink and you miss 'em. And if the Jumbotron is a waste of space, what does that make that long stripe of screen above the club sections? Only time I paid any attention to that was when they used it for appearances by Mr. Zero. They ought to put useful info there more often.

Vernam

Hitmen77
10-09-2006, 01:21 PM
Speaking of the scoreboard, that thing could use a serious update.

:?:

Both the jumbo-tron and the scoreboard are since 2003.

Have you looked at it? It's nothing but a big billboard.

or the score! Seems to me that the MAIN scoreboard should display the score by inning and the run/hit/error totals. That covered it when they build the fan deck. You'd think they would have a redesign in the works.

This whole discussion is interesting. A few things that occur to me:

...
* I don't understand why the scoreboard was reduced to being simply a Jumbotron. While it's true that the Fan Deck blocks the view of the lower part of the board, there's still plenty of room on its face to have the line score, ball/strike count, hit/error notification, and other basic baseball stuff that has now been scattered around the ballpark. It's a scoreboard, after all. Even the billboard ads on the board don't fill up the space. Everything on there is sponsored anyway, so the cost to make changes on it should be transparent to the club or to its landlord, the ISFA. I don't get it.



I agree with rdwj on this one. The scoreboard needs to be changed somehow. The main board is just a video board that mostly shows birthday greetings. The aux board is where all the game info is (line score, R-H-E totals, lineups, etc.), but it's view is obstructed from many seats on the 3rd base side of the park. There are way too many seats at the park from where you can't see this basic game info. Also, that out of town scoreboard is woefully out of date. Check out the graphics and info at other parks' out of town scoreboard the next time the Sox play in places like Cleveland or Anaheim.

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 01:25 PM
Also, that out of town scoreboard is woefully out of date. Check out the graphics and info at other parks' out of town scoreboard the next time the Sox play in places like Cleveland or Anaheim.

At least we don't have a person sitting inside our scoreboard putting up big number cards everytime the score changes.... :D:

batmanZoSo
10-09-2006, 01:27 PM
Well, haven't the last several days in Chicago been quite cold? Well, whatever the temps have been, it's been too cold for the epoxy to hold, so they've had to put off the seat change out, indefinitely. Also, the ONE guy who has been working on it, well...his mother got sick so he hasn't been able to come into work recently. He changes out about 3 seats a day, so now they are way behind schedule.

Note: not sure if that should have been in teal or not.


LOL

It was 85 last monday and it's 65 today. Epoxy?! We're supposed to replace the seats, not paint them! :angry::nuts:

Hitmen77
10-09-2006, 01:28 PM
I'm really more concerned that they renovate the pitching staff. In the end, nobody gives a rat's ass about the park. Our attendance stayed pretty much the same each year during the renovations era following 2000. But then in 2005, there was a sudden spike and and even bigger one in 06. Scientists are baffled as to why this is.

like he said.

at this point, who cares what the jumbotron looks like, what matters is building a better team that will lead us into another postseason next year.

I don't get this logic? So the Sox can't improve the ballpark and improve their lineup at the same time? :?: Do you think they're making KW spend time on ballpark renovations instead of roster moves? They do have other people working on this stuff.


This whole discussion is interesting. A few things that occur to me:

* The Sox proved that winning fills the ballpark. The renovations are nice, but they're really side dishes to the main course. At the risk of provoking a Cub-fans-are-lemmings rant, I'll say that the Sox' record attendance this year simply demonstrates that Sox fans appreciate good baseball. Period.


Yes, winning fills ballparks. But don't underestimate the importance of a nice, well-received ballpark. The Sox will have down years at some point in the future. Having a warm, well liked, fan friendly ballpark (plus the improving neighborhood) will help the Sox out immensly during lean years. IMO, the renovations were perfectly timed for the influx of fans that have come out in '05 and '06. Now, many many thousands more fans who used to have bad impressions of the park have seen first hand how great the place is and they're much more likely to come back in the future - even during down years.

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 01:29 PM
Epoxy?! We're supposed to replace the seats, not paint them! :angry::nuts:

Do they know that?

itsnotrequired
10-09-2006, 01:31 PM
I agree with rdwj on this one. The scoreboard needs to be changed somehow. The main board is just a video board that mostly shows birthday greetings. The aux board is where all the game info is (line score, R-H-E totals, lineups, etc.), but it's view is obstructed from many seats on the 3rd base side of the park. There are way too many seats at the park from where you can't see this basic game info. Also, that out of town scoreboard is woefully out of date. Check out the graphics and info at other parks' out of town scoreboard the next time the Sox play in places like Cleveland or Anaheim.

I don't mind the out of town scoreboard. It has that "modern-retro" feel and gives you the basic information. At least they updated it more frequently this last season. I remember in 2005 where some of those scores were 2 innings behind.

Agreed on being able to see the box score more readily. Even the aux board doesn't give you all the info. I think a good idea would be to take the last 15 feet or so at the end of each ribbon board and put up the box score. IMHO, the main video board serves its purpose. It shows the player, some key stats, an interesting story or two and replays. I guess I don't really have a problem with all the birthday/group messages. The ribbon board on the Fan Deck is fabulous but could show a bit more info.

batmanZoSo
10-09-2006, 03:03 PM
I don't get this logic? So the Sox can't improve the ballpark and improve their lineup at the same time? :?: Do you think they're making KW spend time on ballpark renovations instead of roster moves? They do have other people working on this stuff.




Yes, winning fills ballparks. But don't underestimate the importance of a nice, well-received ballpark. The Sox will have down years at some point in the future. Having a warm, well liked, fan friendly ballpark (plus the improving neighborhood) will help the Sox out immensly during lean years. IMO, the renovations were perfectly timed for the influx of fans that have come out in '05 and '06. Now, many many thousands more fans who used to have bad impressions of the park have seen first hand how great the place is and they're much more likely to come back in the future - even during down years.

The thing is they've already done pretty much whatever they could've done to make it a better park. It ain't gonna get better. Adding an upper deck in right field isn't going to make a difference at this point. The park's nice and will have all green seats in 07. It's about maintaining a playoff-caliber team for the better part of the next decade and winning (and retaining) new fans.

Well, if you want to talk aesthetics, one thing I really wish they'd do is get rid of the stupid, ridiculous billboards that surround the outfield. Come on, those are disgusting. And don't say money because no other team has a wall of billboards from pole to pole and there are all kinds of ways to bring in ad revenue.

salty99
10-09-2006, 03:19 PM
Somebody e-mail Brooks QUICK!!

Soxfanspcu11
10-09-2006, 05:16 PM
They show replays all the time. They just don't show replays of close plays on the bases, per White Sox policy.


I'm pretty sure that it is not just a White Sox policy, but MLB policy. My aunt works for the Rangers at the "former" Ballpark in Arlington and she says that they have the same policy, something that they were told by MLB.

Check out the graphics and info at other parks' out of town scoreboard the next time the Sox play in places like Cleveland or Anaheim.


Exactly! I was even thinking about Toronto. I have never been to the Skydome, but from what I can see on TV, they not only have the scores of the out of town games, but they also have a picture graphic of the diamond and where the baserunners are located. That is really impressive considering that they have to follow every game. They must have like a dozen people operating that to keep it so close to real time.

It would be nice to see a board like that at Comiskey, especially come late September when we really need to know EXACTLY what is going on in a game that has an effect on our playoff chances.

Trav
10-09-2006, 05:42 PM
I couldn't disagree more. Especially because as a poor college student, I can't afford season tickets or even good seats at the Cell unless someone else pays for them (like my Dad). More seats means more people can go to the games which means more people can enjoy the Sox. It sounds like you're trying to draw in some elite crowd and well, that's definately no fun.


I agree, Myrtle. MLB seems to be making sure they squeeze out the fans that don't drive new cars and live in big houses. I'm sick of the trend and soon the only seats in baseball parks will be delux boxes and scout seats.

dickallen15
10-09-2006, 05:53 PM
The thing is they've already done pretty much whatever they could've done to make it a better park. It ain't gonna get better. Adding an upper deck in right field isn't going to make a difference at this point. The park's nice and will have all green seats in 07. It's about maintaining a playoff-caliber team for the better part of the next decade and winning (and retaining) new fans.

Well, if you want to talk aesthetics, one thing I really wish they'd do is get rid of the stupid, ridiculous billboards that surround the outfield. Come on, those are disgusting. And don't say money because no other team has a wall of billboards from pole to pole and there are all kinds of ways to bring in ad revenue.
You obviously haven't been to Yankee Stadium.

TheOldRoman
10-09-2006, 07:05 PM
Props to all the people who threw in the irrelevant but witty comments about the Sox rebuilding their pitching staff. This is akin to all the people saying "the only renovation I want is a world series champs flag in the outfield".:rolleyes:

At this point, nothing major will be done to the park for several years. The Sox will probably add some restaurants and change scoreboards, but I don't forsee any structural changes. It would cost many millions to add a deck in the outfield for a few thousand seats. The Sox wouldn't do that unless they had sold out the entire season for several years in a row.
As for changes, last year Roger Bossard said he planned on putting a new field in, but the Sox played too late into the season. There should be a fresh bed of grass and new green seats, but other than that, not much should be changed by next year.

Rockman218
10-09-2006, 07:45 PM
Maybe they should add seats on top of the Visiting team bullpen. This would rattle the opposing relief pitchers by keeping them in an enclosed place, and it adds some more seats.:D:

OzzieBall2004
10-09-2006, 07:49 PM
I wonder if they'll do anything to commemorate where Podsedniks walkoff homer landed?

Parrothead
10-09-2006, 08:40 PM
My pet peeve is that pitchers' stats are only shown momentarily when they first come into the game. Blink and you miss 'em. And if the Jumbotron is a waste of space, what does that make that long stripe of screen above the club sections? Only time I paid any attention to that was when they used it for appearances by Mr. Zero. They ought to put useful info there more often.

Vernam

I have brought this up to the brass before to no avail.:mad:

Red Barchetta
10-09-2006, 09:01 PM
Props to all the people who threw in the irrelevant but witty comments about the Sox rebuilding their pitching staff. This is akin to all the people saying "the only renovation I want is a world series champs flag in the outfield".:rolleyes:

At this point, nothing major will be done to the park for several years. The Sox will probably add some restaurants and change scoreboards, but I don't forsee any structural changes. It would cost many millions to add a deck in the outfield for a few thousand seats. The Sox wouldn't do that unless they had sold out the entire season for several years in a row.
As for changes, last year Roger Bossard said he planned on putting a new field in, but the Sox played too late into the season. There should be a fresh bed of grass and new green seats, but other than that, not much should be changed by next year.

Well said. The renovations have already been a fun topic of discussion especially during the offseason. I remember the pictures the SOX posted on their website when the installed the new roof. It was a great way to help keep the offseason interesting.

The renovations come from an entirely different tax base and budget than the costs to field the team. I think it's fun to speculate any additional changes.

Once the green seats (angled) are in, I think the basic structure and renovated design is complete. I only hope they continue with smaller projects to help improve the park on a regular basis. Projects like continuing to brick over exposed concrete, perhaps green paint in the bullpens instead of gray, more player statues, perhaps a paver outfield concourse walkway with trees.

I remember in 2005 while showing players on the jumbotron, it appeared they were standing in front of brick archways, similar to an old church. I was always hoping they would get rid of the black iron scafolding used in the outfield to hold the lights and replace them with arched brickwork.

Just imagine if we would have waited three years to build and Daly was in office. I think he would have been excited about a southwest loop ballpark that showcased the city and would have helped make it happen. Oh well, we can only wonder what if....

FedEx227
10-09-2006, 10:31 PM
I asked Cleveland how it worked out. They said all those years being in the playoffs, it worked phenomenal for them. They said that in the future, when/if they get to the post season, they will have the infrastructure already in place, and not have to get creative and come up with a bogus sliding ticket scale or renaming seats BOX to charge you more.
Really? I'm sure you misread what I said, I wasn't bashing Jacob's Field at all, I meant the Mistake on the Lake Municipal...

Then again I really do hope you misread because... well Muncipal Stadium was open from 1932-1993 housing all of two postseason apperances.

C-Dawg
10-10-2006, 07:28 AM
I think a good idea would be to take the last 15 feet or so at the end of each ribbon board and put up the box score.

LOL Yeah I don't even pay attention to the ribbon boards anymore; when they were new I found them to be distracting, especially at night, and kept looking at them for the whole game. Now that they are a few years old, I just ignore them and watch the game. Losing 15 feet at the ends won't be missed by anyone.

BanditJimmy
10-10-2006, 10:30 AM
I think it would be nice to add just enough seats so that a sell-out would actually show 40K plus instead of the 38-39K we would show every night. The stadium holds a little less than 41K and when comp tickets are distributed, the attendance for a full house drops to below 40K.

Any one have more details on what this restaurant behind home plate is all about? Is this going to be similar to what the stadium club is? If so, why have two premium restaurant locations when instead you could have additional seats? Where is the press going to be moved to?

The Sox dropped the ball with the fundamental deck IMO. When you play winning baseball, you don't need a children's play ground anywhere in the viewing area of the game. The fundamental deck wasn't even open for business during the play-offs. The plan of putting up this so called HR porch would have been an excellent idea not only to add seating but to make the park looking even better.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 10:37 AM
The Sox dropped the ball with the fundamental deck IMO. When you play winning baseball, you don't need a children's play ground anywhere in the viewing area of the game. The fundamental deck wasn't even open for business during the play-offs.

I strongly disagree. Fundamentals fits in perfectly with the Sox family-oriented approach to the game. Just imagine how many kids are being exposed to the Sox due to Fundamentals. Today's snot-nosed kids are tomorrow's season ticket holders...who will in turn bring their family to the game. An excellent addition to the park. The reason it was closed for the playoffs is because MLB owns all in terms of the playoffs. The recognized it as a great place to hold VIP gatherings.

Jjav829
10-10-2006, 10:49 AM
And if the Jumbotron is a waste of space, what does that make that long stripe of screen above the club sections?

Another opportunity to sell advertising. That's really the whole point of those screens.

Jjav829
10-10-2006, 10:54 AM
I strongly disagree. Fundamentals fits in perfectly with the Sox family-oriented approach to the game. Just imagine how many kids are being exposed to the Sox due to Fundamentals. Today's snot-nosed kids are tomorrow's season ticket holders...who will in turn bring their family to the game. An excellent addition to the park. The reason it was closed for the playoffs is because MLB owns all in terms of the playoffs. The recognized it as a great place to hold VIP gatherings.

The FUNdamentals area is one of the best renovations the Sox have made. It's not an eyesore unless you like to spend a significant portion of the game staring into the sky in left field.

And the design is terrific. It's a great place for kids to come and enjoy themselves. And like you said, those little kids of today that are falling in love with coming to White Sox games because of the FUNdamentals deck are the season ticket holders of the future. I only wish an area like that was around when I was a kid. I don't have kids yet, but I can imagine that whenever I do, I'll probably be spending a lot of time up there with little-Jjav.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 11:10 AM
The FUNdamentals area is one of the best renovations the Sox have made. It's not an eyesore unless you like to spend a significant portion of the game staring into the sky in left field.

And the design is terrific. It's a great place for kids to come and enjoy themselves. And like you said, those little kids of today that are falling in love with coming to White Sox games because of the FUNdamentals deck are the season ticket holders of the future. I only wish an area like that was around when I was a kid. I don't have kids yet, but I can imagine that whenever I do, I'll probably be spending a lot of time up there with little-Jjav.

Other than the Bullpen Sports Bar, it is the only area of the park accesible to 100, 300 and 500 level ticket holders. Minors aren't allowed in the bar so in their case, it is the only place.

Little itsnotrequired will be 18 months old on Opening Day. I forsee myself spending a great deal of time over at Fundamentals in 2007.

BanditJimmy
10-10-2006, 11:13 AM
The FUNdamentals area is one of the best renovations the Sox have made. It's not an eyesore unless you like to spend a significant portion of the game staring into the sky in left field.

And the design is terrific. It's a great place for kids to come and enjoy themselves. And like you said, those little kids of today that are falling in love with coming to White Sox games because of the FUNdamentals deck are the season ticket holders of the future. I only wish an area like that was around when I was a kid. I don't have kids yet, but I can imagine that whenever I do, I'll probably be spending a lot of time up there with little-Jjav.


But my arguement is the location and the space it takes away. I am all for doing things for the kids but what is the need to have the fundamental deck/area have a direct view to the playing field. All other ballparks (Anaheim, Detroit, KC) have the children areas located somehwere in the concourse, I think we should have done the same.

batmanZoSo
10-10-2006, 11:15 AM
The Fun-deck is fine. For me, it has a great raised view as well that's open for anyone, even those in the upper deck. This is good for two reasons...one I'm tall and have a hard time sitting in my seat for the whole game and like to stand and watch from a good vantage point...and two I almost always sit in the upper deck, so being able to watch the game from there is practically like watching from the lower deck, though the raised viewpoint is actually better in my opinion.

batmanZoSo
10-10-2006, 11:16 AM
But my arguement is the location and the space it takes away. I am all for doing things for the kids but what is the need to have the fundamental deck/area have a direct view to the playing field. All other ballparks (Anaheim, Detroit, KC) have the children areas located somehwere in the concourse, I think we should have done the same.

What's worse, the fundamentals deck or the billboard that used to be where it is?

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 11:26 AM
Other than the Bullpen Sports Bar...

dont get me started on the Bullpen Bar

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 11:29 AM
But my arguement is the location and the space it takes away. I am all for doing things for the kids but what is the need to have the fundamental deck/area have a direct view to the playing field. All other ballparks (Anaheim, Detroit, KC) have the children areas located somehwere in the concourse, I think we should have done the same.

What space is it taking away? The footprint of the support columns on the concourse? That's insignificant. The major drawback is that it blocks views of the scoreboard for many along the third base line and shades areas of the concourse that were once sunny.

I think having it visable is much better than shoving it in some hole. It sends a message that kids are important. Besides, it would have taken a lot of real estate to put all the stuff that is in there now. Stacking it vertically saves space and provides more viewing angles. And how awesome is it when a kid hits a HR into the lower deck?

jenn2080
10-10-2006, 11:29 AM
Other than the Bullpen Sports Bar, it is the only area of the park accesible to 100, 300 and 500 level ticket holders. Minors aren't allowed in the bar so in their case, it is the only place.

Little itsnotrequired will be 18 months old on Opening Day. I forsee myself spending a great deal of time over at Fundamentals in 2007.


They should do what they did to Jacobs. They have a bar called the Catchers Eye where our fan deck is with the same set up we have.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 11:30 AM
dont get me started on the Bullpen Bar

I'm going to start it up: What problem could you possibly have with the idea and location of the Sports Bar?

salty99
10-10-2006, 11:32 AM
Yeah I am curious as well. It's hard to even imagine the days when all parks were was a place to watch a game.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 11:41 AM
They should do what they did to Jacobs. They have a bar called the Catchers Eye where our fan deck is with the same set up we have.

That setup wouldn't work at the Cell unless they wanted to block out the concourse. The Indians have a lot more real estate to play with.

BanditJimmy
10-10-2006, 12:13 PM
What space is it taking away? The footprint of the support columns on the concourse? That's insignificant. The major drawback is that it blocks views of the scoreboard for many along the third base line and shades areas of the concourse that were once sunny.

I think having it visable is much better than shoving it in some hole. It sends a message that kids are important. Besides, it would have taken a lot of real estate to put all the stuff that is in there now. Stacking it vertically saves space and provides more viewing angles. And how awesome is it when a kid hits a HR into the lower deck?


The space which is taking away is the prerfect spot for additional seating where an upper deck/porch could have been built (not as high as the 500 level but perhaps the 300 level like the max height of the club seats or even the upper suites). I would consider a view from here as a "premium seating area" where you could add about 2,000 extra seats.

There is already enough wide open bleacher type seating in RF and Left Center where you can afford to cover up the lower level reserved in LF (3-4 sections of it)


2,000 seats at $30 per seats for 81 games = $4.8 million per year + concessions

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 12:18 PM
I'm going to start it up: What problem could you possibly have with the idea and location of the Sports Bar?

Idea: A+
Location: C+++ (shouldve been in LF area to allow for year-round access)
Final Interpretation: F I originally gave the BPB a C-, but after seeing all the new ballpark bars being built and the way they've incorporated their bars into the ballparks, your left wanting a bit more.

tacosalbarojas
10-10-2006, 12:40 PM
but it's view is obstructed from many seats on the 3rd base side of the park. There are way too many seats at the park from where you can't see this basic game info. Yep, ten sections give or take a couple in the lower deck, I want to say, from near left field to the corner.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 12:49 PM
Idea: A+
Location: C+++ (shouldve been in LF area to allow for year-round access)
Final Interpretation: F I originally gave the BPB a C-, but after seeing all the new ballpark bars being built and the way they've incorporated their bars into the ballparks, your left wanting a bit more.

The Sox are once again limited in what they can do based upon the original design of the park. Putting the sports bar underneath the RF seats was quick, cheap and serves its purpose. Another idea would be to have an elevated indoor/outdoor structure above the concourse but that would take big $$$ to build.

How would having it in LF permit year round access that could not be provided in RF? Because it is closer to the L? It may be closer to the L but it would be further from parking (unless they used the player's lot). I just can't imagine a large amount of people trekking over to the stadium in the middle of winter for some beers. I'm sure some people would be interested but I just don't see enough interest to warrant having it open year round.

And what would the cost be? The BSB has typical ballpark prices due to the captive nature of the clientele. Would that be the same in winter? How many people would be willing to pay $6 for a beer at the stadium when they could get one at their local watering hole for half that?

The BSB serves a variety of drinks, offers a unique view of the field, has several food options, many TVs and has lots of space for large groups of friends. What more are you looking for? Exotic wood paneling? A whole bunch of crazy crap on the wall?

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 01:00 PM
The space which is taking away is the prerfect spot for additional seating where an upper deck/porch could have been built (not as high as the 500 level but perhaps the 300 level like the max height of the club seats or even the upper suites). I would consider a view from here as a "premium seating area" where you could add about 2,000 extra seats.

There is already enough wide open bleacher type seating in RF and Left Center where you can afford to cover up the lower level reserved in LF (3-4 sections of it)

Fundamentals was built at the same time as the Sox were removing seating. Even with the recent surge in attendence, I believe the Sox would still have stayed the course and built Fundamentals. In other words, if Fundamentals wasn't scheduled to be built until right now, I feel the Sox would have still built it rather than additional seating.

2,000 seats at $30 per seats for 81 games = $4.8 million per year + concessions.

But how much would it cost to build? $8 million? $10 million? Where are those capital funds going to come from? Also, I think 2,000 seats is a stretch. That's 20 rows, 100 seats across (4 or 5 sections). No way there is enough space for that, unless they stick way over existing seating or extend outside the stadium. 15 rows, tops. I say 1500 seats is all you would get. And what guarantees that every seat will sell out? Subtract out maintenance, additional staff, etc. and it isn't as much money as one would think. There's a reason why stadiums across the country aren't just throwing extra seating up for extra revenue.

GregoryEtc
10-10-2006, 01:23 PM
I wonder if they'll do anything to commemorate where Podsedniks walkoff homer landed?

I'm not sure if you were kidding or not, but I kind of like this idea.
How much do you think they could auction off that seat for? ...or any of the other major HR's in US Cellular history?

Then they could replace it with a different colored seat or put a commemorative plaque on the new seat in it's place. I think it'd be cool.

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 01:32 PM
The Sox are once again limited in what they can do based upon the original design of the park. Putting the sports bar underneath the RF seats was quick, cheap and serves its purpose. Another idea would be to have an elevated indoor/outdoor structure above the concourse but that would take big $$$ to build.

How would having it in LF permit year round access that could not be provided in RF? Because it is closer to the L? It may be closer to the L but it would be further from parking (unless they used the player's lot). I just can't imagine a large amount of people trekking over to the stadium in the middle of winter for some beers. I'm sure some people would be interested but I just don't see enough interest to warrant having it open year round.

And what would the cost be? The BSB has typical ballpark prices due to the captive nature of the clientele. Would that be the same in winter? How many people would be willing to pay $6 for a beer at the stadium when they could get one at their local watering hole for half that?

The BSB serves a variety of drinks, offers a unique view of the field, has several food options, many TVs and has lots of space for large groups of friends. What more are you looking for? Exotic wood paneling? A whole bunch of crazy crap on the wall?


The SOX put in a bar, and nixed being creative with what they put there.
The service, is incredibly slow for a place that size. If the bar were indeed in LF, it would totally be able to stay "open" year round, because what SOX fan, with the winter blues, wouldnt want to have a beer and look out at the field, dreaming about 07 (or 05 for that matter) When you drive by on 35th, nobody has a clue that the bar is there. An easier entrance is more inviting.

As for the unique view of the field? The SOX pretty much dropped the ball on that one, with the giant pillars and thick fencing deleting any view you would have of the field. I thought for sure the "windows" would be much larger, as they are in Miller Park for instance. The place is poorly lit, doesnt have nearly as many tvs as you would think, and slapping paint on the bland concrete blocks isnt really conducive to a warm atmosphere. Its HomeDepot, with a keg and TV. Or if you want to give it a local touch, its Lower Wacker Drive down there. I always expect a couple of cars to be parked in there with me when I have a drink. Heck, the concrete couldve been colored if they didnt want to put a floor in there.

If anyone has been to the bar in Jacobs Field on the 2nd level, its fantastic.
Real flooring. Beautiful Oak bar in the center, with views of the field AND downtown FROM THE BAR. Petco has a bar in that building you see in LF
with outdoor seating on the deck and roof!!! The places look phenomenal, very tastefully decorated, and generally look like they cared about what they were doing. Petco is year-round .........with, you guessed it..... street access.

jenn2080
10-10-2006, 01:48 PM
The SOX put in a bar, and nixed being creative with what they put there.
The service, is incredibly slow for a place that size. If the bar were indeed in LF, it would totally be able to stay "open" year round, because what SOX fan, with the winter blues, wouldnt want to have a beer and look out at the field, dreaming about 07 (or 05 for that matter) When you drive by on 35th, nobody has a clue that the bar is there. An easier entrance is more inviting.

As for the unique view of the field? The SOX pretty much dropped the ball on that one, with the giant pillars and thick fencing deleting any view you would have of the field. I thought for sure the "windows" would be much larger, as they are in Miller Park for instance. The place is poorly lit, doesnt have nearly as many tvs as you would think, and slapping paint on the bland concrete blocks isnt really conducive to a warm atmosphere. Its HomeDepot, with a keg and TV. Or if you want to give it a local touch, its Lower Wacker Drive down there. I always expect a couple of cars to be parked in there with me when I have a drink. Heck, the concrete couldve been colored if they didnt want to put a floor in there.

If anyone has been to the bar in Jacobs Field on the 2nd level, its fantastic.
Real flooring. Beautiful Oak bar in the center, with views of the field AND downtown FROM THE BAR. Petco has a bar in that building you see in LF
with outdoor seating on the deck and roof!!! The places look phenomenal, very tastefully decorated, and generally look like they cared about what they were doing. Petco is year-round .........with, you guessed it..... street access.


The street access is one thing and would probably draw more business during the season, but I would think that they would lose more money being open during the off season then we would think. People do not want to pay $6 bucks for a beer, when they can go to any other bar in Chicago for cheaper(well most bars).

There should be more tvs. When I was in the **** dome they had tvs facing the gate area which was convient when you wanted to smoke. I think it is a great idea. However I also can live without it too. It it my choice to smoke and my choice to miss something in the game by doing so.

I like the Bullpen bar. Could it be a lot better? Of course, but it is still not a bad place to head when the Sox are suckin it up big time.

Hitmen77
10-10-2006, 01:50 PM
Agreed on being able to see the box score more readily. Even the aux board doesn't give you all the info. I think a good idea would be to take the last 15 feet or so at the end of each ribbon board and put up the box score. IMHO, the main video board serves its purpose. It shows the player, some key stats, an interesting story or two and replays. I guess I don't really have a problem with all the birthday/group messages. The ribbon board on the Fan Deck is fabulous but could show a bit more info.

Excellent suggestion.

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 01:58 PM
The Sox are once again limited in what they can do based upon the original design of the park. Putting the sports bar underneath the RF seats was quick, cheap and serves its purpose. Another idea would be to have an elevated indoor/outdoor structure above the concourse but that would take big $$$ to build.

How would having it in LF permit year round access that could not be provided in RF? Because it is closer to the L? It may be closer to the L but it would be further from parking (unless they used the player's lot). I just can't imagine a large amount of people trekking over to the stadium in the middle of winter for some beers. I'm sure some people would be interested but I just don't see enough interest to warrant having it open year round.

And what would the cost be? The BSB has typical ballpark prices due to the captive nature of the clientele. Would that be the same in winter? How many people would be willing to pay $6 for a beer at the stadium when they could get one at their local watering hole for half that?

The BSB serves a variety of drinks, offers a unique view of the field, has several food options, many TVs and has lots of space for large groups of friends. What more are you looking for? Exotic wood paneling? A whole bunch of crazy crap on the wall?


I'm kinda with Hangar on this one. It would be a year-round sports bar at many Chicagoan's favorite place in the world. Miller Park does it. I've had many meals in Milwaukee in the dead of winter at Miller Park. As for the $6 beers....they don't need to be $6 when there's no game on.

To use Miller Park as an example again....the Brewers would offer $1 drafts after every game at the Friday's in LF. Beer and food prices wouldn't need to be ballpark prices....just sportsbar prices. If they marketed it properly by simply putting a couple of billboard and newspaper ads in strategic places w/ food & drink specials. Who among us wouldn't want to meet for a Bears, Bulls, NCAAF or NCAAB games during the winter at the Cell?

I've thought for years it should be open all year round. I'd go often.


They do need to cozy the joint up a little bit first though. It's kinda sterile, but has alot of potential.

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 02:02 PM
The street access is one thing and would probably draw more business during the season, but I would think that they would lose more money being open during the off season then we would think. People do not want to pay $6 bucks for a beer, when they can go to any other bar in Chicago for cheaper(well most bars).

There should be more tvs. When I was in the **** dome they had tvs facing the gate area which was convient when you wanted to smoke. I think it is a great idea. However I also can live without it too. It it my choice to smoke and my choice to miss something in the game by doing so.

I like the Bullpen bar. Could it be a lot better? Of course, but it is still not a bad place to head when the Sox are suckin it up big time.


In the offseason, they could charge a more "normal" rate for beer. That in itself would have people going there to watch football or whatever. Parking? They could park right across the street, in the current lot where the Tour Buses go (underneath the CellularField sign that faces the Ryan)

The Bullpen Bar was a great idea and I'm glad we were the 1st, but every other team seems to have outdone us by a country mile. Best views would be the Fridays in Miller Park. Most unique setting Petco.

jenn2080
10-10-2006, 02:04 PM
In the offseason, they could charge a more "normal" rate for beer. That in itself would have people going there to watch football or whatever. Parking? They could park right across the street, in the current lot where the Tour Buses go (underneath the CellularField sign that faces the Ryan)

The Bullpen Bar was a great idea and I'm glad we were the 1st, but every other team seems to have outdone us by a country mile. Best views would be the Fridays in Miller Park. Most unique setting Petco.


I would rank the Catcher's Eye above TGI Fridays at Miller. I think the Catcher's Eye was awesome(and you can smoke there:D: ) It is the fan deck with a bar. I can not rank Petco I was never in it, but what I saw from a distance looks cool.

itsnotrequired
10-10-2006, 02:25 PM
I'm kinda with Hangar on this one. It would be a year-round sports bar at many Chicagoan's favorite place in the world. Miller Park does it. I've had many meals in Milwaukee in the dead of winter at Miller Park. As for the $6 beers....they don't need to be $6 when there's no game on.

To use Miller Park as an example again....the Brewers would offer $1 drafts after every game at the Friday's in LF. Beer and food prices wouldn't need to be ballpark prices....just sportsbar prices. If they marketed it properly by simply putting a couple of billboard and newspaper ads in strategic places w/ food & drink specials. Who among us wouldn't want to meet for a Bears, Bulls, NCAAF or NCAAB games during the winter at the Cell?

I've thought for years it should be open all year round. I'd go often.


They do need to cozy the joint up a little bit first though. It's kinda sterile, but has alot of potential.

Agreed on the prices. The Sox would need to charge less during games. As "fun" as it would be to have a beer there in the dead of winter, I wouldn't enjoy the $6 prices.

Also agreed on making it more inviting. It has that Soviet-era concrete bunker look (much like the Patio Party area). I have no problem with year-round service but the Sox would need to make it more inviting.

If the Sox are looking for a new, awesome bar experience, they could build a multi-tier, indoor/outdoor, year round, field view bar/restaurant above the concourse in RF. This is the only real place to put something like this. Think of Fundamentals for adults. I guess I would rather see something like this in RF rather than seats. It could "mirror" Fundamentals in massing to help maintain the park symmetry. Still, it would cost big $$$.

New stadiums are incorporating bars/restaurants into the design from the get go and have a lot more options. The Sox had to shoehorn something in for cheap so we get what we get. I guess it is better than nothing.

Scottzilla
10-10-2006, 02:28 PM
i always wished i could spend my birthday in uscf they really should have it open year round

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 02:31 PM
New stadiums are incorporating bars/restaurants into the design from the get go and have a lot more options. The Sox had to shoehorn something in for cheap so we get what we get. I guess it is better than nothing.


It's nothing that can't be fixed. With a little time and money the place can be very inviting. Fix it up to make it look like a middle/high-end sports bar and I feel it could be a nice little revenue stream for the Sox that's also good for the fans. If it fails, so be it....it'll still look really good for when people sit down for their $6 beers during the games.

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 02:36 PM
I was just thinking....there's already a VERY nice bar/grill area in the stadium. That Scout Seat lounge would be a tremendous off-season hangout. Everything is totally brand new and extremely inviting.

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 02:41 PM
I was just thinking....there's already a VERY nice bar/grill area in the stadium. That Scout Seat lounge would be a tremendous off-season hangout. Everything is totally brand new and extremely inviting.


But theres no view of the field from there. It is pretty happening in there.

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 02:45 PM
But theres no view of the field from there. It is pretty happening in there.

Point taken. Then there's only one solution....the Sox need to make something happen

OzzieBall2004
10-10-2006, 03:10 PM
I'm not sure if you were kidding or not, but I kind of like this idea.
How much do you think they could auction off that seat for? ...or any of the other major HR's in US Cellular history?

Then they could replace it with a different colored seat or put a commemorative plaque on the new seat in it's place. I think it'd be cool.

Nope...I wasn't kidding. What if they just left the old seat there a la Fenway and the Metrodome?

russ99
10-10-2006, 03:45 PM
I've watched many an inning from the Fundamentals deck and the view is great there. It would be the same if there was a tier of seats there or in RF like you suggest. I just don't see the need for more seats. Adding capacity would be a mistake.

I agree, the view is amazing.

Why not build an identical deck on the right side thus not obstructing lower deck seats. That area only has a parking lot behind it so there's not a limit to the depth of the deck. They can put in 5-10 rows of seats and the "McCuddy's" adult-area behind them, like Fenway's monster-seats.

This is pretty moot, unless Uncle Jerry can get more cash from someone to build it.

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 03:46 PM
This is pretty moot, unless Uncle Jerry can get more cash from someone to build it.


And he'd be losing another giant billboard

Hangar18
10-11-2006, 08:22 AM
Why not build an identical deck on the right side thus not obstructing lower deck seats. That area only has a parking lot behind it so there's not a limit to the depth of the deck. They can put in 5-10 rows of seats and the "McCuddy's" adult-area behind them, like Fenway's monster-seats.



Grown people chasing a Scott Podsednik down a track for a beer ....
Drunkdamentals is what it will end up being ...

Law11
10-11-2006, 09:03 AM
There are a couple things they can do. If you look in CF area of new Busch, they can do a smaller version of that. Or, if you've been to the Jake, Look at how they added seats down the lines in each direction, butting directly with the concourse. I thought that was pretty clever.
Its not a lot of seating, but definitely something that could easily be done.

Having a 38,000 seat stadium is nice. But having a 42 or 43,000 seat stadium would be much better for the SOX, especially if those seats are somewhere CLOSER to the field, which means more $$$$$. Thats what the SOX are thinking about

Bush has a nice setup behind Their Cf backdrop. Patio seating with a huge screen of the game on the back of the wall so when you are back there you can still wtch the game.. I have a pic somewhere in the other parks album..

MiamiSpartan
10-11-2006, 03:01 PM
Yeah, that will be a big, big difference down the lines. I don't see how or why they wouldn't be able to finish the seat replacements. The angled seats are no harder to put in than regular ones, they're just built differently to be pre-angled to give you a better sightline. It'll be like sitting down the line at Fenway where the grandstand faces the plate almost, only you don't lose sight of the OF corner.

Geea, the one time I sat down the lines at Fenway, I was staring at an outfield wall. Came out of that game with a heck of a stiff neck...:angry:

Red Barchetta
10-11-2006, 07:54 PM
I think Turner Field in Atlanta nailed the ballpark bar concept. It's in the OF concourse, has a deck and I think they have a smokey barbeque pit as well.

Like I said before, they did something nice for the kids in LF, now do something nice for the adults in RF. Build a barbeque/party deck and add to the theme of the bullpen bar and the Stadium club with tickets/passes to access each level. Ties right into the tailgate areas in the parking lot.

whitesoxwilkes
10-11-2006, 08:02 PM
Grown people chasing a Scott Podsednik down a track for a beer ....
Drunkdamentals is what it will end up being ...

Holy ****! A Hangar post that made me :D: instead of :rolleyes:.

Good one!

paciorek1983
10-11-2006, 08:19 PM
I think Turner Field in Atlanta nailed the ballpark bar concept. It's in the OF concourse, has a deck and I think they have a smokey barbeque pit as well.

Like I said before, they did something nice for the kids in LF, now do something nice for the adults in RF. Build a barbeque/party deck and add to the theme of the bullpen bar and the Stadium club with tickets/passes to access each level. Ties right into the tailgate areas in the parking lot.


Maybe with that 7-11 money they could do it?

itsnotrequired
10-12-2006, 07:00 AM
Maybe with that 7-11 money they could do it?

The Sox are getting $1.5 million from 7-11 over the next three years. That would pay for the engineering of a RF "adult zone" and that's about it. Maybe some of the demo work. The Sox would need at least $8 million to do the deck.

pinwheels3530
10-12-2006, 09:08 AM
Didn't the Sox have designs to put a couple of restaurant & bars on 35th street? While moving the existing offices to left field.

batmanZoSo
10-12-2006, 09:20 AM
Geea, the one time I sat down the lines at Fenway, I was staring at an outfield wall. Came out of that game with a heck of a stiff neck...:angry:

You must've been on the right side then.

Hangar18
10-12-2006, 09:27 AM
Didn't the Sox have designs to put a couple of restaurant & bars on 35th street? While moving the existing offices to left field.


almost. The plans werent formal, but would have been on track if a separate building to house the offices was built

ewokpelts
10-12-2006, 09:27 AM
Didn't the Sox have designs to put a couple of restaurant & bars on 35th street? While moving the existing offices to left field.
yes, as well as a "grand entrance" on 35th and wells/expressway

pinwheels3530
10-12-2006, 09:36 AM
yes, as well as a "grand entrance" on 35th and wells/expressway


Well that solves everyone's problems. Hangar gets the bars he wants, The Sox get new offices and we all get a new "grand entrance" sponsored by HomeRun Inn Pizza!

SSSoxFan
10-12-2006, 10:19 AM
This was in Fred Mitchell's column from today's Tribune

"The press box at U.S. Cellular Field is being moved to the 400 level along the first-base line from behind the plate along the second level.

The old area will have seats for fans in front of a special club/restaurant beginning next season.

"Given our success on the field and at the gate, demand for tickets and premium locations for fans is extremely high," said White Sox Vice President for Communications Scott Reifert. "As with all our revenues, anything generated by this new space will go back into improving our team on the field. The new press box will be state-of-the-art, with a media wall, wireless, etc., and should be a very comfortable work space ."

salty99
10-12-2006, 10:37 AM
I like it. The fans should get the best seats in the house. Wow I wonder if these aer going to be more diamond suites or just regular club level type seats.

Gammons Peter
10-12-2006, 10:45 AM
and those, by far, are the best seats in the house. I was lucky enough to watch a game from there last year and it was amazing

batmanZoSo
10-12-2006, 11:03 AM
yes, as well as a "grand entrance" on 35th and wells/expressway

A strip of a few bars on 35th would've been great, but that "grand entrance" idea would've been a huge waste of time and money. I'm glad that didn't get done.

BanditJimmy
10-12-2006, 12:22 PM
I always have said that the huge monumental Ramp entrance by parking lot B should be converted into a block long bars/restaurants strip which would include the current ramps with escalators and elevators to get you to the bridges for the different levels of the ball park.


Those restaurants could even operate year round.

ewokpelts
10-12-2006, 12:57 PM
I like it. The fans should get the best seats in the house. Wow I wonder if these aer going to be more diamond suites or just regular club level type seats.
super club seats...the ligers have a similar setup(that premired this year)...they call thierr's the champions club

ewokpelts
10-12-2006, 12:59 PM
A strip of a few bars on 35th would've been great, but that "grand entrance" idea would've been a huge waste of time and money. I'm glad that didn't get done.what's better? the gate 6 you cant get in from? the closest gate is exit only....the sox are getting more fans to take the train....a closer entrance is a no-brainer....

the "grand entrance" idea is used at miller park...they have a restaurant, gift shop, and ticket windows fully enclosed....horrible idea for the sox...

ewokpelts
10-12-2006, 01:01 PM
do we REALLY NEED bars now? we drew 3 million fans with WINNING BASEBALL.......bars are just a coat of paint over sad franchises

itsnotrequired
10-12-2006, 01:05 PM
do we REALLY NEED bars now? we drew 3 million fans with WINNING BASEBALL.......bars are just a coat of paint over sad franchises

Why can't a team have both?

batmanZoSo
10-12-2006, 01:35 PM
what's better? the gate 6 you cant get in from? the closest gate is exit only....the sox are getting more fans to take the train....a closer entrance is a no-brainer....

the "grand entrance" idea is used at miller park...they have a restaurant, gift shop, and ticket windows fully enclosed....horrible idea for the sox...

But we drew 3 million with winning baseball. A grand entrance is really just a coat of paint over a sad franchise.

itsnotrequired
10-12-2006, 01:35 PM
But we drew 3 million with winning baseball. A grand entrance is really just a coat of paint over a sad franchise.

:kneeslap:

TREATED!

ewokpelts
10-12-2006, 01:37 PM
But we drew 3 million with winning baseball. A grand entrance is really just a coat of paint over a sad franchise.
touche....
but i'd liek to keep those 3 million fans HAPPY....and if a cool million or so take the train to the games, it MIGHT be a good idea to have another access point, especially one closeto teh train

salty99
10-12-2006, 03:11 PM
Rumor has it that the new seating area is going to be $250 per ticket and around 300 seats.

hold2dibber
10-12-2006, 03:27 PM
what's better? the gate 6 you cant get in from? the closest gate is exit only....the sox are getting more fans to take the train....a closer entrance is a no-brainer....

the "grand entrance" idea is used at miller park...they have a restaurant, gift shop, and ticket windows fully enclosed....horrible idea for the sox...

I think an entrance on that side of the park makes a lot of sense, but a grand entrance would be too much buck, not enough bang.

itsnotrequired
10-12-2006, 03:50 PM
Rumor has it that the new seating area is going to be $250 per ticket and around 300 seats.

Source?

I wonder if this will be like the EMC (.406 Club) at Fenway.

salty99
10-12-2006, 04:23 PM
Here you go:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/92988,CST-NWS-soxgames12.article

GoSox2K3
10-12-2006, 05:18 PM
Rumor has it that the new seating area is going to be $250 per ticket and around 300 seats.

Source?

I wonder if this will be like the EMC (.406 Club) at Fenway.

Here you go:

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/92988,CST-NWS-soxgames12.article

Credibility of the paper notwithstanding, if the info was right in the Sun-Times, then why did you say "rumor has it"? :?:

batmanZoSo
10-13-2006, 12:08 PM
I think an entrance on that side of the park makes a lot of sense, but a grand entrance would be too much buck, not enough bang.

Exactly. I'd like an entrance every 20 feet, but a grand entrance is a little too grand for really attacking one problem which could be addressed in a far cheaper way. And there are/were bigger problems than that for sure.

IronFisk
10-16-2006, 12:56 PM
Of course they are going to be angled seats, it's the thing now:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a334/Violinski/RedirectedSeating.gif

IronFisk
10-16-2006, 12:58 PM
Not sure if any one is with me on this, but I find the fundamental deck a waste of good space for additional good seating.


There's got to me another place in the park where it can be used of kids.

I bet you don't have children. I do - and that place ROCKS! Since my 8-year old has about zero attention span for a baseball game, he loves going up there - and I love being able to catch the game at the same time. Do you ever look up there and see the place teaming with kids and their parents? Flippin' brilliant!

nasox
10-17-2006, 09:20 AM
touche....
but i'd liek to keep those 3 million fans HAPPY....and if a cool million or so take the train to the games, it MIGHT be a good idea to have another access point, especially one closeto teh train

Is that you, Hangar?