PDA

View Full Version : Reinsdorf on Talking Baseball, ESPN AM1000 with Bruce Levine


DrCrawdad
03-17-2002, 01:02 PM
Reinsdorf on Talking Baseball, ESPN AM1000 with Bruce Levine
Sunday sometime after noon. The show is from 12-1pm.

duke of dorwood
03-17-2002, 06:59 PM
Only thing I found curious was the comment that they need the money to go ahead with next years upper deck renovations. Also, something about an additional administrative office building outside the park somewhere.

nut_stock
03-17-2002, 11:27 PM
a dairy queen across the street would be nice

DrCrawdad
03-18-2002, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by duke of dorwood
Only thing I found curious was the comment that they need the money to go ahead with next years upper deck renovations. Also, something about an additional administrative office building outside the park somewhere.

Yeah, he said an office building outside the park on the left field side. I guess that fits in with illustrations that were released that had an additional upper deck in right field.

Reinsdorf also talked about adding picnic areas in the outfield area. I would guess that he was referring to on top of the buildings that house the stands, but I'm not sure.

LongDistanceFan
03-18-2002, 12:22 AM
isn't it a sad commentary that the sox have to continue to do renovations on what is still considered a new ballpark.

i wonder 1 who drew up the designs and 2. who advice jr, and 3 who agreed to build it.

why can't he agreed that someone screwed up........

czalgosz
03-18-2002, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by LongDistanceFan
isn't it a sad commentary that the sox have to continue to do renovations on what is still considered a new ballpark.

i wonder 1 who drew up the designs and 2. who advice jr, and 3 who agreed to build it.

why can't he agreed that someone screwed up........

Wasn't it HOK, the same people who did most of the new parks?

The timing was off on New Comiskey. When it was designed, it was designed for two things -

1) To have no "obstructed view" seats, which meant no pillars, and

2) To be able to allow people to efficiently move into, out of, and around the ballpark. Hence the wide concourses.

The ballpark was similar in look and feel to many ballparks built and designed in the '60s through the '80s - like new Yankee Stadium, Dodger Stadium, Candlestick Park, or Oakland Coliseum. In other words, it was designed for utility, not aesthetics.

And then along came Camden Yards.

When Camden Yards came along, there was a massive paradigm shift on the purpose of baseball stadia. Aesthetics became king. A string of beautiful new ballparks were built in the years following (Jacobs Field, the Ballpark in Arlington, Coors Field, Enron Field, Bank One Ballpark, Safeco Field, Pac Bell Park, etc.) and New Comiskey had the misfortune of being the last park built under the old way of thinking.

So, now they're trying to go back and retroactively put the new thinking on the old-think ballpark. I don't know if it was a screwup, unless not accurately predicting what the future of ballpark architecture would be a screwup.

RedPinStripes
03-18-2002, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz


Wasn't it HOK, the same people who did most of the new parks?

The timing was off on New Comiskey. When it was designed, it was designed for two things -

1) To have no "obstructed view" seats, which meant no pillars, and

2) To be able to allow people to efficiently move into, out of, and around the ballpark. Hence the wide concourses.

The ballpark was similar in look and feel to many ballparks built and designed in the '60s through the '80s - like new Yankee Stadium, Dodger Stadium, Candlestick Park, or Oakland Coliseum. In other words, it was designed for utility, not aesthetics.

And then along came Camden Yards.

When Camden Yards came along, there was a massive paradigm shift on the purpose of baseball stadia. Aesthetics became king. A string of beautiful new ballparks were built in the years following (Jacobs Field, the Ballpark in Arlington, Coors Field, Enron Field, Bank One Ballpark, Safeco Field, Pac Bell Park, etc.) and New Comiskey had the misfortune of being the last park built under the old way of thinking.

So, now they're trying to go back and retroactively put the new thinking on the old-think ballpark. I don't know if it was a screwup, unless not accurately predicting what the future of ballpark architecture would be a screwup.

This was just a rumor i heard. It might not be true, but didn't Jerry have the plans for Camden Yards right by McCormic place and took this design instead? I doubt there is any truth to it, but it would be pretty stupid to turn that down.

Daver
03-18-2002, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes


This was just a rumor i heard. It might not be true, but didn't Jerry have the plans for Camden Yards right by McCormic place and took this design instead? I doubt there is any truth to it, but it would be pretty stupid to turn that down.

For the record,Camden Yards went about twenty mil over budget,Comiskey came in under budget,though some lawsuits are still pending.

FarWestChicago
03-18-2002, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by daver


For the record,Camden Yards went about twenty mil over budget,Comiskey came in under budget:reinsy

That's music to my ears!

PaleHoseGeorge
03-18-2002, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz
....The ballpark was similar in look and feel to many ballparks built and designed in the '60s through the '80s - like new Yankee Stadium, Dodger Stadium, Candlestick Park, or Oakland Coliseum. In other words, it was designed for utility, not aesthetics.

And then along came Camden Yards.....

I agree with everything you say. The only thing I would add is the responsibility the architect has (working within the client's wishes) to create a structure that will have useful utility and aesthetics for many years to come--to anticipate the practical needs of the future. By this measure, New Comiskey is an abject failure. All the renovations prove the point.

It wasn't news that Camden Yards was going to blow the doors off New Comiskey. I saved the article by the Tribune's architecture critic, Blair Kamin, from June, 1991. He gives New Comiskey faint praise. The most prophetic quote is "But wait until the novelty wears off. And wait 'til next year, when the new ballpark opens in Baltimore."

If a simple architecture critic knew what was about to happen, I hardly think HOK didn't know, too. In fact, HOK designed Camden Yards. They knew exactly what future ballpark design would require, LOL!

So who does that leave to blame?

:reinsy
"Umm... err... if you don't build my stadium, I'm moving to Florida. So there!"