Braves Leaving Turner Field - Page 3

beasly213 · #31 11-12-2013, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kittle42

If you ever take a trip down to Cobb County, Georgia, you'd better read the signs, respect the law and order.

Steelrod · #32 11-12-2013, 03:49 PM

Its always about money. I was raised in a time where stadiums never became obsolete, they were just upgraded and became civic treasures where memories came from.

**The Immigrant** · #33 11-12-2013, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfourni

Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

Not sure how "locked into" the lease they really are given that they pay little to no rent. I imagine they could get out of the lease without too much trouble, since the landlord's termination damages shouldn't be prohibitively high. The bigger question is why would they? They have a sweet deal from a financial standpoint and make bucketloads of money when the team is even halfway decent. Unless a crazy billionaire buys the team and is willing to spend truckloads of his own money to fund a new stadium, it ain't happening.

ChicagoG19 · #34 11-12-2013, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Immigrant

Not sure how "locked into" the lease they really are given that they pay little to no rent. I imagine they could get out of the lease without too much trouble, since the landlord's termination damages shouldn't be prohibitively high. The bigger question is why would they? They have a sweet deal from a financial standpoint and make bucketloads of money when the team is even halfway decent. Unless a crazy billionaire buys the team and is willing to spend truckloads of his own money to fund a new stadium, it ain't happening.

I certainly hope that doesn't happen, at least not a move to the suburbs like the Braves.

DSpivack · #35 11-12-2013, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoG19

I certainly hope that doesn't happen, at least not a move to the suburbs like the Braves.

If the Sox moved to Addison in the 80s, I'd probably be a fan of the team on Addison, instead.

kobo · #36 11-12-2013, 08:04 PM

One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

DSpivack · #37 11-12-2013, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kobo

One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

It's not like there's anything wrong with it for baseball, though. It was substantially re-built after the Olympics to specifically become a ballpark. It's design and layout is very similar to Coors Field (and I also found Nats Park to be similar in some ways, too).

**asindc** · #38 11-13-2013, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kobo

One thing everyone has failed to mention so far is that Turner Field wasn't built for the Braves, it was built for the 96 Summer Olympics. After the Olympics they had to convert it to use it as a baseball stadium. Building a new stadium now give the Braves the ability to design the stadium they way they want and cut back on the number of seats.

Actually, it was designed from the beginning so that it would be immediately converted to a baseball-only park immediately after the Olympics, which makes this decision all the more bizarre. I wonder if USOC had known the Braves would want to bolt after 17 years if they would have made such a huge accommodation. As it was, IOC and USOC officials weren't thrilled with the design concept, but it wasn't a major disruption to the Olympics. If I'm Atlanta civic officials, I'm more upset with the fact that it can't be used as a multi-sport stadium. Ah well, IOC money built it, so who the hell cares, right?

SaltyPretzel · #39 11-13-2013, 08:44 AM

Maybe the Sox can get a discount on their Jumbotron.

MeteorsSox4367 · #40 11-13-2013, 09:58 AM

Judging by the one game I saw at Turner Field, I thought it was a solid baseball venue. Granted, we were in the last rows of the upper deck behind the plate, but I thought it was a good place to watch a ballgame.

Another thing that I thought was cool was that the site of Fulton County Stadium was across the parking lot. I liked the fact that I could see the spot where Hank Aaron hit his historic home run and also where the Falcons and the Peach Bowl called home.

**Hitmen77** · #41 11-13-2013, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrfourni

Sox are locked into their lease until 2029. At that point the stadium will be nearly 40 years old. I'd be willing to bet that with new ownership in place, there will be a lot of talk of building a new park. And I wouldn't be surprised if they used some of the same reasoning the braves are using now.

Yes, I could see the White Sox clamoring for a new stadium at that time. I doubt the state is going to give them anywhere close to such a sweetheart deal at the Cell when this lease is up. Reinsdorf would be in his 90s and it's very likely the Sox will have a new ownership group by then. Even with the successful fixes that have been made to the Cell in the last decade, I could see a new ownership group saying 40 years at the Cell is enough and wanting to start from the ground up to get the ballpark completely right this time. The Cell is JR's baby - a new owner won't necessarily feel any sentimentality to it.

That being said, this would only happen if Sox ownership comes up with a way to privately finance almost all the cost of a new park. There's no way the State is going to be giving the Sox much in the way of public funding again.

Also, my guess is that any new ballpark would be built just north of the Cell on the site of Old Comiskey. I just don't think they're going to find any better site available for a new park.

As far as any of the other MLB parks that were built after the Cell, I expect all of them (except Turner Field) to be still in use in 2029. How long is the Marlins' lease? Maybe they'll be looking to move by 2029 if their lease is up and they continue to draw poorly over the next 2 decades.

kittle42 · #42 11-13-2013, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MeteorsSox4367

Judging by the one game I saw at Turner Field, I thought it was a solid baseball venue. Granted, we were in the last rows of the upper deck behind the plate, but I thought it was a good place to watch a ballgame.

I went in September. There were maybe - maybe - 5,000 people at a game involving a first-place team. Really got to explore the park, which was nice. I would say it was middle of the road of the "newer" places I have been. Citizens Bank, for one, is better, as is Busch.