Nationals Park

[Sean O]

It's sad when the best part of a ballpark is the scoreboard.

Panning from right to left on the panorama is an amazing experience. You see endless boring blue seats and nothing interesting architecturally, then your spirits are brightened by the black rectangle of the scoreboard (at least black makes sense), before you hit the endless boredom of the weirdly shaped outfield seats. And then, with the coup de grace, you get a concrete parking blob dominating left field.

I'm amazed at how wrong they can get a park. It doesn't control the space, the design is actually less interesting than watching grass grow (since the last 2 weeks of discussion on the page has been about that topic), and it has nothing to do with Washington. It doesn't even have a view of anything, unless you're standing in the back row of the upper deck in a very specific section.

I love it. I just have to assume HoK is ironically trying to create the anti-park.

People are going to miss RFK.

[PeteU]

People are going to miss RFK.

I don't know about that. Except maybe for game-related nostalgia. And face it, for baseball at RFK those moments were few and far between.

[placount]

I don't know about that. Except maybe for game-related nostalgia. And face it, for baseball at RFK those moments were few and far between.

yea rfk will be remembered more for its redskins moments than anything even related to baseball

[jimmyjimjimz]

What are they doing with RFK after the new stadium opens?

[nymdan]

What are they doing with RFK after the new stadium opens?

The MLS team still plays there, so nothing, at least for a while.

[Lafferty Daniel]

Panning from right to left on the panorama is an amazing experience. You see endless boring blue seats and nothing interesting architecturally, then your spirits are brightened by the black rectangle of the scoreboard (at least black makes sense), before you hit the endless boredom of the weirdly shaped outfield seats. And then, with the coup de grace, you get a concrete parking blob dominating left field.

I'm amazed at how wrong they can get a park. It doesn't control the space, the design is actually less interesting than watching grass grow (since the last 2 weeks of discussion on the page has been about that topic), and it has nothing to do with Washington. It doesn't even have a view of anything, unless you're standing in the back row of the upper deck in a very specific section.

I love it. I just have to assume HoK is ironically trying to create the anti-park.

People are going to miss RFK.

And just think of how much money would've been saved if RFK were renovated. I don't know what's worse, this park or GABP. And both of those ballparks have those huge gaps, creating a less than intimate grandstand. It's like this park in D.C. wants to be basketball arena with grass. But hey, congrats on the scoreboard.

[nymdan]

Here's an article from today's Washington Post, where the columnist gushes with praise for the new park: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111302361.html

[Sean O]

Here's an article from today's Washington Post, where the columnist gushes with praise for the new park: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111302361.html

I am now so much dumber for having read part, just part, of that article. What a disgusting review of a disgusting park.

edit:
what the hell is going on with the two lights on the left side of the scoreboard? It's so arbitrary! And the right field bullpen placement, it's so dark it looks like it's underground. And the triangular wall dead center, why is that necessary when it's built in a parking lot. Then there are two different parking garages, the only things visible out of the park. Then there's the seating arrangement.

I'm amazed at this park. I keep finding new things to hate.

[RichardK]

I am now so much dumber for having read part, just part, of that article. What a disgusting review of a disgusting park.

edit:
what the hell is going on with the two lights on the left side of the scoreboard? It's so arbitrary! And the right field bullpen placement, it's so dark it looks like it's underground. And the triangular wall dead center, why is that necessary when it's built in a parking lot. Then there are two different parking garages, the only things visible out of the park. Then there's the seating arrangement.

I'm amazed at this park. I keep finding new things to hate.

You find things to hate real easy, second nature to you. Matter of fact... Which stadium do you like the best? Seriously. Is there any? lol

[Sean O]

You find things to hate real easy, second nature to you. Matter of fact... Which stadium do you like the best? Seriously. Is there any? lol

Yes, Kauffman, because it actually gets both the big and the little things right. I can't imagine anyone who simply NEEDS a new ballpark in Washington for some reason to look at this park and actually say they like it. Every single thing about it fails miserably.

PNC is of a similar size, and that's beautiful. This is a mess.

[PeteU]

I can't imagine anyone who simply NEEDS a new ballpark in Washington for some reason to look at this park and actually say they like it.

The fact is, RFK Stadium was woefully outdated in terms of what is expected from ballparks in this day and age, and the place was of little historical value when it comes to baseball and virtually no architectual value, except maybe for its unique wavy roofline. With Wrigley and Fenway people will put up with the outdated idiosyncracies and inconveniences because they are considered classics, but RFK was no baseball classic. It was a bland multipurpose stadium that will likely get forgotten in the dustbin of baseball history, sad to say.

I remember in another thread on this subject you raised the possiblity of revamping RFK Stadium into a baseball only park with modern amenities a la Anaheim Stadium. The problem is, such a solution is a lot less feasible than it sounds at first thought. It was never built structurally to support luxury suites, and as much as us baseball purists may cringe, luxury suites are a virtually necessary evil for baseball teams these days, like it or not. Unless you actually demolish both the mezzanine and the upper deck, which is probably the only thing distinctive about the place.

So sorry to say this, but RFK was not going to work long-term in today's baseball world, and it didn't have the historic classical status of other parks to fall back on either. It needed to be replaced.

As for calling the new Nationals Park "disgusting"? I think that's a bit of a stretch. I'll agree with you that they could have done more with it--including a more interesting exterior and having an unobstructed view of the Capitol for all the seats, not just a few, but the Nationals are much better off here than at RFK.

[Sean O]

True, RFK wasn't built for luxury boxes, but neither were Wrigley, Fenway or Yankee Stadium. There's no way a 1912, 1914 and 1923 structure could handle the addition of luxury boxes but a 1960s structure cannot, imho. Even if it involves structural supports in the lower bowl, it is entirely feasible. Or, since we're talking an absurd amount of luxury boxes needed since it's DC, take advantage of the wavy roofline to add boxes similar to the football press areas in the corners. That way, you keep the cool roof while removing the seats farthest away.

When you rip out the center field section, you gain additional areas for seating and for high-end luxury boxes. They could have built several expensive restaurants in the outfield, or an exclusive gathering area for the lobbyists and pols to occupy.

Public transport isn't an issue, and neither was parking. By all accounts, transportation in all forms was easier with RFK. Renovation also would've been much cheaper. They wanted to rebuild the Anacostia waterfront, but $611 is quite a price to pay.

There is nothing good about the new park as far as I can see, and this is separate from the RFK issue. HoK is actually getting worse with their designs. You have a park whose only defining characteristics are parking garages. As much as I'm sick of red brick, it's better than beton brut concrete, which appears to be the only color this park will have.

Petco will finally have competition for worst park in the majors.

[stlfan]

There is nothing good about the new park as far as I can see, and this is separate from the RFK issue. HoK is actually getting worse with their designs. You have a park whose only defining characteristics are parking garages. As much as I'm sick of red brick, it's better than beton brut concrete, which appears to be the only color this park will have.

Petco will finally have competition for worst park in the majors.

Are you serious? Petco looks to be one of the nicest built in the last 15 years. As far as Nationals Park, true there are some design elements that don't make sense, but we can't criticise it yet. It has yet to open and everything be completed, like finishing touches. I love Busch III but I remember when it was 1-2 months away from completion, I wasn't completely thrilled, the place seemed to have no personality or soul. Once they made the finishing touches like paint along the edges of the upper deck, signage, etc. it looked much better. Add fans and the place seemed to have personality and soul. I think we should wait and see on this one.

[placount]

True, RFK wasn't built for luxury boxes, but neither were Wrigley, Fenway or Yankee Stadium. There's no way a 1912, 1914 and 1923 structure could handle the addition of luxury boxes but a 1960s structure cannot, imho. Even if it involves structural supports in the lower bowl, it is entirely feasible. Or, since we're talking an absurd amount of luxury boxes needed since it's DC, take advantage of the wavy roofline to add boxes similar to the football press areas in the corners. That way, you keep the cool roof while removing the seats farthest away.

When you rip out the center field section, you gain additional areas for seating and for high-end luxury boxes. They could have built several expensive restaurants in the outfield, or an exclusive gathering area for the lobbyists and pols to occupy.

Public transport isn't an issue, and neither was parking. By all accounts, transportation in all forms was easier with RFK. Renovation also would've been much cheaper. They wanted to rebuild the Anacostia waterfront, but $611 is quite a price to pay.

There is nothing good about the new park as far as I can see, and this is separate from the RFK issue. HoK is actually getting worse with their designs. You have a park whose only defining characteristics are parking garages. As much as I'm sick of red brick, it's better than beton brut concrete, which appears to be the only color this park will have.

Petco will finally have competition for worst park in the majors.

sometimes i wonder if you dont just try to raise the temperature in these threads

[nymTom]

sometimes i wonder if you dont just try to raise the temperature in these threads

No Not Sean O. he is perfect, LOL. If he has ideas thats great , nothing wrong with that. But when you go to every thread and rip all the parks apart especially when the fans of the teams are excited, it gets pretty old. We realize things could be done different, but not everyone thinks alike. He doesnt get that point. I personally like all the new stadiums for the most part, and i enjoy reading the history of the old ones as well...