Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pros & Cons - New Yankee Stadium and 70's renovation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pros & Cons - New Yankee Stadium and 70's renovation

    There has been a lot of passionate discussion on the merits of replacing the House that Ruth Built with a new Stadium. Equally passionate has been discussion of the impact of the 1974-75 renovation to the original ballpark.

    Since these conversations have been "encrouching" on the New Stadium Construction thread, this thread needed to be created.

    Have at it . . . . !!!

  • #2
    My take:

    And for the record, while the renovation did take away from some of the original "feel," I think it is an engineering marvel. I have some blueprints from the renovation that show exactly how they were able to support a massive upper deck that was originally only supported in the front and the back, without losing too much of the Loge and lower deck to do it.

    As for the new Stadium, in general I am for it; however, my support will certainly wane if it turns out that the "average" ticket buyer is precluded from accessing substantial sections of the park. Making some of the lounges and clubs exclusive to season ticket and suites holders is perfectly acceptable. Limiting access to entire concourses is not.

    As for the current Stadium, based on what they are doing with the new one, it looks like they could have returned some of the original design elements (such as the frieze) to it if they really wanted to.

    Comment


    • #3
      As an outsider looking in, it doesn't feel like the same stadium they built for ruth or even the same stadium that they added on to until the renovations actually started. It was cool that it stayed in the same place and they kept most of the stadium intact, but they did so many dramatic changes, I don't look at it the same way I do with fenway or wrigley.

      So to me its like getting rid of a stadium from the 70s such as 3 rivers or shea. They talk about better site lines, wider seat rows, and bigger concourses; so I would be in favor of getting a new stadium to get those things!
      The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It has been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt and erased again. But baseball has marked the time.

      Comment


      • #4
        Good idea moving this thread here, let's keep the other board for actual construction progress discussions and pictures. What started some of this was when I posted that the renovated stadium isn't the same place as the pre-renovated stadium.

        People were complaining that the 2009 stadium is not going to be the same, that the history of the old place is going to be lost, etc... So my whole reason for bringing up the discussion is that we've ALREADY erased the real Yankee stadium in the renovation, and that moving it now across the street is completely isignificant to the history since Yankee Stadium was already gutted in the 70's.

        If people wanted to complain about losing the original Yankee Stadium they should have done it 3 decades ago
        Last edited by GordonGecko; 04-28-2008, 08:26 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by GordonGecko View Post
          People were complaining that the 2009 stadium is not going to be the same, that the history of the old place is going to be lost, etc... So my whole reason for bringing up the discussion is that we've ALREADY erased the real Yankee stadium in the renovation, and that moving it now across the street is completely isignificant to the history since Yankee Stadium was already gutted in the 70's.

          If people wanted to complain about losing the original Yankee Stadium they should have done it 3 decades ago
          I happen to plain agree with you here, but I'll play devil's advocate. Here's a good example. If you've ever been to Kennywood amusement park in Pittsburgh (if you haven't, I highly recommend doing so) you probably went on The Racer. Here's the exterior of the ride now, and when it was built:


          However, back in the 60s/70s, that exterior was changed to a more modern, hideously ugly multi-colored design. Now, what if Kennywood, instead of simply taking the easier task of restoring the exterior, had ripped down the entire ride because it was "out of date" or unpopular?

          Yes, Yankee Stadium was hurt greatly in the 70s renovations. However, when the wrecking ball starts knocking it down next year, we will forever lose the chance to restore the park. The 70s renovation wasn't all bad, as they effectively removed the lower deck's support posts, while maintaining the insanely close upper deck.

          I am fully confident that a tremendous number of luxury boxes could be added to the park, while also bringing those iconic Yankee Stadium elements (the frieze in the grandstand, mainly) back. Monument Park can be relocated to another area that doesn't negatively affect the views of thousands of seats, and the concourses can get a renovation that removes the 70s buildings that stick out sorely, without removing functionality.
          http://www.virtualfenway.com

          Comment


          • #6
            I would have preferred for Yankee Stadium to have been renovated.

            That said, the exterior of the new park is outstanding. Further, the old stadium was claustrofobic and the concourses were very narrow. The stadium food venors were also limited as were the washrooms.

            My only problem with the new stadium is the Upperdeck. The yankees should have told HOK to f-off and replicate the original upperdeck. I also would have loved a return of death valley, with the orginal three monuments, flag and plaques on the wall.

            Comment


            • #7
              I realize that Yankee Stadium's upper deck is very close to the field, but I would prefer not to sit there unless I'm directly behind home plate. If you sit down the lines, unless you are in the 1st or 2nd row, you cannot see a great portion of the outfield. I am going to prefer the new stadium's upper deck. Although it will be pushed farther back, it will allow for better sightlines.

              I've sat in other stadium's upper decks that are pushed further back, such as Tropicana and Shea, and I had no problem with it. I may have been a little bit farther away from the action, but at least I could see ALL the action, and not have to guess what happened from the crowd's reaction.
              Bats, they are sick. I cannot hit curveball. Straightball I hit it very much. Curveball, bats are afraid. I ask Jobu to come, take fear from bats. I offer him cigar, and rum. He will come.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by curb my enthusiasm View Post
                I realize that Yankee Stadium's upper deck is very close to the field, but I would prefer not to sit there unless I'm directly behind home plate. If you sit down the lines, unless you are in the 1st or 2nd row, you cannot see a great portion of the outfield. I am going to prefer the new stadium's upper deck. Although it will be pushed farther back, it will allow for better sightlines.
                The upper deck is probably the thing I'm most conflicted about in the new stadium. We'll have to wait and see, yes it looks more generic, but on the other hand when we used to sit in the upper deck on the first baseline, you could go an entire game without seeing Paul O'Neill in the outfield! Its funny how you tend to forget about stuff like that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by curb my enthusiasm View Post
                  I realize that Yankee Stadium's upper deck is very close to the field, but I would prefer not to sit there unless I'm directly behind home plate. If you sit down the lines, unless you are in the 1st or 2nd row, you cannot see a great portion of the outfield. I am going to prefer the new stadium's upper deck. Although it will be pushed farther back, it will allow for better sightlines.
                  i agree. The closeness of the upper deck means that a chunk of the action is taking place underneath you rather than in front of you. And if you're in the first row of the upperdeck, you get a fantastic view of the metal railing. It's very annoying and possibly one of the worst seats in the house IMO.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MarcianoNY View Post
                    The upper deck is probably the thing I'm most conflicted about in the new stadium. We'll have to wait and see, yes it looks more generic, but on the other hand when we used to sit in the upper deck on the first baseline, you could go an entire game without seeing Paul O'Neill in the outfield! Its funny how you tend to forget about stuff like that.
                    Think of all the people who missed the Jeffrey Maier incident, and Jeter winning game 4 of the 2001 World Series. Thousands of people who paid good money sitting in the right field upper deck completely missed those!
                    Bats, they are sick. I cannot hit curveball. Straightball I hit it very much. Curveball, bats are afraid. I ask Jobu to come, take fear from bats. I offer him cigar, and rum. He will come.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MarcianoNY View Post
                      The upper deck is probably the thing I'm most conflicted about in the new stadium. We'll have to wait and see, yes it looks more generic, but on the other hand when we used to sit in the upper deck on the first baseline, you could go an entire game without seeing Paul O'Neill in the outfield! Its funny how you tend to forget about stuff like that.
                      I think that in NYS HOK could have
                      1) Not split the upper deck
                      2) Added 3-5 rows in the back
                      3) Moved it a little closer

                      I also think that the roof should have extended out a bit more as well. It looks to be not much wider than the existing Stadium's and if you sit in the back couple of rows you will have the frieze in your face (in the old Stadium in the back row the frieze was at least twice as far away and therefore not as obtrusive).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MJP View Post
                        I would have preferred for Yankee Stadium to have been renovated.

                        That said, the exterior of the new park is outstanding. Further, the old stadium was claustrofobic and the concourses were very narrow. The stadium food venors were also limited as were the washrooms.

                        My only problem with the new stadium is the Upperdeck. The yankees should have told HOK to f-off and replicate the original upperdeck. I also would have loved a return of death valley, with the orginal three monuments, flag and plaques on the wall.
                        A lot of people want to return the Monuments to the field . . . but then we fans would no longer get to see them close up . . . thoughts on that??

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          But aren't those quirks about ballparks the reason they are so great? I have full confidence in the original architects that they knew what they were doing, and chose to have the upper grandstand extremely close and intimidating, regardless of the obstructive support beams. Also, they chose to put a roof on the stadium knowing that the sun during day games is absolutely brutal, and knew full well that support beams would have to be used again in the upper grandstand area.

                          No matter what you think about the renovation (I personally think it was a terrible job, the support beams should NEVER have been removed), Yankee Stadium is still a time warp to another era of baseball. The reasons that I keep hearing (on this forum and everywhere else) for the love of Yankee Stadium has nothing to do with what they did during renovations, but for the aspects of the original stadium that still remain. The renovation that should be taking place right now should consist of bringing back the support beams in the lower and upper grandstands, the roof with a real copper frieze, the return of the original outfield dimensions, and repainting the seats/interior stadium a turquoise color.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by GordonGecko View Post
                            Good idea moving this thread here, let's keep the other board for actual construction progress discussions and pictures. What started some of this was when I posted that the renovated stadium isn't the same place as the pre-renovated stadium.

                            People were complaining that the 2009 stadium is not going to be the same, that the history of the old place is going to be lost, etc... So my whole reason for bringing up the discussion is that we've ALREADY erased the real Yankee stadium in the renovation, and that moving it now across the street is completely isignificant to the history since Yankee Stadium was already gutted in the 70's.

                            If people wanted to complain about losing the original Yankee Stadium they should have done it 3 decades ago
                            Agreed but . . . at the beginning of the new Stadium "sales job" the Yankees stated very clearly that they were going to recreate the 1923 Stadium, with modern amenities. To me that meant you start with the Osborn design, fix design flaws (narrow concourses and sight lines) and then add the ammenities. What they wound up doing was starting with an HOK design and adding some YS elements to it (and even then with "modern interpretation").

                            So what we thought we were getting and what we are getting are different. At least in my opinion.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Good point. With all the money they spend on groundskeeping, as well as increased security, there's no way we're ever going back to an era when the fans could just walk across the field after the game. A lot of people would miss out on monument park and it would become just a nice retro gimmick like all the new parks instead of what it is, a place where fans can learn about and pay tribute to the greats before a game.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X