Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Petco Park

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

  • #46
    I really liked Petco and my game experience there was near perfect. Sunny with clear skies, Near sell out, good game, fantastic energy. My only issues with the park are the concourses that remind me of being inside of an Arizona Mall and the area behind the seats in center field where they make you walk down a level then back up. That and you can't really see the game from the concourses.

    Comment


    • #47
      Those two towers are really ugly and break up the lines too much.
      IMO, they look like watchtowers at a prison.
      Even in the photographs on this thread, I've noticed that people try to hide them, or crop them out.
      They are an eyesore.

      Some of the concession areas have the feel of a shopping mall. Perhaps they were just targeting their audience, but I didn't like it. It was a big turn off.

      Third, the whole manufactured quirkiness of right field is over-the-top.

      Also,,,what is up with the 70 year old volunteers running the concession stands???
      It was like a Tim Conway routine. Is the ownership that cheap that they need to do this??? Beer is $9!!!! The city subsidized a large chunk of the stadium costs. Can't the owner at least pay for some competent people?

      Otherwise, it is nice. I have been to a few games there, and even took the stadium tour one day in 2006.
      Last edited by parlo; 02-28-2009, 07:15 AM. Reason: punctuation
      http://soundbounder.blogspot.com/

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by mrakbaseball View Post
        ??????
        2004>1962.. It's time to evolve. Dodger Stadium had its day but it's been surpassed many times over.
        The new stadiums have not had to withstand the test of time. The passing of time has a way of exposing flaws that were not originally evident. Even Shea Stadium and the Astrodome were at one time considered the premier stadiums. But no one said that 20 years after they were built.
        http://soundbounder.blogspot.com/

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by mrakbaseball View Post
          ??????
          2004>1962.. It's time to evolve. Dodger Stadium had its day but it's been surpassed many times over.
          But that's the thing . . . it hasn't been surpassed many times over.

          By the way, by your logic, Rangers Ballpark is better than Wrigley Field . . . and we all know that's not the case.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by pudgie_child View Post
            But that's the thing . . . it hasn't been surpassed many times over.
            .
            Dodger Stadium had its day. This is a Petco thread. Petco is one of the ballparks that offers a better baseball experience than Dodger Stadium. Petco can be improved, but even as it is, it's better than Dodger. :twocents:

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by parlo View Post
              The new stadiums have not had to withstand the test of time. The passing of time has a way of exposing flaws that were not originally evident. Even Shea Stadium and the Astrodome were at one time considered the premier stadiums. But no one said that 20 years after they were built.
              Good point.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by mrakbaseball View Post
                Dodger Stadium had its day. This is a Petco thread. Petco is one of the ballparks that offers a better baseball experience than Dodger Stadium. Petco can be improved, but even as it is, it's better than Dodger. :twocents:
                It could have been been better than Dodger, no question about it. Great location, interesting architecture. Petco, however, has too many significant flaws to be in the same league as Dodger Stadium.

                For instance, I went to a game there last year with my brother, and we sat in the upper deck. Our seats seemed really far from the action, and I couldn't figure out why until I saw this photo (not my photo, but one that came up in a Google search):



                The upper deck at Petco Park has 27 rows. This was surprising to me because I had seen this architectural drawing:



                In the original design, the upper deck had only 22 rows. For those of us who study ballpark design, that is a big difference (a 61' foot wide upper deck vs. a 75' foot wide upper deck). At some point, between the original design and construction, someone backed off on the concept, and, as patrons of the upper deck, the effect could be felt.

                For comparison's sake, the upper deck at Anaheim Stadium has the equivalent of 26 rows: 9 rows + cross aisle (width of 2 rows) + 15 rows.

                There is really no excuse for a new ballpark to have such a large upper deck. It's really a shame because I really wanted to like Petco Park, but there are just way too many significant design flaws there.
                Last edited by pudgie_child; 02-28-2009, 05:16 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Thanks to stadiumpage.com, here's the model of the original design



                  In addition to the smaller upper deck, the original design was superior in the following ways:

                  1. Both bullpens were within the field of play (a la Wrigley Field and AT&T Park), and the bleachers were placed to the left of the hitter's eye, meaning that the berm seating ("Park At The Park") could extend all the way to the right-center field fence.

                  2. No upper deck in left field, only a single tier of seats.

                  3. No contrived notch in the right field corner

                  The arrangement of the seats in right field was seriously flawed in the original design, just as it is in the ultimate design:



                  A single deck in right field would have been better, and right field would have been the best place for the main scoreboard as well (the view corridor should have been to left field and the skyline).

                  Petco Park is not a lost cause by any means. It wouldn't be all that difficult for the new owner to make significant improvements:

                  1. Remove the upper deck in right field.

                  2. Build a new main scoreboard above the right field "lower reserved" boxes and remove the left field scoreboard.

                  3. Rebuild the right-center field bleachers and remove "The Beach."

                  4. Put the Padres bullpen in foul territory down the 3rd base line, and add seating to left-center field.

                  5. Remove the last two rows of the upper deck.
                  Last edited by pudgie_child; 03-01-2009, 02:45 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by pudgie_child View Post
                    Thanks to stadiumpage.com, here's the model of the original design



                    In addition to the smaller upper deck, the original design was superior in the following ways:

                    1. Both bullpens were within the field of play (a la Wrigley Field and AT&T Park), and the bleachers were be placed to the left of the hitter's eye, meaning that the berm seating ("Park At The Park") could extend all the way to the right-center field fence.

                    2. No upper deck in left field, only a single tier of seats.

                    3. No contrived notch in the right field corner

                    The arrangement of the seats in right field was seriously flawed in the original design, just as it is in the ultimate design:



                    A single deck in right field would have been better, and right field would have been the best place for the main scoreboard as well (the view corridor should have been to left field and the skyline).

                    Petco Park is not a lost cause by any means. It wouldn't be all that difficult for the new owner to make significant improvements:

                    1. Remove the upper deck in right field.

                    2. Build a new main scoreboard above the right field "lower reserved" boxes and remove the left field scoreboard.

                    3. Rebuild the right-center field bleachers and remove "The Beach."

                    4. Put the Padres bullpen in foul territory down the 3rd base line, and add seating to left-center field.

                    5. Remove the last two rows of the upper deck.
                    The original design actually did call for the left field seats to include both an upper and lower deck as is seen in the final product. Also, I don't see the need to remove the last two rows of the upper deck as it would not make sense cost wise and also the upper deck seems close enough to the field. Compare the upper deck at Petco Park to Qualcomm Stadium (for baseball, not really for football) and it's night and day.

                    Some of the suggestions you make to improve Petco Park have been made over the last 5 years by many of us Padres fans. The most glaring one being the ugly stark-gray concrete bleachers in right field that include the beach. I'm still waiting for some unsuspecting kid to be knocked out by a home run ball hit into that area.

                    You also mention the need for a scoreboard in right field above that upper deck. The loudest complaints about Petco Park came (and still often come) from people seated in left field and those sitting in Field Level seats under the overhang from the Toyota Terrace who could not see the main board. In 2005, the Padres somewhat solved this by installing a video board next to the out-of-town scoreboard in right field. However, I am still of the opinion that a second scoreboard should be placed in right field where the big three advertising boards are. Considering Angel Stadium has two scoreboards, this would make sense. However, a former member of the Padres front office once stupidly and arrogantly remarked that ballparks have one scoreboard, while stadiums have two thus throwing out the short-term possibility of a right field scoreboard.

                    On the topic of scoreboards, I've never been a fan of the one at Petco Park. For one, the advertising boards and Petco Park marquee are made of a teflon material giving a really cheap appearance. Also, the matrix board has always looked cluttered and the video board is a bit small. My hope is that the incoming Jeff Moorad ownership group invests in a nice big HD board ala Turner Field, Nationals Park, Citi Field, etc. Also, the current out-of-town scoreboard in right field should also be converted to HD while the ugly concrete wall behind it is painted some color.
                    Last edited by OBomb; 02-28-2009, 07:30 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by OBomb View Post
                      The original design actually did call for the left field seats to include both an upper and lower deck as is seen in the final product.
                      In the initial model, the left field seating consists of only one level, albeit with a cross-aisle.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by pudgie_child View Post
                        In the initial model, the left field seating consists of only one level, albeit with a cross-aisle.

                        Are you sure? It LOOKS that way, but remember that the LF upper deck is very low over the smaller lower deck. Looking at pics it looks like there's only about an 8 ft. clearance between them. That model photo is from very far away. Anyway, I agree that the split deck seems not needed.
                        I see great things in baseball. It's our game - the American game.
                        - Walt Whitman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by jnakamura View Post
                          Are you sure? It LOOKS that way, but remember that the LF upper deck is very low over the smaller lower deck. Looking at pics it looks like there's only about an 8 ft. clearance between them. That model photo is from very far away. Anyway, I agree that the split deck seems not needed.
                          It sure looks like one tier in that early model.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Here's a picture released from 2000, I believe, showing what left field at Petco Park was expected to look like. This was one year after the model being discussed was released.



                            The pictures below are of the first pieces of concept art the team released in 1998. I'll never forget just how excited I was when I saw these, as well as other pictures of what a ballpark in San Diego would look like. The team had held a contest for children in the San Diego region to submit pictures of what they wanted the ballpark to look like and very loosely used all the concepts submitted in this design shown. I even submitted my own very elementary drawing to the team and received a cool letter from a representative in the front office thanking me. Things changed, obviously, but the general idea still was realized in the final product.


                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by OBomb View Post
                              The pictures below are of the first pieces of concept art the team released in 1998. I'll never forget just how excited I was when I saw these, as well as other pictures of what a ballpark in San Diego would look like. The team had held a contest for children in the San Diego region to submit pictures of what they wanted the ballpark to look like and very loosely used all the concepts submitted in this design shown. I even submitted my own very elementary drawing to the team and received a cool letter from a representative in the front office thanking me. Things changed, obviously, but the general idea still was realized in the final product.

                              As seen above (and below), the earliest illustrations showed a ballpark with only berm seating in left field and a large pool in center field. Perhaps that is why so many box seats were planned for right field.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                The 2009 WBC at Petco Park
                                Japan vs Cuba
                                March 15th 2009

                                Check out my interactive Past Ballpark Locations map

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X