Yankee Stadium [I] Demolition

[trueblue9441]

great job as always gary.. 2 questions.. picture 4, what pod is that? im going to make an assumption and say its the gate 4 pod? and what is that last photo taken of? the gate 2 area?

[giantsean]

This:

But then they went on to do the exact same thing in NYS, albeit not quite as in your face. I don't understand why they couldn't re-face them both.

[Maas_Pasqua_Pags]

Anyone have any interior shots of Anaheim Stadium that we can compare to RYS?

[Rob R]

But then they went on to do the exact same thing in NYS, albeit not quite as in your face. I don't understand why they couldn't re-face them both.

You're somewhat correct, but on a much, much, lesser scale. But, at NYS they added more of a "design" to the upper level and it's not as pronounced, high or bulky. Still, I wish they would have tiered it like they did at OYS. I agree they could have done something different, and I still think that we'll see changes there in the future. Hardly a deal-breaker though.

But compared to RYS's 1970's, "in-your-face," bulky ugliness, NYS's upper deck is a Jessica Alba 10. What some are forgetting is that NYS is supposed to pay homage to both OYS and RYS, without being a carbon copy. I think that in this respect, NYS was an overwhelming success. I love how NYS incorporates the features most identified with OYS and destroyed during the 1970's, even if the frieze isn't as ornamental. But, ironically, NYS evokes more of the original stadium than the renovated version does. I don't care if 90% or 15% of the original remained intact during the renovation, it was defaced and ridiculed for all the world to see. A joke of a renovation.

The other fascinating thing about NYS is that it is unmistakably the home of the New York Yankees. I'm not talking about signage, pictures or banners. The look and feel of NYS is undeniably Yankees and Yankee Stadium. I've said before that you can blindfold somebody, take them to their seat, remove their blindfold, tell them not to look up (at the frieze) and they'll know exactly which team plays there. NYS captured all of this beautifully. Try blindfolding someone upon entering Citi Field and do this. Once removed, the reaction would probably be, "Ugh...the San Fransisco Giants? The Portland Beavers? The Padres? The Iowa Cubs? The Twins? "

I'm not being facetious when I say that I'm shocked that the 4-5 or 6 vocal opponents in this thread aren't more outraged by what they did to OYS. I think that the problem is that most of us, including myself, are too young to have ever stepped foot in OYS. So RYS is the stadium we came to know and love. But that shouldn't be an excuse. We weren't born when the Mona Lisa was painted, but 100% of us would be outraged if she were tweaked, and tweaked badly. Would we say that 70% of her is still original? Given the astute posters in this forum, including many baseball historians, I'm shocked that RYS gets such a free pass.

[Maxlugar]

That kid has gone blind from all the fail.

"Daddy? Daddy?! I can't see! Turn off the fail! TURN OFF THE FAIL!!!!!"

[giantsean]

That's a very nice photo. Although it was criminal that they removed the frieze in the 1970's my problem with RYS lies more with the exterior. The upper deck of RYS was fascinating in its steepness and the sea of fans, BUT it was always missing something that was always associated with Yankee Stadium - the frieze. My father wasn't very fussy when it came to RYS, but he said that's the one facet of the original Yankee Stadium that he missed. He said that without the frieze, the interior looked like many other stadiums, that it lost its most distinguishable, identifiable feature - that plus the new field dimensions.

I can only go by photos, and without the support columns and frieze, Yankee Stadium just wasn't the same-it was more a defaced impostor, as my new signature says. But again, to me, the biggest crime is what they did to the exterior.

I guess that's where we are consistent. I love NYS's exterior but don't care for it's interior (fit and finish is nice and kills RYS of course, I mean the structure of the thing). I never had a huge problem w/ the pods but at the time I was going never really thought much of them one way or the other, having never been to OYS. I'm sure for folks like your Dad it had a much more profound effect... frieze=YS=tradition=memories and to lose it was a huge impact.

To net it out though it's a shame in retrospect that they could not have redone the outside of RYS, done a NYS-style frieze re-do, etc... which they could have if they really wanted. But the real problem is that the Yankees wanted a new park, and a new park they received.

[Rob R]

.............................

[Rob R]

To net it out though it's a shame in retrospect that they could not have redone the outside of RYS, done a NYS-style frieze re-do, etc... which they could have if they really wanted. But the real problem is that the Yankees wanted a new park, and a new park they received.

I couldn't agree more. That would have been my first choice as well, though greed and also (I believe) impracticability got in the way.

[Strawman]

I'm not being facetious when I say that I'm shocked that the 4-5 or 6 vocal opponents in this thread aren't more outraged by what they did to OYS. I think that the problem is that most of us, including myself, are too young to have ever stepped foot in OYS. So RYS is the stadium we came to know and love. But that shouldn't be an excuse. We weren't born when the Mona Lisa was painted, but 100% of us would be outraged if she were tweaked, and tweaked badly. Would we say that 70% of her is still original? Given the astute posters in this forum, including many baseball historians, I'm shocked that RYS gets such a free pass.

It doesn't get a "pass" - it gets a very careful consideration and an educated judgment. I'm jut old enough to have been to OYS a few times as a kid to see Stottlemyre pitch, and yes is was a great stadium. But here's the thing you miss in slagging the renovated Yankee Stadium, Rob - it too was a fantastic stadium and despute a few warts, was the same place as the old stadium in basic lines, footprint, shape of field, position, and quite frankly, Yankee mystique. Some fantastic, historic ball was played at the place you call "a fake, defaced impostor."

See, some of us totally disagree with that assessment. Yes, parts of that renovation were hideous (the pods) but other parts very successful (extending the upper deck, albeit without the frieze). The old place rocked! (And this from a Mets fan who actually liked Shea for its own history and interior lines). So it's not that we're letting the stadium off with a "pass" - it's that we reject the basic premise: that Yankee Stadium was a hideous fake. It was no such thing. It was still a jewel of all of baseball.

The Yankees should never have condoned its destruction and the defacement of their own freaking history. And the city should never have agreed to take it down. A horrible preservation crime all around. (Which has nothing to do with assessments of the new building, which is perfectly fine - i like the interior while really disliking the misguided exterior design).

[ncyankeefan]

Hey Rob, I agree with you on this one. RYS is not as nice as NYS, I thought RYS was very 70's in design, the only thing that was nice about it was the fact that the Yankees played there. In business and life you have to move forward, you cannot be stuck in the past. The Yankees made a smart business decision and built a ballpark that will give them greater advantage over the rest of baseball...as a fan and someone who owns his own business, I can appreciate that.
Thank you for all the photos.

[mandrake]

Rob

There are some things that they needed to do in 1973. From what I recall as a youngster, I think the bathrooms were an abomination. They certainly did not have enough ladies rest rooms. There was absolutely no ADA type accessibilty anywhere. The scoreboard in RF looked like it would land on people's heads at any moment. Yes, most of the stuff was cosmetic, but the place needed some fixing.

It's tough to take 2010 thinking and put it into the early 1970's mindset. The Yankees were getting killed by the Mets at the gate, and I think blame was put on the actual stadium (and not the-then horrible neighborhood, etc). In 1972, the Yanks drew 966,000 and the Mets 2.2 million (the Mets had drawn 2.7 mil in '70) so I think people thought 'we need a modern stadium'......of course they thought wrong ! I, too, prefer OYS over RYS but one can't forget that the franchise was threatening to leave. It's unthinkable in 2010 that they would ever consider it, but in the context of the late 1960's and early 1970's, it was a very real threat. The Yankees saw how the Mets were drawing, and also saw how much money the Dodgers were raking in out in LALA land. If it wasn't for Robert Short scheming to get out of DC, the Yankees could have moved to Texas in 1971. If there are NYY fans who don't believe it, they can research both the Yankees threats and Robert Short's plan to get out of his brand new Stadium in DC (by charging the highest prices, by playing up the unsafe neighborhood, etc).
The mindset that 'ruined' the look of OYS with the renovations did not change until the opening of Camden Yards. That ballpark finally stopped the cookie cutter madness and started a new trend (which itself is becoming a little played out)

(I did mention ADA seating earlier, or lack of. My father in law claims that for football games, people in w/c's were actually allowed on the sidelines for Giants games. I will have to verify that one.)

[giantsean]

But compared to RYS's 1970's, "in-your-face," bulky ugliness, NYS's upper deck is a Jessica Alba 10.

That's where I disagree... I never really minded the stringers given that's all I've ever known (to the time I ever really knew the history) and like I've said elsewhere, the grit of the 70's is to me part of the House's mystique - at least in that stage if it's and my life. I find NYS's whole upper area busy and inconsistent. Lower and more subdued stringers are offset by all those grates and panels. Again, though, the limestone is fantastic.

What some are forgetting is that NYS is supposed to pay homage to both OYS and RYS, without being a carbon copy. I think that in this respect, NYS was an overwhelming success. I love how NYS incorporates the features most identified with OYS and destroyed during the 1970's, even if the frieze isn't as ornamental.

Absolutely agree... it's meant to evoke both of the "looks" of the old place and to expect a copy would be unfair to it. I already wrote volumes on what I love and hate and overall just wish they had gone a bit farther. My problem w/ HOK's design - interior mind you - is that it looks to me more like any modern stadium with some Yankee parts tacked on. I think if you put a frieze on US Cellular park and plopped it onto River Ave you'd get the same effect w/ your blindfolded fans (or more close, as I like Chicago's new UD better than NYS'). Again, just talking interior.

I'm not being facetious when I say that I'm shocked that the 4-5 or 6 vocal opponents in this thread aren't more outraged by what they did to OYS. I think that the problem is that most of us, including myself, are too young to have ever stepped foot in OYS. So RYS is the stadium we came to know and love. But that shouldn't be an excuse. We weren't born when the Mona Lisa was painted, but 100% of us would be outraged if she were tweaked, and tweaked badly. Would we say that 70% of her is still original? Given the astute posters in this forum, including many baseball historians, I'm shocked that RYS gets such a free pass.

I think a lot of the vitriol comes not only from age, but the fact that it's been done for 30 years now... not much anyone can do (I for example, was four when it closed). But more than that, it's hard to dispute that it's the same PLACE that's been standing since 1923. Of course the city not saving a bit of the place and that overall experience didn't help.

[richiek]

The other fascinating thing about NYS is that it is unmistakably the home of the New York Yankees. I'm not talking about signage, pictures or banners. The look and feel of NYS is undeniably Yankees and Yankee Stadium. I've said before that you can blindfold somebody, take them to their seat, remove their blindfold, tell them not to look up (at the frieze) and they'll know exactly which team plays there. NYS captured all of this beautifully. Try blindfolding someone upon entering Citi Field and do this. Once removed, the reaction would probably be, "Ugh...the San Fransisco Giants? The Portland Beavers? The Padres? The Iowa Cubs? The Twins? "

Um...



C'mon Rob. You complain about others taking cheap shots at NYS and yet you compare Citi Field to a minor league park?

[Rob R]

Um...



C'mon Rob. You complain about others taking cheap shots at NYS and yet you compare Citi Field to a minor league park?

My apologies. It truly wasn't meant as a cheap shot, but in retrospect I should have worded it better. I meant that Citi was built in a retro style that is similar to other retro parks and that NYS is more distinguishable and it more identifiable with the team that plays there. Even minor league parks these days are going for that Camden-style retro look.

I'll say it here in a Yankee thread to show my sincerity: Citi IS one of the better retros, hideous signs and all (which can be corrected), and probably one of my top 5 ballparks, closer to the top. Very nice photo, btw.

[Rob R]

It doesn't get a "pass" - it gets a very careful consideration and an educated judgment. I'm jut old enough to have been to OYS a few times as a kid to see Stottlemyre pitch, and yes is was a great stadium. But here's the thing you miss in slagging the renovated Yankee Stadium, Rob - it too was a fantastic stadium and despute a few warts, was the same place as the old stadium in basic lines, footprint, shape of field, position, and quite frankly, Yankee mystique. Some fantastic, historic ball was played at the place you call "a fake, defaced impostor."

See, some of us totally disagree with that assessment. Yes, parts of that renovation were hideous (the pods) but other parts very successful (extending the upper deck, albeit without the frieze). The old place rocked! (And this from a Mets fan who actually liked Shea for its own history and interior lines). So it's not that we're letting the stadium off with a "pass" - it's that we reject the basic premise: that Yankee Stadium was a hideous fake. It was no such thing. It was still a jewel of all of baseball.

The Yankees should never have condoned its destruction and the defacement of their own freaking history. And the city should never have agreed to take it down. A horrible preservation crime all around. (Which has nothing to do with assessments of the new building, which is perfectly fine - i like the interior while really disliking the misguided exterior design).

I understand what you're saying and agree that from an historical viewpoint, the way this demolition/destruction of RYS was handled is appalling (on many levels), showing a total lack of respect for a landmark. But, that doesn't change the fact that the renovation was nothing short of criminal. You don't tweak the Mona Lisa by adding vivid colors and re-painting spots that may have faded over the centuries and call it a success.

As for the exterior of NYS, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'd like to share an interesting little comparison that I posted in the NYS thread (some of the folks here don't seem to visit that thread):