Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Target Field

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

  • Target Field

    Replacing some dead photo links with some newer links of Target Field, several from the 82nd All-Star Game.

    http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/photo-...7/#photo-86637

    http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/photo-.../#photo-123388

    http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/photo-.../#photo-123389

    http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/photo-.../#photo-123397
    Last edited by milladrive; 08-06-2012, 11:23 AM. Reason: Replaced dead links with newer photo links

  • #2
    Nothing new, nothing interesting, nothing worth building.
    http://www.virtualfenway.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Welcome to BBF, hofflalu.

      As for the Twin's new park, they could of done better. Compared to what the A's are building.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Williamsburg2599 View Post
        Welcome to BBF, hofflalu.

        As for the Twin's new park, they could of done better. Compared to what the A's are building.
        At least it's a lot better than the current stadium. It's great for Vikings football, but for baseball? It's just like playing baseball inside a house: it doesn't work. I'm not saying it has an unfair advantage for playoffs, but it's just awkward to play in a dome baseball stadium with no retractable roof.

        From what I have heard, the neighborhood around the Metrodome, is not exactly the safest, so be careful at nighttime.

        Comment


        • #5
          It looks like a nice open-air ballpark, but given all the bad weather this April in the northern cities (epsecially Cleveland), it seems like the Twins should really be considering a retractible roof.
          Rockies fan living in Texas

          Comment


          • #6
            Roof would be too expensive from what I understand. They used to play outdoors (but the season started later) so we'll see how it works out.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by catbox_9 View Post
              Roof would be too expensive from what I understand. They used to play outdoors (but the season started later) so we'll see how it works out.
              I'm sure it will be fine. This year's April weather was a fluke just because the jet stream dipped way down into the southern U.S. drawing a bunch of Arctic air with it. (According to Al Roker )

              Looks like a pretty good stadium, good to see another dome & artificial turf stadium headed for the scrap heap. Only two more to go after this!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sean O View Post
                Nothing new, nothing interesting, nothing worth building.
                I beg to differ. Have a look at this slideshow. The external drawings of the stadium look very interesting and in my opinion, very unique.
                RIP - HGF [1937-2009]

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by brewcrew82 View Post
                  I beg to differ. Have a look at this slideshow. The external drawings of the stadium look very interesting and in my opinion, very unique.
                  It looks like a bad ripoff of a Libeskind mess. It takes the worst generic qualities of the HOK cookie cutters, and wraps it in a contemporary monstrosity. Instead of a park based on proper architectural principals like line, form and texture, we have Camden Yards with a glass and steel tumor on the front.

                  When will we have another stadium on par with Kauffman?
                  http://www.virtualfenway.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Okay, this is what I think about the new Twins ballpark:

                    Pros:

                    * It's an obvious upgrade over the Metrodome. Anything would be.

                    * The external design is interesting. It does look kind of weird.

                    * I notice a double-decker tease somewhere, but I forget where.

                    Cons:

                    * Look at the upper deck seats barring the ones past the outfield. It still looks like it's pushed back badly.

                    * Too much emphasis on the lower deck.

                    * HOK-made means cheap looking. The distance and leverage of the seats still bothers me. It gets as flat as a board at times.
                    Last edited by Knick9; 04-12-2007, 08:40 PM.
                    My Top 4 funniest BBF posts ever:

                    1) "plZ dOn;t' pOsT LikE tHIs n e mOr!"

                    2) "The teams play 1962 games in 180 days."

                    3) "Stadiums don't move silly, people do."

                    4) "Once again you quibble, because it is I who speaks."

                    5) Almost anything RuthMayBond says...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's all right. Not the best design to come out, but light years away from the Metrodome and that's a good thing. It's open air which may cause problems in the early season or in post season play, but hey, baseball was always meant to be outdoors. I'm sure the Twins will adapt.

                      The new breed of ballparks seem always to get a bad rap on this board, with complaints about them being too derivative of each other and stuff about the upper deck being too far back. I'm not saying there isn't validity to those complaints, but I can't see how anyone can say this recent breed of parks is worse than the "dark ages" of the stadiums built from the mid-sixties to the eighties (with the possible exception of Kauffman Stadium). There's got to be some perspective to these things, and all things considered, the new "retro" parks are still a welcome change from the sterile, multipurpose monstrosities a generation back.

                      And I do think the Twins design is better than the New Yankee Stadium, which I honestly believe is a major disappointment.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I've been to four of the new retro parks, and I like all four of them. Coors Field is just about perfect for watching baseball (especially if you like high scoring games). My experience at Chase Field was unique since the only game I went to there was the first Opening Day. Watching that roof open was amazing though. Minute Maid Park in Houston is nice too, but both time I went, they had the roof closed. I'd like to go to one with the roof open one of these days.

                        The Ballpark in Arlington is beautiful, but it has a couple of major flaws that take away from the experience of watching a game. The first one is that fans can't see the field from the main concourse. They had to install TVs at the concession stands just so people could see what was going on while waiting in line. The other flaw is the placement of the jumbotron scoreboard. About a third of the ballpark can't see it (including everyone in that homerun porch).

                        The Minnesota design looks comparable to Coors Field. Two other parks that I'd really like to visit just from seeing them on TV are PNC Park in Pittsburgh and PacBell Park (or whatever they're calling it this year) in San Francisco. The plans for the new park in Oakland look fantastic (better than the Twins new park)...
                        Rockies fan living in Texas

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          From those pictures I dont really see a 'focal point' or 'signature' of the ballpark. The shot that is always on TV that allows everyone to recognize where they are.
                          www.twitter.com/jasonrosko

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I like it. If only they would put the upper deck anywhere near the action... h. It looks like you'll be able to watch for free from the parking garage, and from the area past RF. Kind of cool...
                            WAMCO!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The left field stands are reminiscent of Metropolitan Stadium. The best thing about this ballpark is that baseball returns to the elements the way it was meant to be played (translation: advantage pitcher early and late in the year). Same for football, the Vikings utilized the elements to their advantage when they played at the Met. The Rams or the Cowboys dreaded going there for a playoff game.
                              I like the new ballparks. I also like the old parks. If I am going to take a loan to go to a major league game, I at least don't want to wait on a very long line to go to the bathroom, get a beer, soda, hot dog or get a souvenir ( as great as they are they suck for these very things: Yankee, Fenway & Wrigley).

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X