Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could they still be at 155th and Eighth?

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

  • rcl986@aol.com
    replied
    Yes but, Yankee Stadium retained its basic shape. Seating was reduced by almost 15,000 seats. This was done primarily by eliminating the left and right field bullpens and eliminating the left field bleachers. The centerfield bleachers were "blacked out". The left field bleacher area was converted into Monument Park and the bullpens relocated to that area. I believe several rows of left and right field box seats were removed to allow for greater distance down the lines and the seats were raised about ten feet above ground level. The back rows of the mezzanine level were removed and replaced by luxury boxes. All of this was accomplished without changing the basic foot print of the stadium.
    The Giants on the other hand would have faced a far more challenging problem had they tried to change the dimentions. In my mind it would have been virtually impossible to reconfigure that park within its basic footprint. Expansion of the existing park would have been all but impossible because it was bordered on three sides; 1- A housing project behind third base, 2- An elevated train station and the Harlem River beyond centerfield and 3- A hill and parkway behind home plate. Expansion on the first base side would have cost them what little parking space they had by eliminating their parking lot. Moving into Yankee Stadium for several years while the Polo Grounds was razed and rebuilt on the same site may have been possible but I'm not sure what shape that park would have taken given the forementioned site restrictions. In my view, the only option to keeping the Polo Grounds viable would have been to retain its shape, recondition, reinfforce and reconfigure (where possible) the park within its existing boundaries and provide the best possible creature comforts that could be provided ie. seating, restrooms, restaurants, food and souvenier stands etc.
    Doing even this however, would not have solved Stonehams problem with most of the seats being beyond first and third base. A solid winning team would have been the best remedy to increase attendance at the time, however having said all of that, the park would still have been in a dangerous area and eventually would have had to be replaced.
    Last edited by [email protected]; 05-30-2006, 06:04 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tonypug
    replied
    Originally posted by soberdennis
    As strange as the old dimensions were and as much as it was part of the flavor of the park, I doubt that they would have kept the old dimensions. Cookie Cutter Stadiums, as stupid as they were, seemed all the rage in the 60's.
    They probably would have moved the center field in and down the lines out.
    That's what they did across the Harlem River.
    Personally I prefer the old dimensions at Yankee Stadium and would have been a bit disappointed IMO by the dimensions of a new PG.
    The Polo Grounds would have been changed. One of Stonehams complaints was that most of the seating was past first and third bases and in the outfield.He couldn't charge premium prices for those seats. If he had anything to do with planning a new stadium it would have been configured differently. In my eye, the new Yankee Stadium was totally different from the old. Dimensions , seating, height of fences. Really two different ballparks, built on the same site.

    Leave a comment:


  • soberdennis
    replied
    Originally posted by donzblock
    Mr. Grounds 1957, if you decided to renovate the Polo Grounds, would you leave the dimensions of the park alone?
    As strange as the old dimensions were and as much as it was part of the flavor of the park, I doubt that they would have kept the old dimensions. Cookie Cutter Stadiums, as stupid as they were, seemed all the rage in the 60's.
    They probably would have moved the center field in and down the lines out.
    That's what they did across the Harlem River.
    Personally I prefer the old dimensions at Yankee Stadium and would have been a bit disappointed IMO by the dimensions of a new PG.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shotgun Shuba
    replied
    That picture was from 1940. What a strange park and desolate neighborhood eh! I would google "washington park, brooklyn" , without the quotes of course and go to the third page of images. On the bottom right you should see a great picture of Ebbets Field. That whole link has GREAT pictures of old NY. Enjoy.

    Leave a comment:


  • tonypug
    replied
    Originally posted by Shotgun Shuba
    photo from cyburbia.com
    Very nice photo. Any idea of the date it was taken?

    Leave a comment:


  • Shotgun Shuba
    replied
    photo from cyburbia.com
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • POLO GROUNDS 1957
    replied
    polo grounds

    Originally posted by MSUlaxer27
    No, we have the same amount of actual experience when it comes to the being in Manhattan with the Polo Grounds, none. Yeah I know, you went to the PG houses in 1987.

    The question that started the thread was if they could still be at 155th and 8th. The present traffic patterns and demographics of the surrounding (both the neighborhood and outlying buroughs/counties) areas should be taken into account. I was responding to Brownie31 and his factual statement that Manhattan is the only Borough of NYC not to have it's "own" professional baseball franchise/stadium.

    It should be noted that to get to all the places that Brownie31 mentioned by car (it is 2006 this is the preferred method of transport for LI,NJ and westchester and to a much lesser extent in SI, Bkln & Queens residents all places where fans the NYC teams come from) you don't have to come through Manhattan. Manhattan does have a "stadium" so to speak, Madison Square Garden. I live close to where RCL986 did and I work in midtown. I can tell you that it is a zoo commuting to work on a daily basis (I take the train). I do know that on days when the Rangers and Knicks are home at the garden it's even worse because even though MSG sits on top of a major transit hub (6 subway lines (ACE,123) the LIRR, NJ Transit & Amtrak, not to mention a PATH station & 6 more subway lines (FVBD,NR) two blocks away) people insist on driving in to watch the games. MSG seats 19,000 the Polo Grounds sat 56,000. How could it not have been worse today to get that many people to Coogan's bluff? As far as driving to Yankee stadium from Westchester, LI, NJ, Bkln or Queens or SI you you don't have to come through Manhattan. That changes if you're trying to get to the PG even if it was "just across the river". Most Manhattanites use the subway/LIRR to get to Yankee or Shea but for all others I suspect it's not the case.

    I'm sure it was easy to get to Yankee and the PG when the majority of fans both lived in the city and didn't have cars, but that is just not reality anymore.
    Well i still think that baseball still could be played at the polo grounds today.you may not like my opinion on this because i dont live in new york but live in detroit but i have been to the polo grounds site in 1987 and also over the years i have talked to alot of former giants and mets that played there and have learned alot from them.i will say this one more time if the yankees still can play across the river then the giants or mets still could be playing at the polo grounds.and this is my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • MSUlaxer27
    replied
    No, we have the same amount of actual experience when it comes to the being in Manhattan with the Polo Grounds, none. Yeah I know, you went to the PG houses in 1987.

    The question that started the thread was if they could still be at 155th and 8th. The present traffic patterns and demographics of the surrounding (both the neighborhood and outlying buroughs/counties) areas should be taken into account. I was responding to Brownie31 and his factual statement that Manhattan is the only Borough of NYC not to have it's "own" professional baseball franchise/stadium.

    It should be noted that to get to all the places that Brownie31 mentioned by car (it is 2006 this is the preferred method of transport for LI,NJ and westchester and to a much lesser extent in SI, Bkln & Queens residents all places where fans the NYC teams come from) you don't have to come through Manhattan. Manhattan does have a "stadium" so to speak, Madison Square Garden. I live close to where RCL986 did and I work in midtown. I can tell you that it is a zoo commuting to work on a daily basis (I take the train). I do know that on days when the Rangers and Knicks are home at the garden it's even worse because even though MSG sits on top of a major transit hub (6 subway lines (ACE,123) the LIRR, NJ Transit & Amtrak, not to mention a PATH station & 6 more subway lines (FVBD,NR) two blocks away) people insist on driving in to watch the games. MSG seats 19,000 the Polo Grounds sat 56,000. How could it not have been worse today to get that many people to Coogan's bluff? As far as driving to Yankee stadium from Westchester, LI, NJ, Bkln or Queens or SI you you don't have to come through Manhattan. That changes if you're trying to get to the PG even if it was "just across the river". Most Manhattanites use the subway/LIRR to get to Yankee or Shea but for all others I suspect it's not the case.

    I'm sure it was easy to get to Yankee and the PG when the majority of fans both lived in the city and didn't have cars, but that is just not reality anymore.
    Last edited by MSUlaxer27; 02-21-2006, 03:00 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rcl986@aol.com
    replied
    I did, and amazingly enough it was far easier (and quicker) for me to get to Yankee Stadium than it was to the Polo Grounds. I lived in the Yorkville section of Manhattan and simply had to jump on the Lexington Avenue Express and four stops (about 15 minutes) put me at the stadium. Getting to the Polo Grounds involved taking a crosstown bus to West 86th Street and boarding an 8th Avenue train to 155th Street. Trains and buses you may recall, were only a dime and later 15 cents in the fifties. Great memories of great years. Unfortunately however, I never made it to Ebbets Field. My loss!

    Leave a comment:


  • POLO GROUNDS 1957
    replied
    polo grounds

    Originally posted by MSUlaxer27
    You'll find that most of us who live in manhattan don't mind not having a stadium. Traffic is bad enough on any given day. I wouldn't want to imagine what it would be like if there was still a stadium on manahttan and a everybody from LI, NJ and points north were trying to get to it by car because they refuse to use the buses/subways/railroad. It's quick and easy enough to get to Yankee via subway or Shea via LIRR/subway.
    Did you live in manhattan when the polo grounds was still standing.

    Leave a comment:


  • MSUlaxer27
    replied
    Originally posted by Brownie31
    The Yankees are in the Bronx and the Mets in Queens along with minor league teams in Brooklyn & Staten Island-thus haughty Manhattan is the lone borough without professional baseball!-Brownie31
    You'll find that most of us who live in manhattan don't mind not having a stadium. Traffic is bad enough on any given day. I wouldn't want to imagine what it would be like if there was still a stadium on manahttan and a everybody from LI, NJ and points north were trying to get to it by car because they refuse to use the buses/subways/railroad. It's quick and easy enough to get to Yankee via subway or Shea via LIRR/subway.
    Last edited by MSUlaxer27; 02-20-2006, 07:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brownie31
    replied
    Look who is without baseball!

    The Yankees are in the Bronx and the Mets in Queens along with minor league teams in Brooklyn & Staten Island-thus haughty Manhattan is the lone borough without professional baseball!-Brownie31

    Leave a comment:


  • POLO GROUNDS 1957
    replied
    polo grounds

    Originally posted by MSUlaxer27
    OK. First off I am a Met Fan. I dislike Shea immensely and will not shed a tear when (if, you never know in NYC) they knock it down to build a new stadium but as a Met fan that's the only place I can watch Met home games. And quite frankly I'm sure it was great watching Mets/Giants games sitting in the upper deck left field seats 447 feet away from home plate at the Polo Grounds. You might as well have been sitting in the Bronx. However when they build a new stadium I hope they will build a stadium that is made just for baseball, like Yankee or Ebbets. If you check out this link and roll over the word football you will notice that the Polo Grounds were set up better to watch football than baseball http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/PoloGrounds.html

    In addition MLB has passed a rule (which they allow variances for) that all new stadiums must have around (not sure the exact number) 330 feet down the lines. I think you will not see stadiums anymore with the ridiculous dimensions of the Polo Grounds, Baker Bowl, Fenway or Griffith.

    Let's remember as well why these stadia had such quirky dimensions; either they had geographic (?) limitations (ie Coogans bluff at PG) or owners of the surrounding property wouldn't sell (Griffith, Fenway) I don't know why Baker (281 down the RF line and also had a train tunnel under the outfield causing a bump) was so screwy. Remember as well for every Wrigley, beloved for it's neighborhood feel and the apartments on Waveland where you can watch games without being in the park you have Shibe with it's "Spite" fence. When you don't have to worry about the surrounding neighborhood you won't have these "quirks".

    Last, as bad as the cookie cutter 60's stadiums were (I think Shea is the last, no) you had some idea (I know "the launching pad" or Shea's winds)that all homeruns, doubles & triple were somewhat equitable. Baseball is the only sport that plays it's games on fields of different dimensions (which harkens back to it's pastoral roots). Why should this be. I'm not a conformist but I'd like to be sure that the "sacrosanct(?)" records actually mean something. I know I'm going to get skewed for this but shouldn't Mike Schmidt's 548 HR at the Vet(or McCovey's 521 at the Stick)(I use them becasue they didn't play during the "steriod era") be viewed in a greater light than Ott's 511 launching "chinese homeruns" or Williams using the short porch at Fenway?

    I would have loved to watch a game at the Polo Grounds but I think for a full season of games in the 21st century I would much rather watch at Camden, Comerica, The Mariner's stadium, the Giants new place or even (god forbid) Dodger Stadium.

    The "good old days" weren't always good and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems.
    Well you can have your camden yards dodgers stadium or even that dumpy new stadium here in detroit called comerica, i would rather be at a full season of games at the polo grounds.and yes everyone knows about the diminensions of the polo grounds.those dimensions is what made the polo grounds so unique.i would love to sit 483 feet away in centerfield of the polo grounds anyday than any of these modern stadiums .again everyone has there own opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Greenpeach
    replied
    Originally posted by EbtsFldGuy
    I agree.

    But I wonder what would have happened had the Giants been owned by someone with a stronger will and more financial resources than Horace Stoneham had. Say a Jerry Jones ( of the Dallas Cowboys) type.

    Might they have stayed?
    Joan Payson & Bill Terry both offered to buy the Giants from Stoneham when he was threatening to pull the Giants out of New York, but they were both rebuffed. Terry put a group together in the mid-1950's that was going to have the Giants play in Yankee Stadium until the Flushing Meadow (Shea Stadium) was completed. However, when the negotiations became public knowledge Stoneham, who was embarrassed, broke them off.

    Leave a comment:


  • MSUlaxer27
    replied
    OK. First off I am a Met Fan. I dislike Shea immensely and will not shed a tear when (if, you never know in NYC) they knock it down to build a new stadium but as a Met fan that's the only place I can watch Met home games. And quite frankly I'm sure it was great watching Mets/Giants games sitting in the upper deck left field seats 447 feet away from home plate at the Polo Grounds. You might as well have been sitting in the Bronx. However when they build a new stadium I hope they will build a stadium that is made just for baseball, like Yankee or Ebbets. If you check out this link and roll over the word football you will notice that the Polo Grounds were set up better to watch football than baseball http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/PoloGrounds.html

    In addition MLB has passed a rule (which they allow variances for) that all new stadiums must have around (not sure the exact number) 330 feet down the lines. I think you will not see stadiums anymore with the ridiculous dimensions of the Polo Grounds, Baker Bowl, Fenway or Griffith.

    Let's remember as well why these stadia had such quirky dimensions; either they had geographic (?) limitations (ie Coogans bluff at PG) or owners of the surrounding property wouldn't sell (Griffith, Fenway) I don't know why Baker (281 down the RF line and also had a train tunnel under the outfield causing a bump) was so screwy. Remember as well for every Wrigley, beloved for it's neighborhood feel and the apartments on Waveland where you can watch games without being in the park you have Shibe with it's "Spite" fence. When you don't have to worry about the surrounding neighborhood you won't have these "quirks".

    Last, as bad as the cookie cutter 60's stadiums were (I think Shea is the last, no) you had some idea (I know "the launching pad" or Shea's winds)that all homeruns, doubles & triple were somewhat equitable. Baseball is the only sport that plays it's games on fields of different dimensions (which harkens back to it's pastoral roots). Why should this be. I'm not a conformist but I'd like to be sure that the "sacrosanct(?)" records actually mean something. I know I'm going to get skewed for this but shouldn't Mike Schmidt's 548 HR at the Vet(or McCovey's 521 at the Stick)(I use them becasue they didn't play during the "steriod era") be viewed in a greater light than Ott's 511 launching "chinese homeruns" or Williams using the short porch at Fenway?

    I would have loved to watch a game at the Polo Grounds but I think for a full season of games in the 21st century I would much rather watch at Camden, Comerica, The Mariner's stadium, the Giants new place or even (god forbid) Dodger Stadium.

    The "good old days" weren't always good and tomorrow's not as bad as it seems.
    Last edited by MSUlaxer27; 02-15-2006, 11:38 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X