Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could they still be at 155th and Eighth?

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

  • #61
    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.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #62
      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.

      Welcome back ARod. Hope you are a Yankee forever.
      Phil Rizzuto-a Yankee forever.

      Holy Cow

      Comment


      • #63
        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.
        Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
        www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

        Comment


        • #64
          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.
          RCL

          Comment


          • #65
            Polo Grounds

            Originally posted by [email protected]
            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 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.
            The yankees today play in a area that is not that great so the giants or mets still could be playing across the river at the polo grounds today.
            LONG LIVE THE POLO GROUNDS 1891-1964
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/POLOGROUNDS1962

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by POLO GROUNDS 1957
              The yankees today play in a area that is not that great so the giants or mets still could be playing across the river at the polo grounds today.
              On that my friend, we'll simply have to disagree!
              Last edited by [email protected]; 05-27-2006, 08:45 AM.
              RCL

              Comment


              • #67
                The Yale Bowl still has troughs, and they function very well.

                Comment


                • #68
                  There was no way that the Giants could have survived in the Polo Grounds, night games were becoming dangerous, unbelievable traffic jams in that area , no parking and the other clubs were moving into new superstadiums, throw in free agency, i doubt many players would have opted for there. You must remember that era you needed New York, New York didnt need them and that was really the reason that Robert Moses and other politicians didnt bend over backwards to accomodate them. If they had stayed the Giants would have proably ended up in the Meadowlands with their football counterparts and the Dodgers at Shea or another site in Brooklyn

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I am sure htis has been discussed before, but all the talk of the Jints staying if Brooklyn moved to LA is pure folly. There is no way the NL would have approved that based upon the travel from all the other NL cities all the way acroos the country to play one series against one team. The Giants and Dodgers had to move in tandem or the NL owners woulld have nixed it......

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Doug24 View Post
                      I am sure htis has been discussed before, but all the talk of the Jints staying if Brooklyn moved to LA is pure folly. There is no way the NL would have approved that based upon the travel from all the other NL cities all the way acroos the country to play one series against one team. The Giants and Dodgers had to move in tandem or the NL owners woulld have nixed it......
                      I know this is true but it is amusing that starting only a few years later the Angels functioned out west for 7 years with out another west coast team for the teams to visit.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Kronos View Post
                        I know this is true but it is amusing that starting only a few years later the Angels functioned out west for 7 years with out another west coast team for the teams to visit.
                        Not that I have a source but you could probably chalk it up to the AL being desperate to have some kind of foot hold in the Los Angeles California market.
                        New York (N.L.)
                        1888, 1889, 1904, 1905, 1911, 1912, 1913, 1917, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1933, 1936, 1937, 1951, 1954, 1969, 1973, 1986, 2000

                        Brooklyn (N.L.)
                        1890, 1899, 1900, 1916, 1920, 1941, 1947, 1949, 1952, 1953, 1955, 1956

                        New York (A.A.) 1884 Brooklyn (A.A.) 1889

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Kronos View Post
                          I know this is true but it is amusing that starting only a few years later the Angels functioned out west for 7 years with out another west coast team for the teams to visit.
                          The difference was that in 1957 most airplanes were propellers and in 1961 they were jets.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            The final nail in the coffin for the Polo Grounds was when Robert Moses built projects right next to the ballpark and they opened a week after Thomson hit the HR. Despite the residents of Harlem wanting middle class housing, Moses rounded up a couple of thousand people classified as 'low income' and crammed them into projects immediately next to (north side)the Polo Grounds. Cars left unattended during games were being broken into, fans were getting mugged after night games, etc. The only real parking lot was on the site of Old Manhattan Field immediately south of the Polo Grounds.

                            I discovered a letter, and posted it on baseball fever, from Nov 1953 where Robert Moses told Stoneham that the Giants should move into Yankee Stadium, as Moses wanted to build more housing projects on Manhattan Field and the Polo Grounds sites.

                            But if we are dreaming.....and we had a chance to make the old train yards into a parking garage like they have at Yankee Stadium.....and we still had that EL spur to the Bronx.....

                            My ideas of renovating the Polo Grounds would have been to undo the 1923 expansion, and bring the seating back down to 1922's 35,000. Then I would have tried to add a 3rd deck from 1st base to 3rd base, maybe 5,000 or so seats in the infield..maybe 10,000 if feasible.

                            My second idea would have been to allow the baseball Giants to relocate somewhere in the metro area, and rebuild the Polo Grounds as a football only stadium for the Jets, Giants, any college games.

                            Either would have been better than housing projects, a failed vision from the late 1940's into the early 1960's. Cities all across America, from Newark to Chicago, are now imploding these mistakes.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Right on the money Mandrake.....

                              The PG Towers killed the PG.
                              "Herman Franks to Sal Yvars to Bobby Thomson. Ralph Branca to Bobby Thomson to Helen Rita... cue Russ Hodges."

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                No way they could have stayed at the Polo Grounds. The area was in bad shape in the early fifties and has improved

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X