menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: No More Cleveland Indians
Page: 4 of 4
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
2/23/2021 7:43 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Absolutely no reason why they should build a new park.

And the exodus from Cleveland has leveled off. The metro area is actually growing and passed Orlando.
Agreed. Do teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?
Ask Atlanta
Or Texas...
mail
person
GroverBall
2/23/2021 11:24 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Absolutely no reason why they should build a new park.

And the exodus from Cleveland has leveled off. The metro area is actually growing and passed Orlando.
Agreed. Do teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?
Ask Atlanta
Atlanta says when you host the summer Olympics money grows on trees and stadiums get built for multiple purposes.
mail
person
GroverBall
2/23/2021 11:35 PM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
Absolutely no reason why they should build a new park.

And the exodus from Cleveland has leveled off. The metro area is actually growing and passed Orlando.
Agreed. Do teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?
Ask Atlanta
Or Texas...
Texas says to have a big enough metropolitan area to include pro soccer, football and rugby to make extra stadiums profitable.

I guess I should have asked "Do small market teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?"

As a Tigers fan Comerica has its positives but I wish we still played in Tiger Stadium.
mail
OhioCatFan
2/24/2021 12:12 AM
GroverBall wrote:expand_more
Absolutely no reason why they should build a new park.

And the exodus from Cleveland has leveled off. The metro area is actually growing and passed Orlando.
Agreed. Do teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?
Ask Atlanta
Or Texas...
Texas says to have a big enough metropolitan area to include pro soccer, football and rugby to make extra stadiums profitable.

I guess I should have asked "Do small market teams really expect to build new stadiums every 30 years?"

As a Tigers fan Comerica has its positives but I wish we still played in Tiger Stadium.
Wrigley Field has character . . . these new fields, for the most part, don't. Stadiums will last centuries if you treat them well.
mail
person
bobcatsquared
2/24/2021 6:48 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Wrigley Field has character . . . these new fields, for the most part, don't. Stadiums will last centuries if you treat them well.
Cookie cutter bowls of the 1970s - Riverfront in Cincy, 3 Rivers in Pitt, Veterans in Philly, the ones in Atlanta and St. Louis, etc... - had no character. The new ones, beginning with Camden Yards in Baltimore, have character.

Not that I'm defending building a new stadium every 20-30 years. And, I loved Tiger Stadium. One of my favorites.
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/24/2021 7:02 AM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Cookie cutter bowls of the 1970s - Riverfront in Cincy, 3 Rivers in Pitt, Veterans in Philly, the ones in Atlanta and St. Louis, etc... - had no character. The new ones, beginning with Camden Yards in Baltimore, have character.

Not that I'm defending building a new stadium every 20-30 years. And, I loved Tiger Stadium. One of my favorites.
The Giants and Jets went in the opposite direction when they built Met Life.

Giants Stadium had character.
The fans loved the place.
But it didn't have enough luxury boxes or amenities for high end fans.

So the Giants and Jets built Met Life.

Met Life is a grey box,right down to the seats.
They wanted it to be "neutral" except for the banners they put when each team plays.

By putting the luxury boxes and club seats in what was the mezzanine level
at Giants stadium,you sit higher and further away from the field.

PSL's didn't help.

My family had season tickets for the Giants from the day the stadium opened.
Sat with the same people the whole time.

3 years at MetLife was enough.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
2/24/2021 9:37 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Wrigley Field has character . . . these new fields, for the most part, don't. Stadiums will last centuries if you treat them well.
I think there are some great new stadiums with far more character than their predecessors.

The Giants stadium is 1000x better than Candlestick. Camden Yards. The Pirates stadium is fantastic, and is way better than Three Rivers. Citi Field beats Shea by a landslide. Target Field's a big upgrade over the Metrodome. San Diego use to have a completely generic stadium; they now have a great, downtown stadium.

Even some of the new stadiums that feel cookie cutter -- Nationals Park, Great American Ballpark -- are still upgrades over what was there before.
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
2/24/2021 10:25 AM
Agree about Target Field over Metrodome and Camden over Memorial. Hated both Memorial and Metrodome, and went there a number of times. Target is one of the nicest new stadiums, in my opinion. Went to Ballpark at Arlington for its last season in 2019 and thought it was a really nice field. The retractable roof for Texas summers was what did it in according to locals. New stadium from above looks horrible, though. Looks like a mall, or maybe a barn. Doesn't look like a beautiful new stadium.

https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/-new-texas-rangers-stadi...

I realize it's only a mark-up, but check out the plans for the proposed new Athletics stadium. Oakland competes with Tampa for worst current stadium, with no great competition elsewhere (though White Sox Comiskey II, or whatever current name, is the worst of the new breeds IMO). This Oakland Stadium would likely be the nicest one out there if it came out looking like the pictures.

https://www.mlb.com/athletics/oakland-ballpark/howard-ter...

(And privately funded, too!)
mail
person
bobcatsquared
2/24/2021 10:51 AM
Biggest difference? The "cookie cutters" were for multi purposes (MLB, NFL) while their replacements are, for the most part, solely for baseball.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
2/24/2021 11:17 AM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
Agree about Target Field over Metrodome and Camden over Memorial. Hated both Memorial and Metrodome, and went there a number of times. Target is one of the nicest new stadiums, in my opinion. Went to Ballpark at Arlington for its last season in 2019 and thought it was a really nice field. The retractable roof for Texas summers was what did it in according to locals. New stadium from above looks horrible, though. Looks like a mall, or maybe a barn. Doesn't look like a beautiful new stadium.

https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/-new-texas-rangers-stadi...

I realize it's only a mark-up, but check out the plans for the proposed new Athletics stadium. Oakland competes with Tampa for worst current stadium, with no great competition elsewhere (though White Sox Comiskey II, or whatever current name, is the worst of the new breeds IMO). This Oakland Stadium would likely be the nicest one out there if it came out looking like the pictures.

https://www.mlb.com/athletics/oakland-ballpark/howard-ter...

(And privately funded, too!)

Do you mean LACK of retractable room for Texas summers? Because the Ball Park at Arlington or whatever it was called last year, did not have a roof, much less a retractable one. That park lasted 26 years, was a nice ball part, and is silly to replace. Though not my favorite of the 32 stadiums I have attended over the years, GABP is definitely one of my favorite places to spend a spring and summer afternoon.
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
2/24/2021 12:17 PM
Yes, the old stadium didn't have a retractable roof, new Texas stadium does. This is to make the scorching Dallas summers more tolerable for fans. If you sat in the sun, it was almost unbearable according to the fans. Old one looks much nicer than the new one, that's for sure.
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
2/24/2021 3:28 PM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Biggest difference? The "cookie cutters" were for multi purposes (MLB, NFL) while their replacements are, for the most part, solely for baseball.
And they all have real grass. The astro turf era is thankfully over
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
2/24/2021 5:03 PM
Who still has AstroTurf, or FieldTurf, in baseball? Toronto and Tampa? Are those the only two?
mail
person
CatsUp
2/24/2021 5:56 PM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
Who still has AstroTurf, or FieldTurf, in baseball? Toronto and Tampa? Are those the only two?
Plus Rangers, Diamondbacks and Marlins...Shaw Sports Turf.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
2/24/2021 8:58 PM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
Yes, the old stadium didn't have a retractable roof, new Texas stadium does. This is to make the scorching Dallas summers more tolerable for fans. If you sat in the sun, it was almost unbearable according to the fans. Old one looks much nicer than the new one, that's for sure.
I’m well aware of the old, and the new, your original post was in regards to the Ball Park at Arlington, which I know did not have a roof
mail
person
cc-cat
2/24/2021 9:51 PM
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
Biggest difference? The "cookie cutters" were for multi purposes (MLB, NFL) while their replacements are, for the most part, solely for baseball.
And they all have real grass. The astro turf era is thankfully over
They also tend to be "fit" into the city scape - versus the cookie cutters that often were on the edge of town to accommodate large parking lots as well.
mail
OhioCatFan
2/24/2021 11:41 PM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Wrigley Field has character . . . these new fields, for the most part, don't. Stadiums will last centuries if you treat them well.
Cookie cutter bowls of the 1970s - Riverfront in Cincy, 3 Rivers in Pitt, Veterans in Philly, the ones in Atlanta and St. Louis, etc... - had no character. The new ones, beginning with Camden Yards in Baltimore, have character.

Not that I'm defending building a new stadium every 20-30 years. And, I loved Tiger Stadium. One of my favorites.
I agree that some of the new stadiums are very nice. That's why I said "for the most part." The two in Ohio -- Great American and Progressive are fairly nice. That's true primarily because they are built to resemble, to some extent, the old ball parks like Wrigley, Shibe Park, or even old Crosley Field. I agree with what someone else said in this thread that the single-use fields -- for baseball only -- generally have a much better atmosphere than the multi-use monstrosities.
Last Edited: 2/24/2021 11:42:41 PM by OhioCatFan
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
2/25/2021 9:36 AM
I think what has made many of the newish stadiums (stadia?) so nice has been the way they have incorporated the cities into the landscape or backdrop. Atlanta tried to build an entire center out of nothing for their newest stadium, and it doesn't seem to have been that great of a draw. Despite having a new stadium and a playoff team, they were the 12th best in attendance in 2019. San Francisco, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati all bring elements of the city into the stadium itself or its design/backdrop. McCovey Cove is already as well known as any former stadium quirk. Green Monster, Wrigley Ivy, McCovey Cove...maybe even the Warehouse at Camden Yards. Having a distinctive characteristic is something that gives the stadium a little something extra.
mail
person
rpbobcat
2/25/2021 11:36 AM
Kevin Finnegan wrote:expand_more
I think what has made many of the newish stadiums (stadia?) so nice has been the way they have incorporated the cities into the landscape or backdrop. Atlanta tried to build an entire center out of nothing for their newest stadium, and it doesn't seem to have been that great of a draw. Despite having a new stadium and a playoff team, they were the 12th best in attendance in 2019. San Francisco, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati all bring elements of the city into the stadium itself or its design/backdrop. McCovey Cove is already as well known as any former stadium quirk. Green Monster, Wrigley Ivy, McCovey Cove...maybe even the Warehouse at Camden Yards. Having a distinctive characteristic is something that gives the stadium a little something extra.

The plural of stadium,is stadiums.

Stadia is a method land surveyors like me used to measure horizontal distances "remotely",before we had lasers.
mail
person
cc-cat
2/25/2021 1:36 PM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
Stadia is a method land surveyors like me used to measure horizontal distances "remotely",before we had lasers.
Makes sense given latin.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
2/25/2021 10:32 PM
The annual BA English lesson is out in full force
mail
person
cc-cat
2/26/2021 11:41 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
The annual BA English lesson is out in full force.
You forgot the punctuation at the end of your sentence. Fixed it for ya. ;)
mail
person
Pataskala
2/26/2021 2:54 PM
CatsUp wrote:expand_more
Who still has AstroTurf, or FieldTurf, in baseball? Toronto and Tampa? Are those the only two?
Plus Rangers, Diamondbacks and Marlins...Shaw Sports Turf.
The Jays are about to lose their phony grass. They're tearing down the stadium formerly known as the SkyDome and replacing it with a new stadium that will have natural grass. Wonder if the new stadium will have a hotel attached, like the current one does. Fans often got a bonus show when hotel guests made love in their rooms with the curtains open.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
2/26/2021 3:08 PM
cc-cat wrote:expand_more
The annual BA English lesson is out in full force.
You forgot the punctuation at the end of your sentence. Fixed it for ya. ;)
LOL 😂
Showing Messages: 76 - 100 of 100
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)