That's pretty classy of Ryan Dempster. I don't know why he picked the Rangers over the Braves though. I still hope he doesn't win a game the rest of the season.
MLB Discussion - 2012 Season
- Thread starter tomalak301
- Start date
That's pretty good. Parking is at a premium there and it's expensive as heck. My suggestion was going to be park a ways from the stadium and take public transit.
Agreed. I was at Fenway for a Yankees/Sox series last fall and I had an awesome time.
I had a great time. It was nice not to have to walk three miles uphill just to get to my seat. That was the first time I'd even been in a sold out ballpark. The atmosphere was great and I got to see a Middlebrooks HR that barely made it over the green monster (which looks bigger on TV).
Dempster was always a classy guy. I'm sorry to see him go, but as things stand from a business perspective yeah it's smart to get a couple of prospects since he's a free agent anyways in November.
I hope he does well in October, he'll definitely help get the Rangers there.
I'm glad you had fun! And I'm also glad that you got to see a game that featured some pretty good pitching on both sides (until the sixth inning or so, anyway).
I'm not glad, however, that the Red Sox couldn't come back and win.
ETA: Where were you sitting?
Right field 187 row PP pretty close to the Rangers bullpen. It was the cheapest ticket that I could find but I think it was a pretty good seat.
The one time I went to Fenway, I sat in CF underneath the John Hancock sign/scoreboard.
My seat faced the first base line. I had to crane my neck like an elementary school yearbook photo to watch the action. That place is a dump. I wish they would tear it down and build something new, but there isn't anywhere to do so unless you build it outside of town.
I'd say Patriot Place, but Foxborough is a tiny town off the beaten path that can handle a football game 8 times a year but would be screwed if they had a baseball team there. The infrastructure doesn't exist.
My seat faced the first base line. I had to crane my neck like an elementary school yearbook photo to watch the action. That place is a dump. I wish they would tear it down and build something new, but there isn't anywhere to do so unless you build it outside of town.
I'd say Patriot Place, but Foxborough is a tiny town off the beaten path that can handle a football game 8 times a year but would be screwed if they had a baseball team there. The infrastructure doesn't exist.
Last year I went to a game and sat in the same general area, except I was a few rows behind the visiting bullpen, in section 43 right next to that big gap between sections. It's a pretty decent view of the field from there.
Still, even with the renovations made to the ballpark in the last decade, a lot of the seats are really uncomfortable, and a lot of the viewing angles are terrible. I don't think they'd tear it down at this point, since it's been added to the National Register of Historic Places, but I still would like to see the Red Sox build a brand new stadium. Keep the same basic field dimensions if you want, but add more seats and emphasize viewer comfort in the stands.
^ I love the old ballparks, and to see the last couple go away would be a shame. It's sad that more of them haven't survived this long.
But both Fenway & Wrigley are very possibly structurally unsound. I mean deep down structurally, even ignoring the falling concrete and such.
Short of stripping them down to the frameworks and treating and sealing that old metal, then effectively "rebuilding" them, there's no way to really make them new again. No matter how much remodeling is done.
At some point, they will have to be replaced or at least abandoned for the playing of baseball games.
I'd prefer the Cubs move to a new stadium somewhere in Chicago that has ample room (maybe back to the West Side?) and leaving Wrigley there as a sort of quasi-baseball museum.
The frickin' yuppies that live on the North Side are mostly johnny-come-latelys (compared to Wrigley Field), yet complain about the noise & traffic.
That Fenway idea should have been done.
But both Fenway & Wrigley are very possibly structurally unsound. I mean deep down structurally, even ignoring the falling concrete and such.
Short of stripping them down to the frameworks and treating and sealing that old metal, then effectively "rebuilding" them, there's no way to really make them new again. No matter how much remodeling is done.
At some point, they will have to be replaced or at least abandoned for the playing of baseball games.
I'd prefer the Cubs move to a new stadium somewhere in Chicago that has ample room (maybe back to the West Side?) and leaving Wrigley there as a sort of quasi-baseball museum.
The frickin' yuppies that live on the North Side are mostly johnny-come-latelys (compared to Wrigley Field), yet complain about the noise & traffic.
That Fenway idea should have been done.
Fenway Park, as it stands, is solid. I think they've done a good job with it. It's got 25-30 years of life left to it, at least. I don't think it's unsafe or threadbare or anything like that.
Wrigley Field, OTOH, is falling apart. If they can't renovate it - this would be a good start - the Cubs should just tear it down and rebuild it from scratch, in the same location. The team can move to the Cell while this is going on (like the Yankees did at Shea in the mid 70's).
Wrigley Field, OTOH, is falling apart. If they can't renovate it - this would be a good start - the Cubs should just tear it down and rebuild it from scratch, in the same location. The team can move to the Cell while this is going on (like the Yankees did at Shea in the mid 70's).
If they were to tear down Wrigley, I definitely think they should move somewhere with more room, not only for the park initially, but for future expansion, parking, etc.
It would be very difficult to add more seating, for example, at the current location. Oh, they could double-deck the outfield, but then the rooftop owners would have kittens.
I've had that stadium page you linked in my bookmarks for years. I love looking at the pictures there are of the old parks. I also have the football stadium version of the site.
It would be very difficult to add more seating, for example, at the current location. Oh, they could double-deck the outfield, but then the rooftop owners would have kittens.
I've had that stadium page you linked in my bookmarks for years. I love looking at the pictures there are of the old parks. I also have the football stadium version of the site.
^ I think the trouble with expanding the upper decks at Wrigley is related to the structural problems of the existing site. If they rebuilt it, they could get rid of all that.
And I doubt Cubs fans would put up with a stadium anywhere other than on that site, looking as much like Wrigley as possible. (Then again, Whitesox fans got over the loss of Comiskey, so I guess anything's possible.)
And I doubt Cubs fans would put up with a stadium anywhere other than on that site, looking as much like Wrigley as possible. (Then again, Whitesox fans got over the loss of Comiskey, so I guess anything's possible.)
Comiskey I was nearly as old as Wrigley too, but White Sox fans really are a different breed.
That's the other side of the coin. Nothing lasts forever, and teams owe it to their loyal fans to give them a good experience, even if the team sucks
Comiskey was older than all of them. I wish I had gotten the chance to see it before they tore it down!
(Fortunately, I didn't get to the Cell until after they renovated it heavily. The Cell *sucked* when it was first built....)
Agreed. If Yankee Stadium can go, any of them can.
Similar threads
