NY Mets to get new stadium says Bloomberg

[Guest Spacemans Bong]

SI Metman wrote: NYC will be in the same situation as Paris. Paris submitted for the 2008 games and was a finalist, but lost since 2006 will also be in Europe (as was 2004). NYC will lose since 2010 is in North America. I bet it'll definately be 2012 Paris and 2016 NYC.

I think NYC will definitely get the games eventually - the lure of the Olympics in the Big Apple will be too much for the IOC to look over, and the bid isn't THAT bad. This, in a way, is probably a test run.

[Frayed Knot]

1) No HR haven please. Keep it at least a neutral park, or even one favoring pitchers at least slightly.

2) The only nod to Ebbits field was supposedly the outside architecture design -- it's not like they were intending to mimic the whole park.

3) It doesn't need to be perfectly symmetrical, but some of the newer parks seemed all tricked up just so they can claim it's quirky.

4) 45K seats sounds a bit small. Lots of the new parks in the smaller cities have gone this way but that's in part to create a kind of artificial demand by intentionally limiting supply. A good team here doesn't need that. It doesn't need to be 55K+ but it seems to me it should be more than 45.

5) I'm not a big fan of indoor ball but if a removeable roof prevents rainouts, helps out those who have distances to travel in iffy weather, and increases the attendance in those early-April games, I think they believe it'll worth the cost. It also allows the stadium to be used for other things in the off-season.
Put it in if you want - just promise to only use it if neccesary.

6) It's going to have a corporate name folks. Just hope it's not one of those fugly-off-the-tongue hi-tech corporate monikers.

[Guest sharpie]

No giant intrusive advertising gimmick like that Coke bottle in San Fran.

[metirish]

i have long wanted a new stadium to be named after Bob Murphy but in reflection it should still be named Shea Stadium, I think there would be pressure to keep it at that, Bob Murphy could probably get streets named around the new place after him,Shea Stadium reflects the history and the man who did so much to get the NL back in town, a NY team that will have it's own Network by then doesn't need to sell naming rights to Bank Of America and get called "the BOA for short....long live Shea.


Selig said to be shocked

] Field not just a dream Word of Mets� new stadium shocks Commissioner Selig, who says it�s overdue BY KEN DAVIDOFF STAFF WRITER June 14, 2005 The news shocked Bud Selig, just as it did everyone else. On Saturday night, the baseball commissioner received a call from his friend and ally, Mets principal owner Fred Wilpon. Suddenly, the Mets had themselves a deal for a new stadium. And once the shock wore off, Selig again experienced the same reaction as virtually everyone else. "There's no question that the Mets desperately need a new stadium," Selig said. "With all respect to Shea, all one has to do is walk through it to realize that. Having said all that, this is very important. It's a great day for the Mets. It is incredible." The incredible became reality Sunday night when Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced the stunning development in his quest to land the 2012 Olympic Games, less than a week after his vision for a stadium on the West Side of Manhattan fell apart. The Mets will pay for the 45,000-seat ballpark -- Wilpon said Sunday that it will cost about $600 million, although another person with knowledge of the discussions disputed that figure yesterday -- and the city and state will kick in $180 million for infrastructure improvements around the stadium. Selig communicates regularly with most of his owners and is known for being on top of everything in the industry, even devouring all of the newspaper coverage. But the talks between the city and the Mets began a week ago tonight, according to an official in the loop, and four days passed before Selig was notified. "I was startled," Selig said, "and I think [Wilpon] was, too." The Mets had been holding quiet talks for the past three months, without much urgency. But on June 6, State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver voted against the West Side stadium -- which would have served as the main Olympic venue and as home to the Jets -- crippling the city's Olympic hopes. The Jets' misfortune turned into the Mets' bonanza. The city followed its call last Tuesday with another Wednesday morning; the "official" call from the mayor's office came Thursday. That set into motion the frenzied negotiations that concluded with Sunday's news conference. In 1998, Wilpon revealed the model for the Mets' new home, one designed to pay homage to Ebbets Field. That model has to be dusted off and tweaked; for one thing, that featured a retractable roof, and this won't. But the reminders of the Brooklyn Dodgers' old home should stay intact. The new design should be revealed in about a month. A modern ballpark, combined with the kickoff of their own television network next season, should put the Mets in excellent economic position. Shea Stadium, the Mets' home since 1964, is currently the sixth-oldest stadium in baseball, behind Fenway Park (1912), Wrigley Field (1914), Yankee Stadium (1923), Dodger Stadium (1962) and RFK Stadium (1962).

[Guest Spacemans Bong]

Frayed Knot wrote: 1) No HR haven please. Keep it at least a neutral park, or even one favoring pitchers at least slightly. 2) The only nod to Ebbits field was supposedly the outside architecture design -- it's not like they were intending to mimic the whole park. 3) It doesn't need to be perfectly symmetrical, but some of the newer parks seemed all tricked up just so they can claim it's quirky. 4) 45K seats sounds a bit small. Lots of the new parks in the smaller cities have gone this way but that's in part to create a kind of artificial demand by intentionally limiting supply. A good team here doesn't need that. It doesn't need to be 55K+ but it seems to me it should be more than 45. 5) I'm not a big fan of indoor ball but if a removeable roof prevents rainouts, helps out those who have distances to travel in iffy weather, and increases the attendance in those early-April games, I think they believe it'll worth the cost. It also allows the stadium to be used for other things in the off-season. Put it in if you want - just promise to only use it if neccesary. 6) It's going to have a corporate name folks. Just hope it's not one of those fugly-off-the-tongue hi-tech corporate monikers.

1. Yeah, I hope it's a pitcher's park too. Ex-pitcher here.

2. The outside architecture shouldn't evoke Ebbets Field either. The retro architecture trend is played out, and the Mets are not a Brooklyn team, and their lineage really isn't Brooklyn either.

3. I'd like a symmetrical park. Having the same dimensions as Shea wouldn't be terrible.

4. I think the new park should hold 50,000. On the dot.

5. It does open the stadium to off-season events like the Final Four, and it will prevent rainouts. But I don't think that justifies the cost, which will be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I don't think an extra 1,500 people for an April game is going to justify the cost and not the Final Four either.

The money could be better spent on having the best drainage system in the game, if you want to lessen the chance of rainouts.

6. Yeah, probably.

[Willets Point]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I also wouldn't mind having something that looks dated in 15 years. The stadium should reflect the time in which it was built. Maybe it'll be dated in 2024, but a cherished architectural treasure by 2050. I want something modern. Enough with the retro; it's been done to death. Let's put the Mets in the first 21st-Century ballpark. Get a cutting edge architect. I hope that it's so different that half the people call it an eyesore. (Even if I'm among that half!)

Does Frank Gehry do sporting venues?

[Elster88]

4) I kind of like the capacity as it is now.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Regarding the Brooklyn thing, I think we absolutely have Brooklyn roots. At the very least, it's why we have blue in our unis (orange for Giants). I think we really need to incorporate the history of the Dodgers & Giants into the new stadium, although I'm open to non-architectural ways of doing it. Maybe a mini museum, or a small park with tributes to the Dodgers or Giants . . . Those teams are an integral part of New York baseball, and as the team that rose out of their ashes, we should keep the torch burning.

On a selfish note, since I started finding out about the Brooklyn Dodgers, I've always been sad that I couldn't visit Ebbets' Field--the parking lot mural doesn't really cut it for me, although I suppose it's better than nothing.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Instead of Yankee Stadium during the build, can we play at, I don't know, East Meadow High?

Actually, if the park is going to be built nearby, isn't there no need to demolish the old home until after the new one is finished? I mean, parking will be an aggravation, but that's nothing new.

I'm not so sure I'd trust Met fans to treat Yankee Stadium well for 81 games.

[Guest silverdsl]

Whether it's at a new Mets stadium or a new Yankee stadium what I want is very simple and probably very insignificant in the grand scheme of things - better concessions. I hear all these stories about the wonderful food that is available at other team's stadiums and I'd like to be able to have something better than a boxed pizza if I'm not in the mood for a hot dog at a game. Granted, I haven't been to Shea for a year or two so I'm not 100% sure what is being served there but it's awful at Yankee Stadium.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I think it's obvious that Fred sees the Mets as carrying the tradition of the Dodgers in NYC and himself (thru his relationship with Koufax) as the link between the two.

I'm OK with that.

I also think Fred will want to take care that the "new Shea" is his legacy to the city. Seems to me all successful NY real estate developers are big-ego guys, and tho Fred is one can any of us attach his name to any one building? I know his company owned the Eastside apt. tower where Hernandez used to live, but I couldn't tell ya what it looks like.

A modern ballpark, combined with the kickoff of their own television network next season, should put the Mets in excellent economic position.

No doubt. As the MFYs know, building a new stadium also excuses a team from luxury-tax responsibilities for a period.

[willpie]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Seems to me all successful NY real estate developers are big-ego guys

I don't know what you could be talking about; why that Lefrak fellow never felt the need to take credit for his projects or even name things after himself.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

We may have to prepare ourselves for the possiblity that the Mets will play their home games at Wilpon Park.

Also, as much as I revere Bob Murphy, Tom Seaver, Gil Hodges, etc. I don't think any of them warrant having a stadium named after them.

I'd be happy with a name that has local meaning. Call it Flushing Meadows Park, the original name for Shea. That would be fine.

[Guest SI Metman]

And throw away those millions of dollars from Pepsi who would love to slap their name on the new stadium?

[metirish]

Yeah kinda naive of me to think they wouldn't sell the naming rights, from an article in today's Daily News..

]Some experts estimate the Mets could get up to $15 million a year for the naming rights for their new park, although Howard says $5 million to $10 million a year is more likely.

Howard = University of Oregon sports business professor .

[Guest ABG]

One thing not yet mentioned--if NYC gets the Olympics for 2012, or intends to compete for 2016 or 2020, I'd think our new stadium might avoid a corporate name for fear of looking cheap or petty against other competitors as it will be the centerpiece of the games.

Either that, or the spectre of naming rights for the olympic centerpiece will greatly improve the Mets bargaining position for naming rights (the $$$ from which I'm CERTAIN will go directly towards top-tier FA's)

[Guest sharpie]

You'd probably have to buy the Olympic year separately. It would be Pepsi Stadium except that the puffed-up 85,000 seat place would be Citicorp Olympic Field and then it would go back to charming Pepsi.

[Guest SI Metman]

ABG wrote: One thing not yet mentioned--if NYC gets the Olympics for 2012, or intends to compete for 2016 or 2020, I'd think our new stadium might avoid a corporate name for fear of looking cheap or petty against other competitors as it will be the centerpiece of the games. Either that, or the spectre of naming rights for the olympic centerpiece will greatly improve the Mets bargaining position for naming rights (the $$$ from which I'm CERTAIN will go directly towards top-tier FA's)

Wasn't every other thing in the '96 games named Coca Cola this and Delta that?

[Willets Point]

SI Metman wrote: Wasn't every other thing in the '96 games named Coca Cola this and Delta that?

Except for the Greco-Roman Wrestling Pavilion which was named for the Varsity Drive-In.

[Guest ABG]

I thought about that--as far as I can recall, the main stadiumn (opening/closing ceremonies, t&f, etc) has never had a corporate name.

I'm sure everything else will be the pepsi pavillion this and GE equestrian center that.

[metsmarathon]

it'd be kinda cool if they were able to design a modern stadium with an exterior that is somewhat evocative of good ol' ebbets.

but in a totally modern, new, non-retro kind of way.

i dont want a ford mustang kind of stadium.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

With our luck it'll be a De Lorean.

[Guest Iubitul]

ScarletKnight41 wrote: With our luck it'll be a De Lorean.

Hey - The De Lorean was a cool car.

Let's see you go back in time in your Subaru...

[Guest Spacemans Bong]

Rotblatt wrote: Regarding the Brooklyn thing, I think we absolutely have Brooklyn roots. At the very least, it's why we have blue in our unis (orange for Giants). I think we really need to incorporate the history of the Dodgers & Giants into the new stadium, although I'm open to non-architectural ways of doing it. Maybe a mini museum, or a small park with tributes to the Dodgers or Giants . . . Those teams are an integral part of New York baseball, and as the team that rose out of their ashes, we should keep the torch burning. On a selfish note, since I started finding out about the Brooklyn Dodgers, I've always been sad that I couldn't visit Ebbets' Field--the parking lot mural doesn't really cut it for me, although I suppose it's better than nothing.

The Mets have some Brooklyn roots. I think it's fair to say the Mets have more Giant roots. The logo. The road uniforms are a dead ringer for the Giant road unis (just switch the blue to black). Joan Payson once owned a small stake in the team. M. Donald Grant was the sole vote on the Giant board against moving the team from NY. The Mets were born at the Polo Grounds. The Dodgers gave the Mets Gil Hodges and Duke Snider (briefly); The Giants gave Willie Mays.

I think an interesting theory of why there seems to be so few Giants fans wailing about the loss of their team compared to Dodger fans is that many more Giant fans immediately became Met fans. I think the Mets clearly rose from the ashes of the Giants.

I'm not advocating the Mets ignore New York's National League history, I just am not a fan of building an Ebbets Field replica or an Ebbets Field facade. To be fair, I am against building a Polo Grounds replica as well.

I'd like a modern stadium, with the homages to the past kept indoors.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I see more Dodgers in the Mets than I do Giants.

The Mets tradition seems more an extension of that of the Dodgers than of the Giants.

The Mets are more Wilbert Robinson than John McGraw. The whole lovable loser schtick that the Mets had going could never have applied to the Giants, not with their background of Mathewson, Ott, Terry, etc. It does apply to a team that became affectionately known as the "Bums."

The Mets have Dodger and Giant roots to be sure. The reason that the Dodgers are more missed than the Giants is because they were more popular in those final years, especially in the wake of the 1955 championship.

When the Dodgers left, they were at their apex. The Brooklyn team had never been better. And although the Giants had had some recent success (1954!) their glory years were decades behind them.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

I come from Brooklyn Dodgers stock. The Mets are way more Brooklyn than Upper Manhattan, IMO.

[Guest Spacemans Bong]

="Yancy Street Gang"]I see more Dodgers in the Mets than I do Giants. The Mets tradition seems more an extension of that of the Dodgers than of the Giants. The Mets are more Wilbert Robinson than John McGraw. The whole lovable loser schtick that the Mets had going could never have applied to the Giants, not with their background of Mathewson, Ott, Terry, etc. It does apply to a team that became affectionately known as the "Bums." The Mets have Dodger and Giant roots to be sure. The reason that the Dodgers are more missed than the Giants is because they were more popular in those final years, especially in the wake of the 1955 championship. When the Dodgers left, they were at their apex. The Brooklyn team had never been better. And although the Giants had had some recent success (1954!) their glory years were decades behind them.

Perhaps, but I practically never hear whining from old Giant fans. They just all became Met fans. And those 80s Mets were all in the tradition of Muggsy McGraw and the swaggering Giants. ;)

By the way, I come from Giants/Red Sox stock.

Alright, time for me to go to the park. Pedro t-shirt: check. Blue Mets hat: check. New York Giants pullover with New York and the NY logo: check.

[nymr83]

if you're going to name the stadium Bob Murphy stadium is the way to go, otherwise justr go for the corporate sponsor. I have no interest in seeing a "seaver stadium"

[soupcan]

1. Symmetrical - it should be a pitcher's park with at least the same dimensions as Shea has now. Pitching and defense is, after all, our tradition.

2. Don't mind the retro look. I'd rather have that then a SkyDome type of structure.

3. Ideally I'd like it to be called Shea Stadium but that's not gonna happen. So if I have to pick a sponsor let's pick one with a 'real' name. Like Miller Park or Coors Field. Not necessarily a beer (Rheingold Field would be pretty fucking cool, no?) but a company with a name instead of Citicorp Park or MetLife Stadium.

4. I did like the model they wheeled out a few years back sans the roof. What is so bad about this...?

[Guest Edgy DC]

Look at the sparsely filled lot. It's like they're only drawing about 50 fans.