All Purpose Shea II, A Work In Progress...

[MFS62]

]Actually, I just don't like stadiums that are not built into the fabric of the city as much, one of Shea's great failings that will be continued in the new venue.

WP, by fabric, do you mean style or location? The retro, Ebbets Field-like exterior of the new Mets park may address some of the style concerns. There's little they can do about location in a different neighborhood now.

I like the asymmetrical parks, especially after the "all purpose" monstrosities build a generation ago. At least if you're kidnapped, blindfolded and dropped into a baseball staduim(a personal fear of mine), you can pretty much figure out where you are in the asymmetrical ones*. In those cookie cutter parks, you couldn't.


* (EDIT: After they remove the blindfold)
Later

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

That has nothing to do with symmetry. Wrigley Field is symmetrical and distinctive.

[MFS62]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: That has nothing to do with symmetry. Wrigley Field is symmetrical and distinctive.

Not exactly. I believe ther is a two foot difference between the left and right field line distances at Wrigley(or there used to be). So it's not truly symmetrical.

But I get your point.

Later

[Willets Point]

] WP, by fabric, do you mean style or location? The retro, Ebbets Field-like exterior of the new Mets park may address some of the style concerns. There's little they can do about location in a different neighborhood no

Location. I like that at Fenway, Wrigley, Camden Yards, and whatever-they-call-it-now ballpark in San Francisco you can just walk along the sidewalk and the ballpark is one of the buildings in the neighborhood. Shea and the future Mets home are divorced from the city by their location. The problem with the Ebbets Field retro-look is that it is a style for a neighborhood ballpark being used on a ballpark that's not in a neighborhood. The artificiality of it is unappealing.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I totally agree with that.

[G-Fafif]

Agree that the hill in Houston is stupid but there is a reason behind it. It's a tribute of sorts to the longtime Astro exec (advisor by the time Enron Field was being built) Tal Smith and his Cincinnati background/fondness for the hill at Crosley. Not much of a reason, but it wasn't ordered up at random from the Ballpark Quirks catalogue.

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

G-Fafif wrote: but it wasn't ordered up at random from the Ballpark Quirks catalogue.

Hmmm - do I see a topic for a FAFIF column?

[Gwreck]

="Willets Point"]Location. I like that at Fenway, Wrigley, Camden Yards, and whatever-they-call-it-now ballpark in San Francisco you can just walk along the sidewalk and the ballpark is one of the buildings in the neighborhood. Shea and the future Mets home are divorced from the city by their location. The problem with the Ebbets Field retro-look is that it is a style for a neighborhood ballpark being used on a ballpark that's not in a neighborhood. The artificiality of it is unappealing.

I can appreciate the point, but it seems to me like a pretty empty complaint.

The Mets don't now nor have they ever had the opportunity to place this ballpark in any sort of "neighborhood."

WIth that in mind, what exactly should the stadium look like?

[stevejrogers]

="Gwreck"] ="Willets Point"]Location. I like that at Fenway, Wrigley, Camden Yards, and whatever-they-call-it-now ballpark in San Francisco you can just walk along the sidewalk and the ballpark is one of the buildings in the neighborhood. Shea and the future Mets home are divorced from the city by their location. The problem with the Ebbets Field retro-look is that it is a style for a neighborhood ballpark being used on a ballpark that's not in a neighborhood. The artificiality of it is unappealing. I can appreciate the point, but it seems to me like a pretty empty complaint. The Mets don't now nor have they ever had the opportunity to place this ballpark in any sort of "neighborhood." WIth that in mind, what exactly should the stadium look like?

I think there has been a consensus in these parts that the Mets "Don't need no stinkin' new stadium" and would rather have done some upgrading to Shea

[Guest KC]

Do you ever go outside? Sleep? It's like everytime I visit here you're logged
in and yappin'.You're like a freakin' poodle on mescaline nippin' on everything.
I hope everyone's happy, we fed him and now we'll never get rid of him.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

To Gwreck's question: I'd rather see them build the first 21st Century style stadium (whatever that is) than build the 15th ripoff of Camden Yards.

[stevejrogers]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: To Gwreck's question: I'd rather see them build the first 21st Century style stadium (whatever that is) than build the 15th ripoff of Camden Yards.

The sad thing is, I think the "retro-chick" is the 21st Century style

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Only because nobody's been daring or creative enough to do anything different.

[stevejrogers]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: Only because nobody's been daring or creative enough to do anything different.

Shouldn't we have those flying cars by now? We need some real Reed Richards in this world!

[Guest cooby]

="soupcan"] ="duan"]if you've got ANY kind of access to the subway you'd be mad to travel any other way. Wellll, there is another way. I played hooky yesterday and went to the game. 3 friends and I planned this at the beginning of the summer and yesterday we did it. One of our friends has a 26' foot boat in South Norwalk CT. Yesterday we sailed it down from there and docked it at the World's Fair Marina which is across the street from Shea. The trip was about 30 miles and took us about an hour and a half. After the game we sailed back home. It was an excellent day all around. The cost and usage of gas makes this only a once a season excursion but still we enjoyed ourselves so much that I think we're going to try and make it an annual thing.

I'm sorry soupcan, but I just can't read this without picturing a Flomax ad. But since you are my friend, I will picture you as the guy who never has to pee.


PS, sounds like fun

[metirish]

In the english premeir league Arsenal just moved out of the great Highbury Stadium with all it's history into a new one called Emirates Stadium, yeah it's great that they have a new stadium but Highbury was old, very old, the new one is great but........change is fine but at what cost...Shea is old and horrible but it has it's charm...very little but i would hate to see a place like the phillies have....I don't know really, Shea is a dump but it has served the Mets well.

[Gwreck]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: To Gwreck's question: I'd rather see them build the first 21st Century style stadium (whatever that is) than build the 15th ripoff of Camden Yards.

I'll admit to knowing crap all about architecture, but isn't this Potter Stewart reasoning (ie. "I don't know what pornography is, but I know it when I see it")?

[G-Fafif]

What do you suppose they'll do wrong? I don't mean what architectural flair won't be to one's respective liking, but what do you suppose they'll out and out screw up? 'Cause you know something will go awry.

Seats not facing home plate?
Forget the press box?
No bullpens or commensurate relief warmup space?
Build a monument or statue with some key fact misstated?
Put the outfielders in the sun?

All of the above have happened elsewhere. It's hard to imagine the Mets being perfect at a craft that has eluded others.

I'm guessing they'll spell Shea wrong when they name it, but that's another story.

[Guest Iubitul]

They'll screw up the scoreboard. We'll get one of those scoreboards with rotating out of town scores...

[Guest Iubitul]

="soupcan"] ="duan"]if you've got ANY kind of access to the subway you'd be mad to travel any other way. Wellll, there is another way. I played hooky yesterday and went to the game. 3 friends and I planned this at the beginning of the summer and yesterday we did it. One of our friends has a 26' foot boat in South Norwalk CT. Yesterday we sailed it down from there and docked it at the World's Fair Marina which is across the street from Shea. The trip was about 30 miles and took us about an hour and a half. After the game we sailed back home. It was an excellent day all around. The cost and usage of gas makes this only a once a season excursion but still we enjoyed ourselves so much that I think we're going to try and make it an annual thing.

Would you like a fifth? That's only a mile from my office..

[seawolf17]

Dude, that sounds like so much fun, I would ferry across to Bridgeport just to take the boat back across.

[HahnSolo]

]They'll screw up the scoreboard. We'll get one of those scoreboards with rotating out of town scores...

Good point. I am so used to the current Shea scoreboard that it will take some getting used to a new one.

[Willets Point]

="Gwreck"] ="Willets Point"]Location. I like that at Fenway, Wrigley, Camden Yards, and whatever-they-call-it-now ballpark in San Francisco you can just walk along the sidewalk and the ballpark is one of the buildings in the neighborhood. Shea and the future Mets home are divorced from the city by their location. The problem with the Ebbets Field retro-look is that it is a style for a neighborhood ballpark being used on a ballpark that's not in a neighborhood. The artificiality of it is unappealing. I can appreciate the point, but it seems to me like a pretty empty complaint. The Mets don't now nor have they ever had the opportunity to place this ballpark in any sort of "neighborhood." WIth that in mind, what exactly should the stadium look like?

Well that's part of the problem, I don't like stadiums in a sea of parking lots. I suppose they could build on the edge of the property closest to Corona and make it old style and just have a lot of parking on the other side. My main point is that it shouldn't be made to look like something it isn't. I suppose Dodgers and Royals Stadiums are fine models for (lack of a better term) a "suburban" stadium. Or they could have a contest to come up with something completely new, originally New York. Or they could have the first Frank Gehry-designed stadium in the world.



Seriously though, Shea's biggest flaw is that it was built as a multi-purpose stadium, but wasn't too good for either purpose. Any baseball-only structure that doesn't have some of the obvious goofs mentioned earlier in this thread will be fine.

[stevejrogers]

Could be worse you know, from another board digging through some of Bryan Hoch's old archives found this from the winter of 1997:

http://web.archive.org/web/19990422191550/icu.com/mets/articles/arti0070.html

]Mets future: High-tech Ebbets By Lawrence Rocca - April 24, 1997 NEW YORK -- While the Yankees continue to posture about a new stadium on the west side of Manhattan, the Mets have made finite plans for a new ballpark just a few hundred feet from Shea Stadium, their current home. Yesterday, Mets president and co-owner Fred Wilpon unveiled a working model of that proposed new stadium, an Ebbets Field-like structure with a retractable roof. Wilpon hopes the new structure will be open for the 2002 season. "I think this is one of the most fantastic stadiums that's ever been planned," said Wilpon, clearly pleased with himself and his son Jeff, who has headed the stadium project for the past two years. The proposed stadium features a grass field that can be rolled completely out of the stadium in 15 minutes, ensuring the field will get the proper amount of sunlight when the roof is closed. The roof will be closed when the Mets are not playing to protect the stadium's structure. "As you know, with some stadiums in the northeast, they start falling apart," Wilpon said. When the field is rolled out -- on a unique system of rollers that Wilpon has had patented -- a concrete surface that can accommodate concerts, tennis matches, basketball games and many other events will be exposed. Capacity for the yet-to-be-named ballpark will be 45,000 seats with 78 luxury boxes. Seating for other events could be expanded to as many as 60,000. The stadium will feature all sorts of modern amenities, said Wilpon, but it is clear that he considers its most important feature its similarity to Ebbets Field, where he often pitched batting practice as a youth in Brooklyn. There were several reminders of Ebbets Field at the news conference, including pictures, models and the new ballpark model itself. The outside design will include red brick and limestone, there will be a rotunda behind home plate and the seats will be close to the field. Wilpon boasted that many of the seats in the new stadium's upper deck will be closer to the field than mezzanine seats at Shea Stadium. "If anything feels like a park you can put your arms around, memories of Ebbets Field, that's what we did here," Wilpon said. The new ballpark will not include one Ebbets Field feature: columns that obstructed the view of spectators. "The sight lines for this stadium will be as good, if not better, than any structure that exists today," Wilpon said. National League president Leonard Coleman, who grew up a Dodgers fan and attended his first game at Ebbets Field in 1953, was on hand yesterday. He clearly admired the design of the new park, which for him evoked memories of Buckminster Fuller and the geodesic dome he designed for Walter O'Malley in hopes of keeping the Dodgers in Brooklyn in 1957. "I think this is it, 40 years later," Coleman said. "This is clearly a park for the new millennium." Wilpon said the total price tag for the ballpark will fall somewhere between $450 and $500 million and that some of the money will be raised by the Mets. He said that Shea Stadium either will be torn down when the new park is completed or remodeled for a potential NFL tenant. Though no one from Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's office was present, Wilpon said the mayor's office has been involved in the planning of the park and supports the steps the Mets have taken. If a deal with the city is reached within a few months, Wilpon said, construction can begin late in 1999 and the park will be ready for Opening Day 2002.

[stevejrogers]

You know, what does everyone think of a dome? I have a cranky 62 year old pop (and his friends) who think its a neccessity in New York because of all the different weather cilmates. Of course are there any dome baseball or football stadiums in the North East US?

[stevejrogers]

]Yesterday, Mets president and co-owner Fred Wilpon unveiled a working model of that proposed new stadium, an Ebbets Field-like structure with a retractable roof. Wilpon hopes the new structure will be open for the 2002 season

Quick math, 97 to 02 was about 5 years
06-10 4 years (well really 5 since the new plans started last year)

I guess the Dome added an extra year to the project!

]The proposed stadium features a grass field that can be rolled completely out of the stadium in 15 minutes, ensuring the field will get the proper amount of sunlight when the roof is closed. The roof will be closed when the Mets are not playing to protect the stadium's structure.

This is what they have in Arizona for the new Cardinals stadium. Wilpon with the forward thinking!

Though, if parking is bad the next few years at Shea for the very open air stadium, I wouldn't want to know what the plan was back then!

Pretty sure improvements on the team also quelched the ideas at the time as well. Okay, think of it this way, this was before Piazza. Piazza's last year the project ideas start getting greenlighted again and this time all the ducks are in rows and they'll start building later this year? Hmmm, quite X-Files-esque...

I'll stick with the theory that it was tied up in City Hall and never did get off the ground, not due to lack of funds from the Mets, though the fact that SNY went through before the new plans were drafted does add to that "Nothing in this particular coffiers" argument.

Of course, as I go into another tangent, whos to say the money allocated wasn't slashed and the project turned into what is now Keyspan Park in Coney Island and the current New Shea is a different project entirely

Interesting stuff to think about.

[Willets Point]

bump