A website with CitiField In Progress photos

[stevejrogers]

http://www.stadiumpage.com/stpages/citi2.html

Looks like the new place is coming along nice. Well for the first few months of the project anyway!

I'm hoping before the spring comes to get down to Flushing and shoot some pics with my camera myself.

[Guest vtmet]

looks like some progress being made...they picked a good winter to start work on it...not looking like snow is going to halt this project too much this year...

[soupcan]

From the looks of those pics parking is going to be a nightmare for the next two years.

[Frayed Knot]

More like three when you figure that they can't even start deconstructing Shea - I think I heard somewhere that city laws will prevent them from blowing it up (down?) - until after the last game of '08, giving them only a few months to "re-open" that section of the lot. I somehow doubt all that will be completed in time for the start of the '09 season.

Part of what's supposed to accompany all this is a multi-level parking garage which will expand the number of slots available and would be ready well before the new stadium is finished.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I'd hate to be trying to get out of a multi-level parking garage after a sold-out game. I parked in the Yankee Stadium garage the day Seaver won his 300th game and it took forever to get out of there.

Multi-level parking garages don't work so well when everyone is leaving at the same time.

I think I've parked at Shea/Citi for the last time. It seems far better to park your car somewhere along the 7 line (or at an LIRR station if you're on the Port Washington branch.)

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

The way to make multi-level garages work after a game is to have attendants directing traffic while cars are on the way out. They did that when we visited Jacobs Field in 1995, and that made getting out of the park much easier.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Nice find, Steve! It's pretty cool seeing the progress being made.

[Guest KC]

That's pretty neat, this is going to be a lonnnngggg thread.

I like the way they've started with upgrading the toilets in frame #4.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I'm pretty sure I've used that portajohn.

[Methead]

They're re-orienting home plate... not that it matters much now that every ballpark is oriented differently anyway. I got curious as to what the correct orientation should be according to the official rules, and apparently the old Shea was sited exactly the way it should be... the line going from home plate to 2B should go east-northeast.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/stadium/ballpark_NSEW_NL.shtml

[Frayed Knot]

Yeah, the new one is going to be turned some 30-degrees to the north
IOW, more North-NE than the present East-NE

[Guest cleonjones11]

Steve...great link. Thank you very much

[Guest Edgy DC]

So it looks like the Mets have been topped. The Nets sold the naming rights for about the same money, but their brand has got to be worth less, moving to a new home in an indoor arena in a sport with half as many games.

Maybe not. That fewer games logic doesn't seem to apply to football, does it?

But what blows me away about the Barclay's deal is that the sponsor is not a coporation looking to expand their alrady established presence in a market, but rather one looking to establish a new brand presence entirely. I guess that's comparable to University of Phoenix Stadium, a football stadium confusingly named after a university that doesn't have a football team, but seeks longterm to expose themselves longterm as the standard in online education, like they're already a standard-bearer in spam and popup advertising.

It seems a higher-risk proposition for such entities than it is for the Citis of the world.*

* Obviously Barclay's is Citi-like-huge in the UK and the Commonwealth, but has no presence in New York.

Edited January 20, 2007 by Guest

[metirish]

Barclay's has been the long time sponsor of the english premier league,but I was surprised at the money they are shelling out for the Nets naming rights.

[Guest KC]

I heard on one of the talk shows that the Yanks will not go that route and
that they feel "Yankee Stadium" has to much trademark value to mess with.
It's an interesting stance to me, they'd probably fetch twice what the Mets
got (which in my opinion was a ridiculously large amount) and that's an aw-
ful lot of moolah to turn your back on no matter how much your brand name
and franchise is worth. We'll see.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I wouldn't be surprised to see something like "Black Flag Roach Motel Field at Yankee Stadium" but probably with a different corporate sponsor than the one I'm suggesting.

[G-Fafif]

"Yankee Stadium" is indeed a brand -- one most of us wouldn't buy if it was on deep discount, but definitely something worth preserving from a business standpoint. The rebuilt version has gotten untold mileage from its link with the original building, so creating a whole new structure (one probably more faithful to the 1923 YS than the '76 has been) and slap the same name on it only makes sense. Even if a financial institution offered them $40 mil a year, it would devalue that whole mystique jazz.

But I agree that they'll find a way to backdoor a title sponsorship, such as Roach Motel Presents Yankee Stadium.

As for the Univeristy of Phoenix, isn't that the online college that advertises on the likes of Channel 11 at three in the morning?

[Guest Edgy DC]

Yes.

[nymr83]

I read somewhere that the Yankees are going to have corporate sponsors for the gates into the stadium or something like that so they can still call it Yankee stadium.