When Shea Became a Dump

[Farmer Ted]

Legend has it Todd Pratt said in 2003 about Shea, "Yeah, it's a dump, but it's OUR dump."

[Guest KC]

Time's flyin' by ... it was longer ago than 2003.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Pratt was gone by late 2001. In 2003, his dump was the Vet.

I think it became a dump when the HVAC guy started slacking off.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I just referred to my collection of Sporting News Baseball Guides.

In 1992 they switched to a new format, and started listing ballpark information. For Yankee Stadium, it says:

First game played: April 18, 1923 (Yankees 4, Red Sox 1)

[stevejrogers]

Uncoincidentally enough, around that time the Yankees continued to commemorate the anniversaries of the "venerable old" ballpark with the 70th anniversary and a big 75th anniversary bash in 1998



that actually included a nifty 360 panoramic spin through the years video where a black and white of Yankee Stadium circa the 20's morphed into the Yankee Stadium circa the 90's.

[metirish]

This is all very usefull information for me on YS,the next time a fool of a yankee fan annoys me about "historic" yankee stadium I'll put them in their place,of course a lot of these fans think the yankees were founded in 1996.

[Gwreck]

="Yancy Street Gang"]I wish that Shea was staying around. I'm not in favor of the new stadium. However, I suspect that if I was still living in New York and going to more than one or two games a year (at the most) I'd feel differently. At this point in my life when I go to Shea it's as much for nostalgia as for any other reason. Citi Field won't do that for me. In fact, I think that once they're in the new stadium I'll be less motivated to make the trip to Flushing. If I was still going 20 times a year, I'd probably be excited about the new place.

I'm not sure you would. I am someone who lives in NY and goes (more than) 20 times a year. I personally care far less about nostalgia than I do about economics but also am not excited about the new park.

The seats at Shea might be far from the field, but I somehow doubt that I'll be able to sit anywhere closer at the new park than where our ticket plan puts us now at the price we pay.

[stevejrogers]

To be fair though, in their media guides they do make the distinction of attendance records for remolded Yankee Stadium and list Firsts and Lasts for "Old Yankee Stadium"

[nymr83]

]Shea hasn't had good parking in awhile

if you know where to park you are in and out in 5 minutes, try under the highway.

[Guest iramets]

I show up a few hours before BP and always get a spot outside BV's old restaurant, a block from the Grand Central.

It seems the more important meme we're uncovering here is not so much the one that says that Shea's a dump, but the one that says that Mets' owners have treated their clientele with such gross (and needless) disrespect over the years that many fans have read cheapness, short-term profitability covered by doubletalk, cluelessness, long-term blindness, incompetence etc (you name it) into the baseball operations as well as the plant management issues-- not unreasonably, since the only thing they can absolutely know is that they sat in dried-up puke for three hours last Tuesday which a guy with a wet rag could have taken care of if management had felt it was worth paying him a nickel to swipe over the seat.

If management prefers keeping those nickels in their jingly pockets, it's fair to extrapolate, as many Met fans do, that other unwise decisions are similiarly being justified by liars and spinners in the front office, though they can't prove that point so well. Puke doesn't lie.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Definitely agree.

You can certainly make more money by chasing fans away with piles of vomit than you can by selling them tickets, parking, hot dogs, and beer.

It costs more to clean a mop than you'd get back in revenue from paying customers.

[MFS62]

I don't think the image of Shea as a "dump" was helped any by the old camera angles. The primary camera locations were behind home plate. From them (both the field level and upper deck cameras) the heavy industrial area beyond the outfield walls was pretty discernible.

Later

[Guest silverdsl]

I don't think Shea is that bad. Nor is Yankee Stadium. They are what they are, which are stadiums that were built years ago and aren't as fancy as some of the newer stadiums.

That said, there was the concrete falling incident at YS, and a number of years ago I was at Shea sitting under an overhang, when a rather large lightbulb fell and hit a woman in the head, then when it shattered glass went everywhere. That was kind of scary, but luckily there were no serious injuries. But ever since because I'm a nervous-nellie about stuff like that I've been known to look above me at both stadiums for things that look loose ever since.

[Guest Edgy DC]

MFS62 wrote: I don't think the image of Shea as a "dump" was helped any by the old camera angles. The primary camera locations were behind home plate. From them (both the field level and upper deck cameras) the heavy industrial area beyond the outfield walls was pretty discernible. Later

Really? I don't think what is on camera is an issue at all.

[MFS62]

I'm just saying that to the occasional fan seeing Shea on tv, it didn't help.
I also remember the shots from the roof camera behind home plate every once in a while that panned the neighborhood. Didn't exactly portray a pastoral setting.
It may not have hurt. But I feel it didn't help.
But since it can't be proven one way or another, chalk it up to opinion.

Later

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

iramets wrote: It seems the more important meme we're uncovering here is not so much the one that says that Shea's a dump, but the one that says that Mets' owners have treated their clientele with such gross (and needless) disrespect over the years that many fans have read cheapness, short-term profitability covered by doubletalk, cluelessness, long-term blindness, incompetence etc (you name it) into the baseball operations as well as the plant management issues-- not unreasonably, since the only thing they can absolutely know is that they sat in dried-up puke for three hours last Tuesday which a guy with a wet rag could have taken care of if management had felt it was worth paying him a nickel to swipe over the seat. If management prefers keeping those nickels in their jingly pockets, it's fair to extrapolate, as many Met fans do, that other unwise decisions are similiarly being justified by liars and spinners in the front office, though they can't prove that point so well. Puke doesn't lie.

Well, I just see there being less to gain by intentionally shortchanging the fans on product (while spending the same $$!), whereas relaxing upkeep on the physical plant -- or my argument, sitting there with arms folded as the perception that the Stadium needed replacing virused its way across the sport -- would lead more directly to substantial benefits and enrichment.

My question, now as always, is where's the benefit of spending $100 million and losing as opposed to spending $100 million and winning?

[Vic Sage]

i remember sitting behind home plate in 1979. I had taken the train in from SUNY Stony Brook to catch an afternnoon game with my then-girlfriend, Debbie (she was a Phillies fan, and the Phils were in for a series).

the Mets, as you'll recall, were in the 6th year of that cycle of suckitude and we were able to walk into the parking lot 1/2 hour before gametime and scalp seats right behind home plate for HALF price.

So, we're sitting there with what seemed like a total attendance of 300 people, watching them lose again. Debbie had never been to Shea and, as she looked around, said "its not much, is it?" At first i got defensive but, as i looker around, i had to agree. "No", i said. "its pretty much a dump."

That was 1979. My view of the stadium hasn't changed much since.

Location: the stadium is located in a shithole area, surrounded by chop shops and highways, and under LaGuardia's airspace.

Parking: The parking is spread out for miles; for a sold-out game you need to take a bus from distant lots to the LIRR platform which is still a hike from the stadium. After a game, trying to get back through the bottleneck of the single stairway up to the LIRR platform to cross over to the bus area is dangerous and frustrating.

Exterior: Shea's symmetrical dimensions are dull. The corrugated orange and blue steel plates have been replaced by neon sculptures, but its still ugly. It lacks even the slightest hint of grace, or pastoral touches, or baseball history or nostalgia. Its not even ironically, post-modernistically hip.

Seating: The seats are hard and narrow (unless you're sitting in the luxury field boxes behind the dugouts); many face in the wrong direction; rear loge and mezz have horriblely obstructed sightlines; the upper deck is in another time zone.

Interior: A concrete bunker with ramps, it evokes a Soviet-style apartment complex-version of the guggenheim. It has no hub, no promenade, no open areas. It is dank, claustrophobic and ugly.

Amenities: In yearly polls, Shea is consistently voted amongst the worst ballpark food and food value in the majors. The bathroom issues have been discussed, but standing in 2 inches of standing water (of unknown origin) while waiting online to pee is a situation that bears mention. There are no views of the game from the promenade areas or any restaurants. In fact, there are no sitdown restaurants available at all, unless you have season tix or box seats, and the "Diamond Club" isn't a gem to begin with. There are no activites or areas for kids (all of whom get bored at some point). "Fanfest" is a bad carny joke. The Mets "museum" is a trophy case in the Diamond Club lobby.

Look, i've been to a bunch of ballparks in other cities... majors and minors. Some new, some old. And i've enjoyed every single one of them more than Shea. Every. Single. One. I'm not saying i've seen them all or even alot, but Shea pales in comparison, and becomes more pathetic with each passing year.

Yes, i've had some amazing times there. But that was created by the team and the crowd, not by the stadium. I'm perfectly happy for them to build me a more compfortable, cozy, enjoyable ballpark to watch a game in.

Memories are forever, but concrete crumbles.

[nymr83]

]Seating: The seats are hard and narrow

I've never found the seats to be too narrow, and i eem to recall reading that when Shea opened they were considered wider than other parks at the time. Maybe Americans are just getting too fat.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Location: Few stadia were the centerpieces of urban promenades in 1979. And in 1979, better to be in an unpopulated part of New York, as dozens of urban gangs were out trying to kill the Warriors.

Parking: The huge lot was far more convenient than the old stadia nestled into neighborhods, and there weren't too many sold-out games to worry about in 1979.

Exterior: The league in 1979 was filled with poured concrete buildings. Now it's filled with poured concrete with brink exteriors. That hardly distinguished it in 1979. The tiles were great.

It was and is post-modern, or future modern, developed in conjunction with the World's Fair architecture. That that wasn't done ironically, I think, is better.

Seating: It was conceived with extra-wide seats, and they were likely still wider than average in 1979.

Interior: I'll give you dank and ugly, but I don't know where clustrophobic comes from. Ceilings on the concouse aren't cathedral arches, but neither are they scraping my head.

Amenities: This isn't an architectual issue. Better bratworst can be fixed easily enough.

What sucked about the Mets in 1979 was that they were 66-96 and run on an austere budget. I'm sure the Vet would have been no more pleaseant.had the Mets played there.

Shea isn't the Ritz-Carlton, but we've built up a mythology about it.

[Vic Sage]

]What sucked about the Mets in 1979 was that they were 66-96 and run on an austere budget. I'm sure the Vet would have been no more pleaseant.had the Mets played there.

i agree.

my preamble about 79 was not intended to be the source of my thoughts about shea. only to put a date (as JD asked) as to when i personally started thinking of the place as a dump.

My list of shea shortcomings are thoughts that occur to me NOW, about Shea in its current situation (which shortcomings started accumulating as other stadia passed it over the last 10-20 or so years).

Nothing you've said contradicts any of my observations, beyond saying they may not have been valid in 1979, which i concede.

On the other hand the mythology of Shea exists in this thread, with so many of you investing this crap hole with emotional resonance that belongs only to the team and to your memory, both of which will continue on in a new home.

They could blow the place up tomorrow and i'd smile.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

Screw ugly stadiums. Let's hear more about Debbie.

[metirish]

Shea is historic,remember that on this very field some of the greats of the game played, Thurman Munson,Graig Nettles ,Lou Piniella and Catfish Hunter to name a few.

[Guest iramets]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: ="iramets"]It seems the more important meme we're uncovering here is not so much the one that says that Shea's a dump, but the one that says that Mets' owners have treated their clientele with such gross (and needless) disrespect over the years that many fans have read cheapness, short-term profitability covered by doubletalk, cluelessness, long-term blindness, incompetence etc (you name it) into the baseball operations as well as the plant management issues-- not unreasonably, since the only thing they can absolutely know is that they sat in dried-up puke for three hours last Tuesday which a guy with a wet rag could have taken care of if management had felt it was worth paying him a nickel to swipe over the seat. If management prefers keeping those nickels in their jingly pockets, it's fair to extrapolate, as many Met fans do, that other unwise decisions are similiarly being justified by liars and spinners in the front office, though they can't prove that point so well. Puke doesn't lie. Well, I just see there being less to gain by intentionally shortchanging the fans on product (while spending the same $$!), whereas relaxing upkeep on the physical plant -- or my argument, sitting there with arms folded as the perception that the Stadium needed replacing virused its way across the sport -- would lead more directly to substantial benefits and enrichment. My question, now as always, is where's the benefit of spending $100 million and losing as opposed to spending $100 million and winning?

I didn't say it was beneficial. I didn't say it was smart, either. I characterized the disrespect as both "gross (and needless)." Can you blame a fan who thinks, "Hey, making me traipse through piss, blood and vomit every time I walk from point A to point B in this dump doesn't even save the Mets money, so whoever's deciding that saving money on keeping the floors mopped is probably the same person who's deciding to pay Vince Coleman millions to play LF. This whole organization, as best as I can tell, is fucked up."

[G-Fafif]

On the day Derek Jeter was born, the Yankees hosted the Cleveland Indians at Shea Stadium and lost 3-2. But because he was born that day, June 26, 1974, Shea Stadium was actually Yankee Stadium and the spirits of Joe D and the Bambino merged with The Future Captain's and made the grounds sacrosanct.

Bet it says that somewhere.

Regarding the Pratt quote from 2001, it was uttered in advance of that year's home opener (following a foreboding sweep in Montreal):

]Anybody can say whatever about Shea -- I love it. When it's full and the fans are behind us, it's the best.

[Vic Sage]

Johnny Dickshot wrote: Screw ugly stadiums. Let's hear more about Debbie.

not on a public board, JD.