CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

How hard was that?

http://s636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/johnql/CF%203-21-10/

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

[G-Fafif]

That is SO more the fuck like it.

[Guest themetfairy]

Why the fuck did it take them so long?

That said, I'm looking forward to seeing Citi Field 2.0 with an extra serving of Metsiness.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It looks like they're doing a good job Metting it up.

Someone still needs to take care of this, though:

[seawolf17]

/weeps

I love the hell out of that. I want to take this new Metsiana out behind the middle school and get it pregnant.

[Valadius]

Dykstra? DYKSTRA???

The man is nothing but a huckster wrapped in fraud tied in a bow of sleaze.

[Guest Kong76]

So's you're next boss, Valad.

Diggin' the new Metiness.

[Piggiestomatoes]

I never made it up for a game last year -- even turned down a weekend trip offer from the wife -- and am so looking forward to getting up there this season (hopefully a couple times). While it would have been nice to compare and contrast from 1.0 to 2.0, I think I would have been more pissed at the short shrifting of the Mets' history. Hopefully Citi 1.0 goes the way of the Dunkin Donuts shoulder patch and dopey hat logo.

Bye, bye 2009.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I think I like the inlays best.

[Fman99]

seawolf17 wrote: /weeps I love the hell out of that. I want to take this new Metsiana out behind the middle school and get it pregnant.

Seriously. I will lick my pinky and then stick it in Citi Field 2.0's sweet asshole.

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

Awesome!

I like how Jason Bay already has his own banner.

Nice job all around!

[Frayed Knot]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: How hard was that?

To do? ... not very.
Ah, but to think of !! ... now that takes a bit more initiative.

[Ceetar]

Frayed Knot wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: How hard was that? To do? ... not very. Ah, but to think of !! ... now that takes a bit more initiative.

To be fair, a lot of that couldn't have been done when Citi Field opened. They didn't have the plaza done, or the grass grown, or even it completely paved. They didn't have all those trees and lightposts up yet that those things are hanging from.

Of course, as that stuff went up, no reason they couldn't have attached the banners at that point. I guess there plan was always to wait until it was all set up and then make a decision about what to do. Growing pains.. They'll be criticized for only doing it because they were caving to public opinion, but I have to believe that isn't true.

I love the lineup cards. They actually did have them up last year, but just over a random concession on the field level.

Love these changes though, 14 days..

[Ceetar]

Also, I love that there is a brick that simply reads "Moo"

[Guest Edgy DC]

I also think it's a bit unrealistic if folks thought this wouldn't be a work in progress. Or that it wouldn't be doing well to approach it as a work in progress.



That looks like latter-day Lenny under the armpit of former-day Lenny.

[Frayed Knot]

Sure there are some specifics that couldn't have been done on day one but, when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. There would have been few if any complaints about the JR-42 exhibit, for instance, had it been done in addition to NYM stuff rather than, seemingly, instead of. But they didn't and therefore it merely served to perpetuate the idea that Fred cares more about his long-lost Dodgers than about his current team.

So, yeah, I think public pressure did have a lot to do with it, which isn't by itself a bad thing and the fact that they're doing it now is good on them - at least in a better late than never way. It all just kind of reinforced the aura of marketing cluelessness that hangs around that crew too often.

[Guest attgig]

I thought they were lowering centerfield. is that lowered??? From previous talk, I thought that second section of padding was supposed to come down.


was it higher? what are they doing to the home run line around that apple?

[Benjamin Grimm]

The impression I got was that they were simply going to remove the tab from in front of the apple. It does look like that's been done. I don't know how current that photo is, but it obviously doesn't show the completed renovation. There's no way that they'll leave a bright white stripe like that in center field.

[Ceetar]

Nah, it was confirmed that they were only lowering the wall directly in front of the Apple, to make it a more uniform height. I assume they'll paint that black and draw the orange line in shortly.

[Guest themetfairy]

Frayed Knot wrote: Sure there are some specifics that couldn't have been done on day one but, when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. There would have been few if any complaints about the JR-42 exhibit, for instance, had it been done in addition to NYM stuff rather than, seemingly, instead of. But they didn't and therefore it merely served to perpetuate the idea that Fred cares more about his long-lost Dodgers than about his current team. So, yeah, I think public pressure did have a lot to do with it, which isn't by itself a bad thing and the fact that they're doing it now is good on them - at least in a better late than never way. It all just kind of reinforced the aura of marketing cluelessness that hangs around that crew too often.

I couldn't agree more. Well stated FK.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Frayed Knot wrote: ...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all.

If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious?

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

This might get me shot, but does anyone think we maybe over-emphasize Casey Stengel a bit? I love the Gil Hodges mural, but I'm not so sure about the Casey version. I know Casey gave the team some instant credibility, and was probably what people came to see in those early days. But he was more of a figurehead than an actual manager, from a lot of the things I've read.

Not complaining, mind you, because I LOVE these new touches. But sometimes I wonder about these things.

I hope there is something for Mrs. Payson, a true trail-blazer among owners.

[Guest themetfairy]

I won't shoot you michigan, but I'll disagree. Casey is what got the fans behind the fledgling team. He made the losers lovable. He made them special - otherwise, they just would have been a nondescript team with a losing record.

I do agree about Mrs. Payson - she was a wonderful owner, who made her decisions based on love of the game.

[seawolf17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The impression I got was that they were simply going to remove the tab from in front of the apple. It does look like that's been done. I don't know how current that photo is, but it obviously doesn't show the completed renovation. There's no way that they'll leave a bright white stripe like that in center field.

The Dodgers would have just left the white stripe like that, you know. It's the "Skoonj" Furillo Memorial Stripe.

[MFS62]

And don't forget, Stengel also played for the Dodgers.
We now end the sarcastic portion of this post.
Yes, better late than never. I like the additions. The place is more and more looking like home.

Later

[Gwreck]

...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious?

I think it's a combination of:

1. The near-constant reminders in marketing and promotional materials that the stadium would be "world-class" and amazing; paired with

2. The visceral reaction of management (specifically, the public face of same -- Dave Howard) when confronted with perfectly legitimate complaints about the stadium;

3. That things like a Mets Hall of Fame are being built in what was space for the team store (no sign of removing the "Verizon Studio" from center field, however).

[Guest Edgy DC]

Number three I get. I don't see where number one is relevant. Number two is an opinion that I think is grossly overstated. ("Near visceral"?)

I remember statements the Mets statments being along the lines of "Yeah, we understand, but please be assured that we're still working on it." Call bullshit on that, and say they never thought of any such thing, that's fine. But it's hardly visceral. It's the exact position I would expect them to take whether it was true or not.

"Visceral" is a word I'd use to describe much of the fan condemnations of the stadium, however.

[Frayed Knot]

Edgy DC wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: ...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious?

By them seeming so blind-sided to the fact that there even were complaints,
- or that even as they put on their best after-the-fact claim to have had these things in mind all along (like a NYM HoF) they still had no answers as to when they might surface or even where they might be put,
- or that they designed and supervised a stadium from scratch that not only didn't set aside room for such mementos but even somehow managed to barely acknowledge team colors and logos


And I'm not even one who believes that ol' Freddie is sitting around trying to re-make the Mets into some modern-day version of the Dodgers that he still pines for. But they do tend to give the impression of owners most interested in what will sell tickets in the here and now (We've got Reyes & Wright and [insert name] our new FA!!) with very little thought as to the history of the team - particularly as to that part of the history which pre-dates their buying into the team or even prior to the era of Wilpon majority ownership.


All that said, I'm have no intention of continually harping on this and acknowledge that they're doing a good job in "fixing" things. I just wish they'd realize things on their own a bit more often without having to be shamed or cajoled into it.

[Gwreck]

My recollection is that as soon as fans started pointing out things to improve or stuff the Mets forgot, the team's public face (specifically, Dave Howard) immediately took the position that the stadium was fantastic and such comments were completely wrong.

From the CPF alone, I look at the home-opener IGT and find a comment from the next day:

"G-Fafif
Apr 14 2009 03:16 PM

Dave Howard on 'FAN all but scolding those who don't adore everything at Citi Field right now."

My further recollection is that it took many months before the team even started acknowledging that things could be improved or changes could be made.