11/21/24
April 23, 2003
Major league ballparks ranked top to bottom: Wrigley gets top marks (what did you expect from a Chicago sportswriter?); Shea squats at the bottom ("When they eventually blow this place up, Ron Santo should get to push the button.") Kudos for consideration to parks that best serve kids.
Turner Field at 26? He's got to be kidding. I know it doesn't compare to Wrigley, Fenway, or Camden (having been to all three), but that low is ridiculous. How is Yogi Bear any different than the sausages in Milwaukee.
posted by trox at 02:21 PM on April 23, 2003
got a generic username/pw we can use?
posted by jerseygirl at 02:45 PM on April 23, 2003
nevermind! Sportsfilter/Sportsfilter works.
posted by jerseygirl at 02:49 PM on April 23, 2003
I am glad to see Fenway up there at #2. The new owners have really put a lot of cash, thought and design into the park. I had the pleasure of sitting in the new Green Monster seats last week, it was a tremendous experience that I won't soon forget. Best time ever at Fenway, easily.
posted by jerseygirl at 02:55 PM on April 23, 2003
Safeco rings in at number 7, not that bad, upper quartile anyway. Not bad for $500 million (or was it $640 when all was said and done?). Of course there's another $500 million brand new stadium right next to it. Safeco also (I just heard today) raised the price of a 16 ounce draft beer (cheapest brand, natch) by $1.50 to $6.50. Can anybody confirm that? What do you pay for a cold one at your stadium?
posted by vito90 at 03:19 PM on April 23, 2003
oh, how i miss friday afternoon games at Wrigley.
posted by jbelshaw at 03:20 PM on April 23, 2003
I'll be attending my first major leauge game next month at Wrigley. I got bleacher seats, what should I expect?
posted by corpse at 03:31 PM on April 23, 2003
Great American Ball Park: Not so great after all. Cold, unoriginal and very, very red. It's officially the new "new Comiskey" now that the old new Comiskey has changed its name. Cincinnati had its chance, but dropped the ball, as usual. ouch
posted by mick at 03:33 PM on April 23, 2003
I'll be attending my first major leauge game next month at Wrigley. I got bleacher seats, what should I expect? an "L"
posted by vito90 at 03:40 PM on April 23, 2003
he's definitely biased towards history, which I can't fault, but I'd put Fenway over Wrigley. Not sure why, just always thought like that. I think Edison and Turner were very underrated, and he seems biased against Great American, which is the least obnoxious corporate name (since it still sounds generic) and from the photos and tours I saw, it wasn't bad. Not the best of the new places, but not one of the worst. I'd have put Shea above Olympic and the Vet though. Shea is pretty much unmemorable and unfun, but it's better than those two dumps...
posted by Bernreuther at 03:41 PM on April 23, 2003
vito90, At Staples a few Sundays ago to watch our one and only ever arena football game they wanted $10 each for 14oz imports. The guy even said jokingly said "Welcome to Disneyland !!". At this point we opened our cunningly disguised water bottles full of vodka and asked for 3 cups of ice that the guy happily gave us smiling even more :-) Edison Fields is over $6.50 for cheapest i think now.
posted by stuartmm at 06:33 PM on April 23, 2003
stuartmm...$10!!! For an Arena FB game! I. Am. Speechless.
posted by vito90 at 08:25 PM on April 23, 2003
I haven't been to Fenway in fifteen years, but they must have fixed the parking and traffic situations in that time. Otherwise it loses to Shea on those issues alone...
posted by Joey Michaels at 08:44 PM on April 23, 2003
No ballparks even come close to comparing to Fenway and Wrigley, though Fenway should have ranked above Wrigley. If only because Wrigley stands are filled with the unemployed, or so I've heard...
posted by justgary at 09:39 PM on April 23, 2003
PNC's better than this list gives it credit for. And where else but a Chicago paper would put New Comiskey ahead of the Reds' new park, then dismiss the Red's park as a terrible new stadium -- just like New Comiskey. And I agree with Bernreuthe on Turner Field and Edison. Been to both, and both are much better places to see a game than some of the stadiums ranked above it (anyone actually enjoyed a game at BOB?)
posted by herc at 01:43 AM on April 24, 2003
There are only two good reasons to visit SkyDome:
- For the opportunity to watch the dome close in the middle of a game. I've been there when it's happened and it is quite the sight. Even opposing ballplayers will come to the top of the dugout steps to watch the last little bit of outdoor disappear. It's an eerie sensation as there is only a low hum when it moves, and uses some ridiculously low amount of energy ($70Can?) to close it entirely.
- For the opportunity to watch people have sex (or women flash) in front of the hotel windows. Despite warnings that the window is two-way glass and that people will be removed from the premises for "inappropriate behaviour", people are still "entertaining" crowds to this day. I've had the distinction of being at one game where a couple had sex against a window and another game where a woman flashed the crowd for 10 minutes.
posted by grum@work at 12:24 PM on April 24, 2003
I like Kauffman Stadium. There's a bias -- I grew up watching games there. But with all the retro parks, there's something to be said for non-gimmicky digs, unless you count the water fountain. It is of its time -- which is every bit as legitimate for a 70s venue as a 30s venue -- and for a yard with a suburban interstate and a huge parking lot as its backdrop, being ranked No. 7 or No. 8 isn't bad.
posted by jackhererra at 10:03 AM on April 25, 2003
I understand that Shea is a dump, but I still can't see how it is the...um...ballpark...of Olympic Stadium. The stadium leaks and breaks more often than the team wins.