The Chicago Ballpark That Never Was

[Richie]

Just read this from a different forum.

 

Good read.

[he gone.]

My personal opinion reading it is this:

 

- our stadium is "fine". But it's not the girlfriend you want to show off. There's nothing that is very awe inspiring. It's very utilitarian - gets the job done. They've definitely improved it with the fundamentals deck and the ivy in center, etc. But I wish it had a bit more design to it in terms of different wall heights in the OF and not such a perfect 375 in the gaps, 330 down the lines feel.

- I wish the stadium WAS built in Armour Park and took off like it could have. We hate comparing to Wrigley, but with a stadium like that it could have revitalized Bridgeport more. Instead of living in Lakeview maybe I live in Bridgeport right now. I always envy living in Lakeview wishing Wrigley was Comiskey - I'd be at 30 games a year.

 

I get that people are going to say you CAN live in Bridgeport and I like it just fine, but it doesn't hold a candle to the north side in terms of coffee shops, walkability, etc.

 

- Reinsdorf was never going to ever approve that stadium. It doesn't even sound like it was a possibility or made it to the last round. Also I thought it was interesting to hear the Camden story in more detail. My impression was always that the architect gave Reinsdorf and Co. a nice, homey ballpark and they said no. From the article it sounds like that firm wasn't even considering incorporating the factory until forced to. Also glad we didn't get that ugly retractable roof.

 

 

 

My ultimate hope is maybe by 2050 or so we're talking plans to put in a new stadium. I still hope its in Bridgeport.. and maybe this time we go back to the original location or Armour and do it right this time. I think the city has a lot to offer and if the revitalization continues from the South Loop down maybe Bridgeport is happening place before and after games. I still like the location and would love to see the Southside have a touch of gentrification... just a sprinkle though. I like the southside grit and charm.

[reiks12]

Very good article, I had no idea about this place. I wonder what Sox history would have looked like had we decided on Armour Park. Are we looking at 101 years without a title?

[jenksycat]

Very good article, I had no idea about this place. I wonder what Sox history would have looked like had we decided on Armour Park. Are we looking at 101 years without a title?

 

What difference would the stadium have made on how s***ty the team was for decades?

[Middle Buffalo]

I like the idea. I wish they had done it, but I doubt they would have built the park with h those dimensions. They would have turned it some to make the lines longer. Maybe higher oufield walls in the corners to compensate.

 

That said, the G is a fine place to see a game. Not special, but not bad. It's all about winning consistently. They can't have one good year followed by several bad if they want crowds.

[Texsox]

I still think the best option is the west/northwest suburbs. I thought the area around Arlington Park would have been cool with public trans.

[soxforlife05]

A ballpark on northerly island with the seating oriented toward the Chicago skyline would look amazing. Concerts could be played at the ballpark as they already have been on the island.

Edited April 11, 2018 by soxforlife05

[Replacement Level Poster]

Thank you for posting that. I saw the Armour sketches but never the Addison shell stadium sketches.

The article simply stated what has already been public perception, it is a flawed stadium, but no where near as awful as made out to be. I always go to twenty plus games a year, and the experience except for the baseball performance the past decade for me has generally been positive. It would be nice to have more immediate dining options near the park except Cork & Kerrys and the Halsted corridor, but that will never happen as long as the team has full concession and parking revenue per lease agreement and Jerry owns the team. The article does fluff Wrigley and Fenway which to me is a straw man. Fenway and Wrigley were never planned to be that type of ballpark. They were built 100 plus years ago and social and economic factors which are not replicated in every market have transformed those neighborhoods and parks. It’s tough to plan that type of outcome. Like a football team hiring best coach of all time and drafting best qb all time in the 6th round months apart, easily imitated more difficult to replicate.

[greg775]

The Sox should have made a move after winning the WS. Getting private $$s to build a new stadium in the suburbs. Look. 35th and Shields is not a good place for a ballpark. Old Comiskey was great sitting there, but when it was time to build a new one, they shoulda went by Lake Shore Drive. Suburbs woulda been better but the state wasn't going to allow that, correct?

Edited April 11, 2018 by greg775

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Super interesting. I hate the foul pole dimensions of Armour Park, but I would have totally taken that park over our current one. And it's nothing to do with GRF on the inside, because I actually like our actual stadium, it's the outside of the stadium and the fact that it doesn't take advantage of the city backdrop that is frustrating.

 

While I agree with Dayn that maybe putting it in the middle of a neighborhood would make it TOO similar to Wrigley and seem like a copycat premise, but that's the ONLY thing I like about Wrigley. The compromise would be the parking structure he mentions, because that's easily the worst part about Wrigley being in a neighborhood is the parking, or lack thereof.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Left field and right field look like they might be 200 feet down the lines. I doubt MLB would allow a ballpark to have the old Polo Grounds dimensions anymore. Other than that, I agree with your post.

 

 

Yeah and it looks about 5000 feet out to CF. They would have added another fence like they did in Detroit. The other thing is, it was facing due north, with nothing to even partially slow a north wind. It would have been so cold there in April and May.

 

 

It is really frustrating he included the image with the actual distances that you can't actually make out. Hard to imagine it could be much more than 250

 

 

Huh? Dayn says the dimensions in the article...

 

"That would be perhaps the most compelling set of outfield distances and angles in all of MLB today (400 feet to center, 421 to the alleys, 388 to the first turn in the outfield, and 283 down the lines)"

[kitekrazy]

Reminds me why owners never pay for stadiums. They are a bad investment. Threatening to move is a good way to force it on tax payers. Too bad they don't hear "no".

[Chicago White Sox]

Reminds me why owners never pay for stadiums. They are a bad investment. Threatening to move is a good way to force it on tax payers. Too bad they don't hear "no".

The Sox would be in Tampa right now if we said no.

[Dick Allen]

The Sox would be in Tampa right now if we said no.

Yes, and probably some other team would have taken their place because even with their red headed stepchild status in Chicago, the White Sox have a far superior situation than a lot of franchises.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, and probably some other team would have taken their place because even with their red headed stepchild status in Chicago, the White Sox have a far superior situation than a lot of franchises.

 

Thinking in retrospect, we could well be the Chicago Expos.

[Dick Allen]

Thinking in retrospect, we could well be the Chicago Expos.

I would guess that or the A's.

[southsider2k5]

I would guess that or the A's.

 

Its either that or one of the 93/98 expansions.

[he gone.]

I think one of the most frustrating things is that Jerry was stubborn and wanted the same address. I don't think anybody is THAT nostalgic or cares that much about that besides him. That was a big mistake. If you just switch the park around you have some of the skyline in the background of your OF and it changes the overall feel of the whole ballpark.

I mean, if any of you have been to Detroit, you walk out of their stadium and the Grand valley state building is very unassuming. But once inside, that building pops. Frustrating, but is what it is. We're not KC or Cleveland or a suburb, we're one of the coolest and best cities for architecture and we built a bland stadium. Oh well. Just better do it right next time!

[InTheDriversSeat]

A ballpark on northerly island with the seating oriented toward the Chicago skyline would look amazing. Concerts could be played at the ballpark as they already have been on the island.

 

No, that location should become an airport again, Plus, Richard Daley Jr. needs to be sent to prison for a long time for going in with bulldozers in the middle of the night! Lock him up for terrorism.

 

 

35th and Shields is not a good place for a ballpark

 

That's actually a fine location. Close to downtown, an expressway, and public tranportation. Has access from all directions, which is not possible along the lakeshore.

 

 

The Sox would be in Tampa right now if we said no.

 

No they wouldn't. The American League had not approved the move, plus the league indicated that a move out of Chicago would not be approved.

 

 

If you just switch the park around you have some of the skyline in the background of your OF and it changes the overall feel of the whole ballpark.

 

Who cares if the ballpark is facing the skyline or not? Just because other teams do that, does not mean the White Sox have to. Wanna see the skyline? Walk outside of the ballpark, face north, and look at it.

 

 

.

[Dick Allen]

A ballpark on northerly island with the seating oriented toward the Chicago skyline would look amazing. Concerts could be played at the ballpark as they already have been on the island.

You cannot have a baseball stadium face west. It's one thing to have sun in the eyes of OFs. In the eyes of hitters is a huge no, no.

[Doc Edwards Shot]

I remember when the Sox almost moved to Florida. As a teenager, I was on the edge of my seat with fear and was so relieved that it didn't happen. I couldn't understand the people who argued about taxes and public funding, etc.

 

But now as an adult who pays taxes, if this situation arises again they can just move if they think we taxpayers - ESPECIALLY IN THIS RIPOFF STATE - are going to pay for all of it again. Really, we should pay for none of it and the White Sox ownership should pay for all of it. The government and taxpayers shouldn't be subsidizing special interests like sports stadiums.

 

I'm also wondering why there aren't many other events (concerts, other sports, etc.) held at GRF. Why does almost nothing take place there other than White Sox games? The argument in the 80s for taxpayer funding was that it would serve as more than just a baseball stadium and other things could take place there.

Edited April 11, 2018 by Doc Edwards Shot

[Big Hurtin]

I disagree that it’s boring. I think the flat black and green makes it look like Gotham City. This is Batman’s park. This is a man’s man’s park. I think it’s Badass.

Pretty sure that was Heinz Field

 

The Sox would be in Tampa right now if we said no.

 

Talk about sh** stadiums...

 

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Who cares if the ballpark is facing the skyline or not? Just because other teams do that, does not mean the White Sox have to. Wanna see the skyline? Walk outside of the ballpark, face north, and look at it.

 

This is a terrible take. Have you ever seen BB&T Ballpark in Charlotte? It's incredible, mainly because of the backdrop.

 

 

[Texsox]

You cannot have a baseball stadium face west. It's one thing to have sun in the eyes of OFs. In the eyes of hitters is a huge no, no.

I remember seats at Wrigley below the scoreboard in center field. Bad for hitters. My grandfather told a story that fans were encouraged to wear white when the opponents were batting and blue when the Cubs were batting. Not sure if it was true or he was pulling my leg.