77 Hitmen

Here's my last set of ballparks that I have visited. This one is for older ballparks. Wrigley Field: I haven't been there since the major renovations. This is a difficult one for me to rank because of not seeing the Ricketts overhaul and because of my blind hatred for the Cubs and anything Cubs. That being said, I've sat in some pretty crappy seats at Wrigley in the lower deck with the overhang blocking popups. The concessions area was cramped and the food was unremarkable (though I don't know if the food is better now). Communal urinal troughs in the men's room? Gross! All these faults inexplicably get totally swept under the rug when grown men weep at the thought of this place. That being said, you can't beat the atmosphere there and there's no denying that the place has become a bucket list destination for some. Even a number of Sox fans acknowledge enjoying the Wrigley experience. Unlike the Sox under Jerry, they've done a masterful job of embracing their history. Obviously the neighborhood is a huge draw. Parking sucks, it's not next to an expressway, and yet they still manage to draw huge crowds even when they're bad. Fenway Park: I was there 30 years ago, so maybe the park as been renovated since then. You can't beat the history and how it's integrated into the neighborhood. When we walked up to it, I was amazed at how it just looked like another building. Much more so than Wrigley. That being said, other than the history, I thought the place was a dump. Cramped concessions, cramped seating, the food was just standard ballpark fare (though that might have changed). They've obviously done extremely well there and it'll be their forever home, but IMHO, I thought the place was overrated. Transit access was great - we were able to take the "T" from our hotel to Fenway no problem Angel Stadium: One of those "there's nothing wrong with it" ballparks. The concourse is worse than Rate Field. It's surrounding by nothing but parking lots, but unlike at Rate Field, you can't just walk to a nearby neighborhood and it's not right by a couple of train lines that are a few stops away from downtown. There IS a train station near the ballpark, but for most people the only way to get there is to drive and park. On the plus side, it's just a couple of miles down the road from Disneyland. They seem to have done a fine job renovating the place in the 1990s and the Angels always draw well despite many years of poor play, but it'll be interesting to see what Kroenke does when their lease is up in the 2030s. My guess is either massive overhaul or build a new ballpark next to it on the parking lots.

What a nailbiter at the end! Great game. As I said earlier, i'd be glad for either franchise to win it all. At least the Brewers have waited longer (1969 expansion vs. 1998 expansion) plus 1957 for the City of Milwaukee. The Brewers and the Padres are the only 1960s expansion franchises that still haven't won a WS. Another bonus of the Brewers winning is that I'm sure most Cubs fans will hate to see the Brewers win the WS (LOL). Remember last year's playoffs? Boo hoo hoo! Mean Brewers fans waved an "L" flag when they won the playoff series against our beloved Cubbies at "Wrigley North". How dare they!!! 😭😭😭😭. Is Paul Sullivan still sore about that?🤣

Just like Rick Hahn promised!

I know it's just two guys, but I wonder why they felt the experience at Rate Field was the worst fan experience. That seems way over the top to me. The best anecdotal experience I have is that I worked downtown for 30 years and was always known as an unabashed Sox fan. In all those years, it was always a tough sell to convince people who weren't already big Sox fans or just huge baseball fans who will go see a game anywhere to go to Sox Park. This included coworkers and especially people who were coming in from out of town for conferences. It had nothing to do with false perceptions of crime in the area and they knew it was a short ride on the Red Line to get there, it was just people thought the park was generic and the area around it was boring. I know that's unscientific, but that's been the challenge for the Sox for decades. Tailgating and chest thumping about the South Side isn't bringing in more fans. @Falstaff , I too have met some diehard Cubs fans who said they like Sox Park over Wrigley. So, that's definitely not unheard of. Not every lifelong Cubs fans likes the bar scene culture around Wrigley. Of course, it still doesn't change the fact that there's not enough people out there who feel this way to make the Sox a better draw.

Finally....some baseball tonight. I know the ALCS ended in 6 games, but it's still quite a layoff from Monday to tonight. I'll be happy with the outcome either way. Nice to have a World Series that doesn't involve a team that I hate.

We’ll see. At the very least, I hope he’s a very solid player for us. I’d love to see him give the new exploding scoreboard a workout in a few years at the Railyards.

Do you mean Turner Field? How was it? Interesting that they converted the actual olympic stadium into the Braves new ballpark. I saw a good YouTube clip a while back that explained the factors that led to the Braves abandoning Turner Field after only 19(?) seasons. Amazing. I'd like to see a game at Kaufmann before the Royals move to their proposed downtown stadium. I only have a few years left to do that.

Here's my next set of stadium visits and reviews. This time, it's for retractable roof ballparks I have visited. Safeco Field (now T-Mobile Park): Easily the best of the 3 retractable roof ballparks I have been to. The roof was open when I was there and it really felt open air. Great view of the city and Puget Sound from some parts of the ballpark. This was 25 years ago, so I really can't comment on what the area around the ballpark is like. At the time, the Seahawks stadium was under construction, so there really wasn't much to look at from the bus station to the ballpark. Transit access from our downtown hotel was easy as we took an underground "busway" there. I believe that transit line has since been upgraded to an actual subway rail line. American Family Field: I have only been there with the roof closed. Someday, I'd like to go to a game with the roof open to see what it's like. It's a good stadium. Nothing outstanding and nothing bad. I sat on the 200 level and my seats were great. It was easy to get to the different levels for concessions. One downside is that they don't have 360 access around the concourse. Location is a negative for me. There's absolutely nothing around the ballpark as far as I could tell other than acres of parking lot. Huge tailgating culture - but nothing much for people who don't tailgate. The only way in and out is by car or bus as far as I could tell. Chase Field: I'd rank this the lowest among these three. I was actually there for an early season game and the roof was open, so that was nice. I can only imagine it feels more like a warehouse most of the season when the roof is closed. It's not a terrible stadium, but it's rather unremarkable. The most overrated feature is the swimming pool. Who cares? How many fans actually use it? Total gimmick IMO. The downtown location is good, but there wasn't much going on in downtown Phoenix when I went there (15 years ago). There is a light rail line that goes by the stadium, but it didn't go where I needed to go. They've since switched to artificial turf, so that would be a downvote for me.

Keep in mind that these days, people have 60" HDTVs to watch games at home that didn't exist back in the day. Also, baseball is just not as dominant in our culture as it was in the 50s and 60s. It's more difficult now to expect to draw fans just because they want to see big name stars in person. Maybe Ohtani? But I can't think of much else star power that gets young fans excited such that they want to see these stars in person. There's also a different economic expectation these days. When the Sox drew 1.65M fans in 1977, it broke the all-time Chicago attendance record and was a massive success. Now, if any MLB team caps out at 1.6M fans, there are screams of how the franchise is failing and has serious attendance problems.

Though not downtown, I went to Forest Park. It's a huge city park....bigger than Central Park in NYC. There's a free zoo, free history museum, and free art museum plus a number of walking trails.

I lucked out with going to the top of the arch. Since I was there by myself, they actually gave me my own elevator both going up and going down! I'm sure I would have hated it if I was crammed in a small pod with up to 4 strangers. At the top, it is a birds eye view, but there really isn't much to see other than Busch stadium. Certainly nothing like the Sears or Hancock observation decks The rest of the city is unremarkable and on the other side, the Mississippi looks rather industrial and unattractive there. Other than thinking "gee wiz, that's the mighty Mississippi down there!", it really isn't very scenic. The observation area was small, but since it was well ventilated, that didn't bother me

Doctors say the Pope's cancer was indeed localized with no spread and he will not need further treatment. Great news! NBC NewsPope Leo will not require further treatment after lung su...His doctors said Wednesday the pontiff suffered pulmonary adenocarcinoma, which was localized.

I stayed at the Drury Plaza Hotel, which is right across park space from the Hyatt. It was a great hotel, but I'll have to check out the Hyatt next time. For anyone visiting St. Louis, I recommend visiting the Gateway Arch at least once. Even if you don't pay to go up to the top (especially if you're claustrophobic), there's a pretty good and free history museum at the base of the arch plus it's worth walking the grounds of the arch and it's really something to stand at one of its bases and look up.

Here's the next set of observations from ballparks I've been to. These are post-Camden, open-air ballparks just below my top tier (see first post of the thread). Busch Stadium: The ballpark is really good - just a step below the top-tier ones. The iconic Gateway Arch (which is walking distance from Busch) is part of the backdrop. Public street-level view inside the ballpark in left field. It's a great way to enter the stadium. You're on the city street, you go through security and the scan your tickets and boom - you're right in the outfield concourse. The Ballpark Village is great. They pack a lot into a relatively small area. It's not just bars and restaurants, but a big public plaza/open space, and a Cardinals museum. One or two bars at the baseball village have rooftop seats from where fans can watch the game. They do a good job of recognizing Cardinals history outside the park. Lots of statutes and a Cardinals "walk of fame". I'd say the biggest downside of Busch is that the rest of downtown St. Louis is pretty dead outside of the ballpark and baseball village area. Hopefully they can breathe some life into it. Citi Field: Again, another really good ballpark. The Jackie Robinson rotunda, which is an homage to Ebbets Field, is cool. They have a nice "bridge" in the outfield concourse. Concessions were very good. I was able to get there from my hotel in Manhattan via subway no problem with the train stop right at the stadium. The downside is that there's not much right around the stadium as far as I remember. I believe they're now planning to build a stadium district on the parking lots. Nationals Park: Of this set of ballparks I've been to, this one is the most "meh". It's a nice enough stadium and I didn't dislike it. There are ones I'd rank lower, but it's not that memorable IMO and not as good as the other two I listed above. I liked the entrance from centerfield that lets you into a centerfield plaza. One thing I liked about the concessions is that they features an item that's a local specialty from the city of the visiting team. I was there more than 10 years ago, and they may have built up the area outside the ballpark since then. Transit access was good. My hotel was in Arlington, VA and I was able to take the Metro to about a block from Nats Park no problem.

Yeah, that makes no sense whatsoever. Not only is this totally inconsistent with the affordability issue, but there are likely only 20k to 25k seats in the 100 level. I don't know the exact number, but it's no more than that. Let's say it's 22k seats in the 100 level plus 3k in the Club Level. Is the argument then that the Sox attendance ceiling should be around 25k and any fans beyond that are not real fans, are total suckers for buying those tickets, and have absolutely no right to complain about their ballpark experience? On games that should be drawing bigger crowds, our ballpark design should only give a s%*# about the first 25k and screw everyone else.? Wonderful! That'll help us grow our fan base!