http://espn.go.com/page2/s/ballparks/cellular.html

Not a bad review, the only things I would disagree with was the "trading up" is way better than 2. You can always trade up to better seats. Also anything to do with food should be a 5. They have the best food I have ever had at any ballpark. period.

That's not a bad score

 

I disagree with the 7th inning stretch, esp when he compares it to Wrigley's, which is a joke and a half.

I disagree with the "Pre-and-postgame bar-and-restaurant scene:" score.

 

He doen't mention the Bullpen Bar, Jimbos or even Tailgating, for which he gave Edison Field a 2.5 alone.

Not a bad review, the only things I would disagree with was the "trading up" is way better than 2.  You can always trade up to better seats.  Also anything to do with food should be a 5. They have the best food I have ever had at any ballpark.  period.

I don't know:

 

15. Trading-up factor: Given the conditions, we not only were able to sit anywhere we wanted (close enough to smell the players passing gas), the Sox announced that everyone at the game would be given a free ticket to an upcoming game. Now, that's customer service.

 

 

On the other hand, if you sit in the upper deck, not only are you subjected to some of the worst seats in baseball, you are not allowed into the lower level. The White Sox started this policy in reaction to the drunk fans who attack players and coaches on the field, which is just a kneejerk response to the problem and a stupid one at that. Fans in the lower level are just as capable of getting violently drunk as those in the upper deck -- maybe moreso, since the upper deck is often filled with families trying to save some money.

 

 

If you really want to stop fans from running onto the field, don't punish the fans -- position more guards on the field and stop selling beer earlier. 2

 

I think he's being entirely fair there, if the new policy wasn't in place he'd have probably given it a 5 but with that policy it is probably a 2.

I have a mixed review of his mixed review.

 

He correctly points out that the South Side is underappreciated but then buys into the exact same arguments that people make when they underappreciate the South Side.

 

I am referring to his harping on the upper deck, in particular.

I have come full circle on the UD since the All-Star Game.

Make no mistake, the UD is high and steep, but it is NOT as bad a seat as the hyperbolists would have you believe. I was very satisfied with my seat in section 551, row 11.

In fact, I sat in that VERY LAST SEAT up in the corner of the UD for a while during ASG BP, and if it weren't for the wind being blocked, I'd have stayed up there much longer! It was a very cool overview of the park.

 

And the whole neighborhood thing will change when "Cellville" is created....rather, IF Cellville ever is created. I'm still waiting for that United Center neighborhood upgrade they promised when they forced all those people out of their homes a few years back. Wrigleyville was ( and the immediate surrounding area still IS ) a pretty sketchy area, with the exception of Clark Street and Broadway Avenue.

 

And after last Saturday, I'd certainly add a point or two for the tailgating!!

Maybe we shoulda invited him to Lot E, huh?

I'm pretty happy with teh score, I was just afraid we would be in the very bottom of all the parks, cause that's what the reputation is of the park from outsiders. I would have rated it a little higher, but not much, I mean the UD is just horrendous.

Hell, we beat out yankee stadium, not bad.

"...Wrigleyville was ( and the immediate surrounding area still IS ) a pretty sketchy area, with the exception of Clark Street and Broadway Avenue."

 

This might be the most incorrect post I have ever read on this board.

"...Wrigleyville was ( and the immediate surrounding area still IS ) a pretty sketchy area, with the exception of Clark Street and Broadway Avenue."

 

This might be the most incorrect post I have ever read on this board.

REALLY?

 

I have VIVID memories of "transients" laying in front of a transient hotel on Waveland, mere blocks away from the Friendly Confines, and people constantly "advising" me not to go north of Irving Park after nightfall. This was in the mid-80's, and that's why I said "was".

 

And I saw a few "transactions" going on where my sister and brother-in-law decided to park for a recent night game, a couple miles west of the park. That's why I said "STILL IS".

 

Sorry if you disagree, but your disagreement doesn't necessarily make the point incorrect.

"...Wrigleyville was ( and the immediate surrounding area still IS ) a pretty sketchy area, with the exception of Clark Street and Broadway Avenue."

 

This might be the most incorrect post I have ever read on this board.

REALLY?

 

I have VIVID memories of "transients" laying in front of a transient hotel on Waveland, mere blocks away from the Friendly Confines, and people constantly "advising" me not to go north of Irving Park after nightfall. This was in the mid-80's, and that's why I said "was".

 

And I saw a few "transactions" going on where my sister and brother-in-law decided to park for a recent night game, a couple miles west of the park. That's why I said "STILL IS".

 

Sorry if you disagree, but your disagreement doesn't necessarily make the point incorrect.

Critic--

 

You're absolutely right about the WAS part--Lincoln Park and Wrigleyville were slums 20 years ago, some of the worst neighborhoods in the city.

 

I disagreed with the IS part--seeing "transactions" doesn't make a neighborhood sketchy, drug deals go down in Bannockburn every day.

 

I am at work, hung-over after watching the Sox at a local watering hole last night, grumpy as hell, and more than willing to lash out at anything I disagreed with. You're right, it doesn't make it incorrect, and I shouldn't have put it that way, but I am in need of a Coca-Cola/Aspirin cocktail stat, and cannot be held responible for my irritating posts today.

Agreed, and point taken as well - a few transactions could be isolated incidents, and shouldn't necessarily reflect on the entire area.

 

Thanks for the level-headed discourse, even when your head isn't actually "level" right now.

Best part of this reveiw...............someone from ESPN finally admits that U.S. Cellular isnt a bad park, and Sox fans finally got the recognition for being knowledgable fans that we are.

REPORT CARD

U.S. Cellular Field

Capacity: 47,098

Opened: April 18, 1991

Surface: Grass

 

Our Ratings:

Seat comfort: 4

Hot dogs: 5

Concessions: 4.5

Signature food: 3.5

Beer: 4

Bathrooms: 3.5

Scoreboard: 4

P.A. system: 4

Fun stuff: 4

Souvenirs: 3

Tickets: 1.5

Exterior: 2.5

Interior: 4

Access: 4

Ushers: 3.5

Trading up: 2

Fan knowledge: 5

7th inning stretch: 3

Local scene: 1

Wild card: 8

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total: 74

Not bad, but the Trade up value is bad...