As some of you may know, my family has been doing an annual trip in an effort to eventually visit all the different MLB ballparks. Of course, if a team replaces their stadium after we have visited there are no promises to revisit the new one. For example, last year we visited both NY parks - Yankee and Shea Stadiums. This year, both parks have been replaced. Shea was the pit I had always heard it was while Yankee Stadium was the shrine I thought it would be - all that history, all those great past Yankee players, all those rings, etc.
Just to recap for those that don't know me...I have three kids that are now 14, 12, and 7 and a wife that plans these trips (yep! How totally LUCKY am I?). Our pilgrimage started 2 years ago when we drove from our Chicago area home to see the Comerica (Tigers), Great American Ball Park (Reds), PNC Park (Pirates), Jacobs Field (Indians), and Cubs at Wrigley Field. Last year, we spent 9 days on the east coast visiting the Shea Stadium (Mets), Citizens Bank Park (Phillies), Fenway Park (Red Sox), and Yankee Stadium. After starting out with a 1-4 record for the home teams, our trip to Wrigley started our current 5-game winning streak making us 6-4 overall.
I have to say, the new "old school" ball parks (notice I didn't call them stadiums - football is played in a stadium; baseball is played in a park) have REALLY turned my opinion quite a bit. Again, for those that know me, I am totally old school when it comes to baseball and I have always called it sacrilege to say Wrigley Field should be torn down and replaced, BUT after visiting Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland in that first trip, I am all for a new Wrigley even if the Cubs have to outdraw the White Sox and blow away all the Sox fan excuses that Wrigley draws most of the people to the Cubs home games by playing a year or even two in The Cell. These new ball parks are just awesome. You still get the old school ball park feel but you also get all the amenities without being overwhelmed with commercialism. Very cool!
OK, so here is my ball park ranking to date including a couple parks not yet visited on our vacations:
1. Comerica Park (Detroit)
2. PNC Park (Pittsburgh)
3. Jacobs Field (Cleveland)
4. Citizens Bank Park (Philadelphia)
5. Fenway Park (Boston)
6. Turner Field (Atlanta)
7. Great American Ballpark (Cincinnati)
8. Yankee Stadium (NY Yankees – pre-2009)
9. Wrigley Field (Chicago)
10. Shea Stadium (NY Mets)
I have little doubt that Shea will just continue to move down the list as we visit more parks each year. There was just very little to like about it. We sat towards the back of the lower level and I could literally stand and touch the ceiling which was the upper deck with my hands without jumping. The site lines were HORRIBLE from there. I have similar issues with Wrigley Field as well due to many seats directly behind poles and seats towards the back of the lower sections have limited views. These new ball parks have no such issues; the seats are bigger and seem to be much more comfortable too.
Next MLB park up is Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City.
Safe travels!
ReplyDeleteWhat a great challenge! Cubs vs. White Sox turnstiles at U.S. Cellular Field! Which, by the way, where is U.S. Cellular Field on your list...no official family visit?
I hope Wrigley Field can stay the way it is--same ivy, same urinals, same neighborhood, same name. I love the unique experience that only Wrigley can provide. We already have modern facilities, in and around town, like U.S. Cellular Field, Soldier Field, the United Center and Miller Park (in Milwaukee).
ReplyDeleteNo family visit to The Cell thus far. We were going to try and go this year, but the timing didn't work. We will definitely get over there at some point though. I have heard the food is better than Wrigley, but that doesn't factor in my rankings. I have also heard the upper deck is better now since they redid it to lessen the slope and feeling that you're about to fall forward. And there is ZERO doubt the Cubs would totally outdraw the Sox at The Cell.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Big Bow's comments, they are difficult to dispute and those were my feelings before starting this odyssey two years ago...now I have changed my mind. OF COURSE they would just have to bring back the ivy but that's about it for me out of your list. If they want to rename it, they can try but it will end up like the Sears Tower/Willis Tower...nobody will call it by the new name anyway so take the money and buy out that worthless Milton Bradley's contract and send him on his way. As far as the neighborhood...I do like the neighborhood feel of the park, but those whiney Wrigleyville residents are a pain in the butt. They limit the number of night games and have gotten rid of all the legal evening parking. Let's see how they like not having the Cubs over there, especially those rooftop owners and all the parking thieves like Taco Bell ($40 for easy out). What else was over there before 1984 when people actually started coming to the games in droves? It is a pain to get to that neighborhood and even worse to get out so it certainly wouldn't kill me to move it somewhere else. And when you are forced to have a hand-written sign in the sink explaining that it is a sink and not a urinal, THAT is a problem. What is a father supposed to do when he attends a game with his 7-year old daughter and she has to go to the bathroom? You certainly can't take her in with you to the men's room; not with that trough in the middle like that!
With as much as the Ricketts are going to be putting into the purchase of the Cubs, I certainly doubt starting a new stadium from scratch is very high on their priority list so this is all a pipe dream anyway so Big Bow will continue to have his unique experience.