Marlins93

Members
  • Content Count

    341
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Marlins93 last won the day on November 15 2018

Marlins93 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

333 Platoon Sharer

Recent Profile Visitors

344 profile views
  1. All parks are going to have shade issues to some degree. Even those without retractable roofs. The shadows are less severe in Houston because its roof retracts to the northeast end of the field. There isn't much at the west side to cast shadows. They are there no doubt, but only cast over the outfield during the late afternoon. SkyDome has a shadow problem but only in dead center. Home plate faces due north and the roof also retracts in that direction. In some respects this was rather clever for a primitive retractable roof. Miller Park has the same orientation as Marlins Park (southeast) and part of the roof retracts due west. Naturally this is going to create shadow problems, and they undoubtedly exist in Milwaukee, but the design shades the field much less. That's the only reason why I'd say the problem is worse in Miami. Again, shadows are going to be mostly unavoidable, but certain park conditions make some worse than others.
  2. Nope. All three panels neatly stack on top of each other when it fully retracts. In that last photo you posted (with the kid) it is not even close to being fully retracted.
  3. Well the roof is clearly not even close to being fully retracted in that last picture (I have no idea why that's the case) for one, which is probably exacerbating the problems. Hard to tell in the first two. If you look at other Miller Park photos you will see that the roof, at least at one point, is indeed capable of opening even more. I wonder if the Brewers have some reason for this. Don't get me wrong, the park definitely has design flaws, but I'd gladly take that roof over the Marlins'.
  4. While I am admittedly uncertain, that photograph seems to indicate a closed roof but the sun is at a precise angle where it is shining directly through the windows and casting a beam on the field. Miller Park's roof retracts further back (it bifurcates) than the one at Marlins Park, so I think they would have less issues with 1pm starts. I've been to every retractable roof park in MLB and I would definitely say that the Marlins have the worst shadow problems from my observations. SkyDome and Miller Park are tied for second.
  5. The shadows are so much worse because when the roof is fully retracted, it still protrudes out so prominently over the 1st base side of the field. The fact that it's the westward facing direction doesn't help, either. The problem with Marlins Park is that even when playing under open air conditions, you still feel pretty enclosed. Arizona and Houston have much better designs to mitigate shadows.
  6. These shadows are infinitely worse than what you encounter at open air parks. They were so bad that many of the TV images came out wacky looking due to the contrast. So much was either under or overexposed.
  7. I love open air baseball as much as anyone and think that South Florida fans should suck it up a little and tolerate games with the roof open beyond April, but I was really horrified by how terrible those shadows were while watching this afternoon's game. If Jeter won't listen, MLB needs to intervene because playing a game under those conditions is probably a safety issue. Unfortunately, either through a design flaw or having to do the best they could on parcel of land leftover from the Orange Bowl, Marlins Park's architecture is really not favorable for day games. The retracted roof segments over the west plaza are just too prominent and loom too much over the field for natural sunlight to cover the field. If they insist on having the roof open for day games early in the season, perhaps they should consider experimenting with 11am start times. I believe those are permitted, although players would probably hate it. Unfortunately day games won't work well with the stadium architecture unless it's really cloudy outside.
  8. This might sound crazy, but I think it might be more accurate to put it the other way around. Didn't one of the PR reps for either MLB or the Marlins mention that they were attempting to design jerseys that could be worn in more contexts outside of going to the ballpark? In other words, it seems like they sort of wanted at least part of the Marlins set to basically be "fashion" jersey. It makes you wonder if the black alternate design emerged from concepts they were already playing with when designing the actual league-wide fashion jerseys, such as the Mets one you posted. That's probably why it looks so ghastly too. I'm not against bold designs and originality if they're executed well, but some aspects of the Marlins set are very un-baseball like.
  9. I hate this notion that the Yankees own pinstripes and are the only team that can wear them.
  10. He has already proven to you that the game from the photograph was a sell out and fans filled in by the time it started. I get to ballparks early and wouldn't even bother sitting down for player intros. Most pre-game fanfare is boring. That's why fans don't usually arrive at their seats until around 5 minutes or so before first pitch. The difference is that at Marlins Park those empty seats never filled in.
  11. The bottom right is the only one that's an upgrade over the current on-field cap but I wouldn't even wear it with every jersey. The BP cap is way better than all of them anyway. The problem with their "neon" design concept for the cap logo is that it doesn't really work on any background that isn't black. I want there to be so much more blue in this set overall but the logo as is really suffers when on that background. That's why I am not a fan of the blue ST/BP jersey, despite liking that as a color for a solid top alternate. With a wordmark it could be great, though.
  12. That white outline of the cap logo on a blue background will always look terrible to me. One of the reasons why I am not so fond of the blue BP jersey because it somehow drains all of the color away. It just looks noisy. Not a fan of the first concept for this reason but it might look better if they thin or get rid of the white. I'd consider it a downgrade for now. The second, with the blue bill, is nice but it still has the problem of a someway ugly, mostly black logo, placed on a black background. That's an upgrade over the current cap but not by much.
  13. Ironically, no information whatsoever is provided on the scoreboard in the photo you posted. If the names and numbers on the back of the jerseys are illegible in that situation, how are fans sitting behind the first few rows going to be able to identify players during their warm-ups and other activities? Scoreboards are good at telling fans who's in the batter's box or playing a specific position, but there's a lot of activity on and around the field that generates fan interest and the board is not sufficient for filling in those gaps. Fans rely much more on names and numbers than you are letting on.