2mr41h Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 That DC concept is beautiful. The architects seem to be taking a nod from European stadiums, with lots of glass and unique lines. I'd rather see a stadium fit into the look of a city than be deceptively 'retro.'That said, Citizens Bank Park, Turner Field, PNC Park, etc. are all unique experiences. Different sightlines, different dimensions, different visual interactions with their respective cities. They all take cues from Camden Yards, but they're not cookie cutters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eww7633 Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 There is SOME truth the the idea that the "brick and steel ball park with a thin row of outfield seats and a view of downtown" keeps happening over and over. Pittsb, St L, Atl, Houston, Detroit ...even San Fran, if you think of their distinguishing view of the city is more the bay than the city buildings.But the real question is this: Is it a bad thing? I say no. Admittedly, the view of the water is pretty boring after about the 3rd inning in San Fran. Cargo ships going by at 3mph just aint that cool, and a view of Oakland is second in a beauty race with a grey concrete-block wall.Atl has some interesting buildings to look at, St louis has the beautiful arch and capitol, but Pittsb, Detroit, and houston dont have particularly great downtown buildings to look at.But, overall, i like a sport paying honor to its past, and the semi-old-school-look parks are nice. I do think it would be fun to see the next new park go stainless steel and glass, clean lines, ergonomic, usability and comfort over traditional. It wuold be interesting to put the designers of the iPod on a staduim. I dont the diciplines dont cross over, but you get my idea.Really? I'm offended. That's better than some crappy arch. Fifth Ave. Place and one PPG are great buildings. Did you know that the Gateway Clipper blows its horn everytime it passes the park and the fans say back by cheering loudly, or that a building across the river puts a light on when the Bucs homer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcgd Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 There is SOME truth the the idea that the "brick and steel ball park with a thin row of outfield seats and a view of downtown" keeps happening over and over. Pittsb, St L, Atl, Houston, Detroit ...even San Fran, if you think of their distinguishing view of the city is more the bay than the city buildings.But the real question is this: Is it a bad thing? I say no. Admittedly, the view of the water is pretty boring after about the 3rd inning in San Fran. Cargo ships going by at 3mph just aint that cool, and a view of Oakland is second in a beauty race with a grey concrete-block wall.Atl has some interesting buildings to look at, St louis has the beautiful arch and capitol, but Pittsb, Detroit, and houston dont have particularly great downtown buildings to look at.But, overall, i like a sport paying honor to its past, and the semi-old-school-look parks are nice. I do think it would be fun to see the next new park go stainless steel and glass, clean lines, ergonomic, usability and comfort over traditional. It wuold be interesting to put the designers of the iPod on a staduim. I dont the diciplines dont cross over, but you get my idea.Really? I'm offended. That's better than some crappy arch. Fifth Ave. Place and one PPG are great buildings. Did you know that the Gateway Clipper blows its horn everytime it passes the park and the fans say back by cheering loudly, or that a building across the river puts a light on when the Bucs homer? Pittsburgh's skyline isn't exactly world renowned or anything.In reality, the only american cities with identifiable skylines are New York, Chicago, and St. Louis. (Add some if I forgot, but I can't think of any that if I see them I instantly go "That's ______!!") That isn't saying that Pittsburgh's isn't beautiful, because the angle of the park suggests that it is. For pure backdrop, Pittsburgh's is the best. I haven't visited, but I'm betting that the rest of the park is up there with the rest.RE: Houston. I'm sure the park is very nice. Even without the Crawford boxes, the stadium is just way too gimicky for my tastes. The Train, Hill, foulpole, buzzing, huge roof, etc. all make it just not as attractive in my book. The exterior of the stadium (minus the HUGE roof) is very nice though.To me, the best looking retractable roof stadium is Miller Park. It was such a unique design, and I'm surprised another stadium hasn't used something similar yet. Unless there are problems with it I'm not aware of... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBear Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Well, the Miller Park roof hasn't worked exactly as planned, so that might be a problem - Mitsubishi (which made the roof) and the county have battled back and forth about who has to pay for the repairs (if you're buying aretractable roof, get the extended warranty at Best Buy).The roof was supposed to close in 10-15 minutes, now it's closer to 40.As for the park, it's nice enough but even with the roof open, it feels closed in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedo Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 A view of Oakland is second in a beauty race with a grey concrete-block wall. Before the Raiders moved back and the monstrous football stands were built, the Coliseum provided some outstanding views of the Eastern hills -- especially late afternoon-to-evening games.Atl has some interesting buildings to look at, St louis has the beautiful arch and capitol, but Pittsb, Detroit, and houston dont have particularly great downtown buildings to look at.But beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I quite like Pittsburgh's downtown -- Baltimore's too. Yes, Detroit's is old, but I still enjoy seeing the red flashing light of the Penobscot Building -- the same one I've seen for five decades. "Old folks" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Did I see someone refer to the Gateway Arch as a "crappy arch"?Come on. I know you're trying to stick up for your own hometown or home area, but to call the Gateway Arch a crappy arch is just silly. And it sounds like sour grapes.When my niece got married in St. Louis a few years ago (my only time in St. Louis, by the way), it seemed as if the Gateway Arch kept beckoning our eyes. It really is worth looking at.It may not be Mount Rushmore or the Statue of Liberty. But it's up near there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorpeligro Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Pittsburgh's skyline isn't exactly world renowned or anything. In reality, the only american cities with identifiable skylines are New York, Chicago, and St. Louis. (Add some if I forgot, but I can't think of any that if I see them I instantly go "That's ______!!")Huh? Wrong in so many ways. Pittsburgh's skyline is one of the most distinctive in the country, and it always has been. In regards to your other statement, there are plenty of American cities with recognizable skylines. To name a few:SeattleSan FranciscoLos AngelesDallasWashington, DCDetroitOh, and by the way, Miller Park sucks. I went to school in Wisconsin and I've been to both County Stadium and Miller Park. There is a reason Miller Park had the biggest attendance drop-off (from its first year to its second year) in baseball history. The architecture is Disneyesque and doesn't fit it with anything else in the city. It's in a piss poor location for a publicly-financed $400 million stadium, and the roof is so bulky and big that the place always seems dark and there is always a shadow on the field for day games. Plus, the roof always leaks and is not airtight, so there is no chance Milwaukee will ever host the NCAA Final Four. The outfield seats in left field are horrible (unlike at County Stadium), and the architects (HKS) ridiculously designed the grandstand to have 4 tiers when 3 tiers or even 2 tiers would have been sufficient. It's arbitrarily asymmetric..., anyways you get the point. I could go on and on. Of the new ballparks, Pittsburgh is the best by a wide margin, and it is the only modern ballpark that can claim to be in the same league as Wrigley or Fenway. And don't anyone say that AT&T is better; that stadium turns its back on one of the great skylines in the world for a vista that is worthless at night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurricaneDavid Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Plus, the roof always leaks and is not airtight, so there is no chance Milwaukee will ever host the NCAA Final Four. Would the NCAA Final Four EVER be played at a baseball-only stadium anyway??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcgd Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Pittsburgh's skyline isn't exactly world renowned or anything. In reality, the only american cities with identifiable skylines are New York, Chicago, and St. Louis. (Add some if I forgot, but I can't think of any that if I see them I instantly go "That's ______!!")Huh? Wrong in so many ways. Pittsburgh's skyline is one of the most distinctive in the country, and it always has been. In regards to your other statement, there are plenty of American cities with recognizable skylines. To name a few:SeattleSan FranciscoLos AngelesDallasWashington, DCDetroitOh, and by the way, Miller Park sucks. I went to school in Wisconsin and I've been to both County Stadium and Miller Park. There is a reason Miller Park had the biggest attendance drop-off (from its first year to its second year) in baseball history. The architecture is Disneyesque and doesn't fit it with anything else in the city. It's in a piss poor location for a publicly-financed $400 million stadium, and the roof is so bulky and big that the place always seems dark and there is always a shadow on the field for day games. Plus, the roof always leaks and is not airtight, so there is no chance Milwaukee will ever host the NCAA Final Four. The outfield seats in left field are horrible (unlike at County Stadium), and the architects (HKS) ridiculously designed the grandstand to have 4 tiers when 3 tiers or even 2 tiers would have been sufficient. It's arbitrarily asymmetric..., anyways you get the point. I could go on and on. Of the new ballparks, Pittsburgh is the best by a wide margin, and it is the only modern ballpark that can claim to be in the same league as Wrigley or Fenway. And don't anyone say that AT&T is better; that stadium turns its back on one of the great skylines in the world for a vista that is worthless at night. I'll give you seattle. Maybe San Fran and DC. I missed those. I didn't mean that to be a definitive statement or anything. Or offensive to Pittsburgh.But as far as San Fran, LA, Dallas and Detroit (and pittsburgh) I couldn't pick those skylines out of a line-up. I'm not saying they aren't beautiful or have locally known landmarks, but if you look strickly at the skyline of those cities, the average person isn't going to go "That's Detroit!" I knew plenty of sports casters make the joke about PNC's beautiful skyline saying "Who knew?"And for miller park, I was strickly talking abou retractable roof stadiums and the look of such. I personally think the location of Miller Park is outstanding. Where else in the Majors can you park and tailgate for 6 bucks? All within a short distance to the ball park. I went to 6 games the first year it opened, and never had troubles leaving. I also frequently sat in Left Field and liked the seats. At least not the troubles I've had in St. Louis, Cincy, or Chicago. Compare Miller to any other modern or past park and I don't think its as nice looking. I just like the roof design. As a few have mentioned, it leaks and has some other problems. I was not aware of them.I put PNC right up there at the top. Its truly a beautiful stadium that I can't wait to visit. I think the skyline view of Pittsburgh is MUCH better than the one of my team's at Busch Stadium. I like some of the other features of Busch III, but I can't compare them without visiting PNC.There's a reason this thread is 7+ pages. People will defend their hometown ballparks just as much as they'll defend their teams. And I think the fact that there are so many different opinions on the same stadiums only proves that the Retro ballparks in now way are cookie cutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eww7633 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Did I see someone refer to the Gateway Arch as a "crappy arch"?Come on. I know you're trying to stick up for your own hometown or home area, but to call the Gateway Arch a crappy arch is just silly. And it sounds like sour grapes.When my niece got married in St. Louis a few years ago (my only time in St. Louis, by the way), it seemed as if the Gateway Arch kept beckoning our eyes. It really is worth looking at.It may not be Mount Rushmore or the Statue of Liberty. But it's up near there.You're right, its iconic. Hell, my grandmother worked for PDM, so I even have a connection. I just would never mark it down as one of the things in life I have to see.Maybe you guys will recognize this skyline of Pittsburgh better:This is viewing Point State Park. PNC Park would be down the Allegheny on the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Plus, the roof always leaks and is not airtight, so there is no chance Milwaukee will ever host the NCAA Final Four. Would the NCAA Final Four EVER be played at a baseball-only stadium anyway??? It was held at Tropicana Field like 5 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yac12 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 The San Fran skyline has the Prudental Pyramid building and Dallas has Reunion Tower. Two buildings that people should see in a skyline and know what city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no97 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 This is viewing Point State Park. PNC Park would be down the Allegheny on the left. Nope, sorry - and the fact that you have to explain what the photo is of, and where the ballpark is is pretty telling...New York has several iconic structures (Chrysler Building, Empire State Building, Statue of Liberty - I could go on). Chicago the same (Sears Tower, John Hancock Tower, etc.), St. Louis has the Arch, even Seattle has the Space Needle, San Francicso the Golden Gate Bridge and the Coit Tower (the former Prudential Building), Washington DC has tons of iconic buildings (they're on money, for crying out loud!).To compete with that, Pittsburgh's got yellow bridges (yes, I suppose they're nice to look at, and some of the buildings are nice, but I couldn't pick out that photo you posted). Dallas has a ball on a stick (Reunion Tower - part of the Hyatt Regency Hotel - and one of those revolving restaurants ), and Detroit has... Detroit has... I'm not sure. I guess the Renasance Center is kind of nice...I'd say, this country has, at most, five easily identifiable skylines - New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Seattle, San Fransisco and Washington DC. Beyond that, only in a regional sense are most other skylines at all recognizable...Moose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harva4 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Miller Park sucks???Are you kidding me, just because you went to school in Wisconsin and you think that Pittsburg has a cool skyline....You are wrong twice! Pittsburg has no skyline, unless burned out industrial buildings count. Help we win a Packers contest by clicking here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorpeligro Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 But as far as San Fran, LA, Dallas and Detroit (and pittsburgh) I couldn't pick those skylines out of a line-up. I'm not saying they aren't beautiful or have locally known landmarks, but if you look strickly at the skyline of those cities, the average person isn't going to go "That's Detroit!" I knew plenty of sports casters make the joke about PNC's beautiful skyline saying "Who knew?"And for miller park, I was strickly talking abou retractable roof stadiums and the look of such. I personally think the location of Miller Park is outstanding. Where else in the Majors can you park and tailgate for 6 bucks?People will defend their hometown ballparks just as much as they'll defend their teams.You're telling me you would look at this photo and not know it's Detroit?Or that this skyline is Los Angeles? It's one of the most photographed and filmed skylines in the world.And if Miller Park is a great ballpark because of the tailgating and cheap parking, then Tropicana Field must be at the top of your list because there the parking is free. By the way, I'm from Orange County, and I'll tell you that our ballpark is severely overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinMcD Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 Miller Park sucks???Are you kidding me, just because you went to school in Wisconsin and you think that Pittsburg has a cool skyline....You are wrong twice! Pittsburg has no skyline, unless burned out industrial buildings count. Do those pictures look like burned out industrial buildings, they look nice to mePittsburgh is the one of the nicest cities I have ever been to I have been to Buffalo, Toronto, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Philly, Baltimore, Orlando, Tampa, & DCI belive Pittsburgh, DC, & Baltimore were the best of those 10 cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OMMF Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 even Seattle has the CN Tower Jesus, who paid the moving costs for getting that thing here from Toronto? I think you meant the Space Needle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yac12 Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 New York has several iconic structures (Chrysler Building, Empire State Building, Statue of Liberty - I could go on). Chicago the same (Sears Tower, John Hancock Tower, etc.), St. Louis has the Arch, even Seattle has the CN Tower, San Francicso the Golden Gate Bridge and the Coit Tower (the former Prudential Building), Washington DC has tons of iconic buildings (they're on money, for crying out loud!).To compete with that, Pittsburgh's got yellow bridges (yes, I suppose they're nice to look at, and some of the buildings are nice, but I couldn't pick out that photo you posted). Dallas has a ball on a stick (Reunion Tower - part of the Hyatt Regency Hotel - and one of those revolving restaurants ), and Detroit has... Detroit has... I'm not sure. I guess the Renasance Center is kind of nice...I'd say, this country has, at most, five easily identifiable skylines - New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Seattle, San Fransisco and Washington DC. Beyond that, only in a regional sense are most other skylines at all recognizable...Moose CN Tower is in TorontoSeattle has the Space Needle.OMMF>You beat me to the CN Tower correction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paynomind Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 SInce you asked, No. I didnt have any idea what city you were showing me there with Detroit nor LA. I dont think I've ever seen those in pictures before.Nor Pittsburgh.But now that I've seen Pittsburghs, I will say it looks fairly nice, but nothing particualrly amazing or distinctive, like Chicago, San Fran, NYC, etc,. NCFA Sunset Beach Tech - Octopi  ΓΔΒ!  Going to college gets you closer to the real world, kind of like climbing a tree gets you closer to the moon. "...a nice illustration of what you get when skill, talent, and precedent are deducted from 'creativity.' " - James Howard Kunstler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcgd Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 I'll repeat...don't get offended because your hometown's skyline doesn't resonate with the rest of america. It takes a useless arch to give St. Louis Worldwide fame. It takes a revolving tourist attraction to put seattle on the map. Chicago and New Yorks though are some of the best in the world in looks and in their worldwide fame.It doesn't mean _________'s skyline isn't beatiful or full of charm or has unique characteristics. People are just saying not everyone knows about them.And I wasn't saying Miller Park was cool only because of tailgating and cheap parking. Again, its a nice stadium (to me) but not one of the best. I just like the roof. Someone said it was in a terrible location and I personaly feel the location is perfect becasue it allows you to park right near the stadium for cheap, tailgate, and go home without the traffic woes of Chicago/St.Louis/any downtown park. Even durinig sell outs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.