Rays seem ready to dump Devil

[BallWonk]

But nobody has really followed the White Sox's attempt to put a human face on the concrete-block style, what with it being a complete failure and all.

It wasn't a failure at all. It is obvious that if you believe it, you have never been there since the changes, and likely haven't even seen a game from the new version. I have been to many ballparks, and I can say that US Cellular is a nice park. It isn't AT&T, it isn't PNC, and it isn't Camden Yards. It doesn't matter. USCF if a downtown ballpark with lots of parking, which isn't that common. It's in a nice, budding neighborhood. It is more of a residential area, but there are still bars and restaurants within walking distance from the park. The park looks like a park (green seats and walls instead of bright blue). Bricks were added in many places, and the biggest change was the upperdeck. They took off several rows, and added an overhanging roof to make it more intimate. It is a great baseball experience. And to those who want to talk about the upperdeck - it still isn't as steep as Jacobs Field of Coors Field. Lots of changes have been made to the park to make it more "fan-friendly", and it is nothing like the massive, blue bowl that opened up in 1991. It may not be a "classical" or "classic retro" park, but it is still a great experience and a very successful conversion.

I lived in Chicago a few years back, and all I can say is that New Comiskey, or whatever it's called these days -- I can never keep the corporate-sponsor ballpark names straight -- is a fine ballpark. If your baseline of comparison is the Metrodome, as mine was at the time. But it provides a "great experience" pretty much exactly like RFK has these last three years. Would I ever say to myself, "Gosh, I sure would love to watch a ballgame at New Comiskey"? No, of course not, because it's simply not a very good park, unless you have seats near the field in the lower bowl. But would I ever say to myself, "The Sox are in town and I've got a free evening, but that ballpark sucks so much I'll just stay in my hotel room and watch the game on TV"? No, it's not nearly that bad at all.

Anyway, by "complete failure" I meant several things:

1. The new park failed to improve on most of the negative aspects of the old park, and in fact made some of them worse. In the ways that old Comiskey was a crummy place to see a ballgame, so was New Comiskey.

2. Not one team, as far as I can tell, has ever looked to New Comiskey as inspiration for its own new park. Great ballparks get copied. Good ballparks get referenced. New Comiskey has been neither copied nor referenced.

3. The fact that such radical changes had to be made to the park so early in its usable lifespan is evidence that the park as built was not a success. Things that ain't broke don't get that expensively fixed. The improvements have made a big difference, but it boils down to the kid who thinks he's a genius for passing tenth grade the second time around.

4. As a bonus, when I lived in Chicago some years back, most of my White Sox fan friends constantly harped about how much they preferred old Comiskey to the new park, yet most of them also rated old Comiskey as a crummy ballpark. That's a strong vote of no-confidence, and though this is entirely anecdotal, it was a nearly ubiquitous opinion among my several circles of acquaintances at the time.

But by "complete failure" I didn't mean that it was like crumbling to the ground or that a fan couldn't have a great time there. Just that its place in history doesn't mark it as a success, and exceedingly few people who have visited several ballparks and are not diehard White Sox fans or Chicago natives rank New Comiskey among their favorite ballparks. New Comiskey is no Metrodome or Tropicana Field, but the fact that there are worse failures doesn't make New Comiskey a great success. And no offense or denigration of New Comiskey meant -- there have been so many really good parks built since New Comiskey that it's easy to forget how many much worse parks there were at the time. When New Comiskey was built, building a C-minus park seemed like an improvement; now it's a failing grade.

Back on topic, I believe it was said earlier in this thread that the new Rays identity is likely to be announced the week of the Buccaneers' bye week. November something or another, if I recall; check the NFL schedule for the precise week.

[Survival79]

Back on topic, I believe it was said earlier in this thread that the new Rays identity is likely to be announced the week of the Buccaneers' bye week. November something or another, if I recall; check the NFL schedule for the precise week.

The Bucs' bye week is week 10.

According to Paul Lukas, they will be unveiled November 8th. And then there is this from today's Uni Watch blog entry:

Uni Watch News Ticker: I have seen the new Devil Rays uniforms. Can?t show them to you, but I can confirm what?s been reported (the team is now just the Rays) and what?s been rumored (the new colors are navy, yellow, and light blue). As for the design, it?s a total snooze ? not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring. I already miss the current design, which I think has been badly underrated (esp. the home set).

[leopard88]

Uni Watch News Ticker:As for the design, it?s a total snooze ? not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring.

I'm suddenly having visions of the late 80s Mariners set. Those unis certainly fit the "not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring" description.

[dahatman]

Back on topic, I believe it was said earlier in this thread that the new Rays identity is likely to be announced the week of the Buccaneers' bye week. November something or another, if I recall; check the NFL schedule for the precise week.

The Bucs' bye week is week 10.

According to Paul Lukas, they will be unveiled November 8th. And then there is this from today's Uni Watch blog entry:

Uni Watch News Ticker: I have seen the new Devil Rays uniforms. Can?t show them to you, but I can confirm what?s been reported (the team is now just the Rays) and what?s been rumored (the new colors are navy, yellow, and light blue). As for the design, it?s a total snooze ? not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring. I already miss the current design, which I think has been badly underrated (esp. the home set).

If the uni's are truly boring then ownership really dropped the ball on this one and shows the lack of creativity from MLB. But then again, if the name is now going to the "Tampa Bay Rays" a boring uniform should accompany a boring name. At least the team colors are not red/brick, blue/navy, gold/sand.

[powersurge]

But nobody has really followed the White Sox's attempt to put a human face on the concrete-block style, what with it being a complete failure and all.

It wasn't a failure at all. It is obvious that if you believe it, you have never been there since the changes, and likely haven't even seen a game from the new version. I have been to many ballparks, and I can say that US Cellular is a nice park. It isn't AT&T, it isn't PNC, and it isn't Camden Yards. It doesn't matter. USCF if a downtown ballpark with lots of parking, which isn't that common. It's in a nice, budding neighborhood. It is more of a residential area, but there are still bars and restaurants within walking distance from the park. The park looks like a park (green seats and walls instead of bright blue). Bricks were added in many places, and the biggest change was the upperdeck. They took off several rows, and added an overhanging roof to make it more intimate. It is a great baseball experience. And to those who want to talk about the upperdeck - it still isn't as steep as Jacobs Field of Coors Field. Lots of changes have been made to the park to make it more "fan-friendly", and it is nothing like the massive, blue bowl that opened up in 1991. It may not be a "classical" or "classic retro" park, but it is still a great experience and a very successful conversion.

I lived in Chicago a few years back, and all I can say is that New Comiskey, or whatever it's called these days -- I can never keep the corporate-sponsor ballpark names straight -- is a fine ballpark. If your baseline of comparison is the Metrodome, as mine was at the time. But it provides a "great experience" pretty much exactly like RFK has these last three years. Would I ever say to myself, "Gosh, I sure would love to watch a ballgame at New Comiskey"? No, of course not, because it's simply not a very good park, unless you have seats near the field in the lower bowl. But would I ever say to myself, "The Sox are in town and I've got a free evening, but that ballpark sucks so much I'll just stay in my hotel room and watch the game on TV"? No, it's not nearly that bad at all.

I actually feel this exact sentiment about Yankee Stadium.

Hear me out on this one....I know the history and all...Ruth...homeruns...Gehrig....disease...blah blah blah. But separate yourself from the history of the team and more importantly the ballpark. In other words "What it used to be" as opposed to what it IS now, and make an unbiased assessment of it as just a "ballpark".

I personally think the stadium is horrible. Its a bad stadium in a bad neighborhood with absolutely ZERO character. I actually believe that Yankee Stadium and New Comiskey/(Insert your corporate name here) Stadium are extremely similar. I think the New Comiskey might have an edge because of the exploding scoreboard quite honestly.

So before we completely kill some of these stadiums lets give them some time to marinate with history and see what happens. I don't think the Trop has a chance either way, but imagine if the Rays won a couple of division titles and maybe just maybe an ALCS or two in their history. Sounds crazy, but it could have happened. Would people think differently of the Trop then? I guess what I'm asking is: Is it the TEAM that makes the ballpark? Or is it the BALLPARK that makes the team?

[leopard88]

I guess what I'm asking is: Is it the TEAM that makes the ballpark? Or is it the BALLPARK that makes the team?

Interesting question, that brings two thoughts to mind.

First, the Twins have won two World Series in the Metrodome, but their move into a new stadium can't come fast enough. In that case, the team has clearly not overcome the shortcomings of the stadium.

From personal experience, I loved Memorial Stadium. However, with the benefit of age, 20/20 hindsight and 16 seasons of the Orioles at Camden Yards, it is clear that the stadium was far from a classic. Despite that, the memories that the Colts and Orioles generated there made it a fan favorite. Meanwhile, the Orioles have had losing seasons in 11 of their 16 years at Camden Yards, yet few will disagree that it is an excellent ballpark.

Based on that limited sample, I think there is no easy answer. However, I suspect the team can do much more to make the ballpark than the ballpark can do to make the team.

[CubsFanBudMan]

powersurge, I've always thought New Comiskey was inspired by Renovated Yankee Stadium.

The point you bring up for the Rays is valid. I think of the Twins and their new stadium. They have had a real home field advantage over the years in the Metrodome, but will that work when they move into an open-air ballpark? I don't know.

The best thing the Rays could do is build a team for the Trop that other teams will have trouble with. Then your theory on whether success on the field has an effect on the perception of the field will be tested.

And "boring" is not what I wanted to hear about the new unis.

[Mac the Knife]

If the uni's are truly boring then ownership really dropped the ball on this one and shows the lack of creativity from MLB. But then again, if the name is now going to the "Tampa Bay Rays" a boring uniform should accompany a boring name. At least the team colors are not red/brick, blue/navy, gold/sand.

They dropped the ball on the name big time. Tampa Bay Stingrays would've worked far better, or Florida Flamingos, or just about any damned thing else. Every time I hear "Tampa Bay Rays" I get an image of Ray Romano in my head, or my brother in law Ray, or James Earl Ray, etc.

[Thunderstruk]

powersurge, I've always thought New Comiskey was inspired by Renovated Yankee Stadium.

The point you bring up for the Rays is valid. I think of the Twins and their new stadium. They have had a real home field advantage over the years in the Metrodome, but will that work when they move into an open-air ballpark? I don't know.

The best thing the Rays could do is build a team for the Trop that other teams will have trouble with. Then your theory on whether success on the field has an effect on the perception of the field will be tested.

And "boring" is not what I wanted to hear about the new unis.

New Comiskey was modeled after Royals stadium.

[TruColor]

Back on topic, I believe it was said earlier in this thread that the new Rays identity is likely to be announced the week of the Buccaneers' bye week. November something or another, if I recall; check the NFL schedule for the precise week.

The Bucs' bye week is week 10.

According to Paul Lukas, they will be unveiled November 8th. And then there is this from today's Uni Watch blog entry:

Uni Watch News Ticker: I have seen the new Devil Rays uniforms. Can?t show them to you, but I can confirm what?s been reported (the team is now just the Rays) and what?s been rumored (the new colors are navy, yellow, and light blue). As for the design, it?s a total snooze ? not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring. I already miss the current design, which I think has been badly underrated (esp. the home set).

I'll second what my buddy Paul says there.

[powersurge]

powersurge, I've always thought New Comiskey was inspired by Renovated Yankee Stadium.

The point you bring up for the Rays is valid. I think of the Twins and their new stadium. They have had a real home field advantage over the years in the Metrodome, but will that work when they move into an open-air ballpark? I don't know.

The best thing the Rays could do is build a team for the Trop that other teams will have trouble with. Then your theory on whether success on the field has an effect on the perception of the field will be tested.

And "boring" is not what I wanted to hear about the new unis.

I thought that too. I haven't fully researched it yet, but I believe it was modeled after Kauffman Stadium AND Yankee Stadium. I think the seats were modeled after Kauffman, while the outfield bleachers/ad walls above the stands were loosely modeled after Yankee Stadium. All in all, they probably took the worst parts of each and added an exploding scoreboard and POOF! New Comiskey Cellular Whatever the heck was born.

Back to the Rays...we've talked about this before in another long thread, but if the Marlins can win two WS titles in a decade or so and not get funding for a new stadium, the Rays don't stand a chance. Expect a mass Florida exodus within the next four or five years.

You hear that Portland and Las Vegas?!

[BallWonk]

First off, that's bad news that Pantone agrees with Paul. I love Paul's reporting, but I think he's got generally terrible taste, so I wasn't worried to hear him give the new Rays unis a solid "meh." But I respect Pantone's aesthetic judgment, so that's worrisome. Makes me glad the team didn't go with Stingrays, since that name needs great uniform design to really work. If they're not going to make great uniforms, better to stick with the safer name.

Back to the Rays...we've talked about this before in another long thread, but if the Marlins can win two WS titles in a decade or so and not get funding for a new stadium, the Rays don't stand a chance. Expect a mass Florida exodus within the next four or five years.

You hear that Portland and Las Vegas?!

The Rays have possibly the most ironclad lease in the big leagues for the Trop. The Rays will play in the Trop until 2027, or until local authorities volunteer to let the Rays go, whichever comes first, regardless of what the team wants.

So there are decent odds that, in a few years, Florida will have one city capable of supporting a big-league franchise in Miami and one big-league franchise in Tampa Bay. But Florida will not lose both of its big-league teams anytime soon.

[Gothamite]

I don't know about that, Wonk. If there was another potential relocation site, I think MLB would find a way out of that lease well before it runs out.

That is, to my mind, the only reason that Florida has a team at all, much less two: no obvious relocation alternatives.

[powersurge]

First off, that's bad news that Pantone agrees with Paul. I love Paul's reporting, but I think he's got generally terrible taste, so I wasn't worried to hear him give the new Rays unis a solid "meh." But I respect Pantone's aesthetic judgment, so that's worrisome. Makes me glad the team didn't go with Stingrays, since that name needs great uniform design to really work. If they're not going to make great uniforms, better to stick with the safer name.

Back to the Rays...we've talked about this before in another long thread, but if the Marlins can win two WS titles in a decade or so and not get funding for a new stadium, the Rays don't stand a chance. Expect a mass Florida exodus within the next four or five years.

You hear that Portland and Las Vegas?!

The Rays have possibly the most ironclad lease in the big leagues for the Trop. The Rays will play in the Trop until 2027, or until local authorities volunteer to let the Rays go, whichever comes first, regardless of what the team wants.

So there are decent odds that, in a few years, Florida will have one city capable of supporting a big-league franchise in Miami and one big-league franchise in Tampa Bay. But Florida will not lose both of its big-league teams anytime soon.

IDK what makes one lease more "iron clad" than another, but I do know that I've seen multiple examples of leases and/or contracts being broken over the years. That being said, I'm pretty sure if it was in the best interest for the Rays and MLB to move the team I'm pretty sure they'd find a way to do it. After what happened the other day with the Marlins game and the nearly 50 fans who were left watching the game, I can't see them keeping a team their for that much longer.

Its sad too because I really thought baseball would do very well in Miami considering the large amount of Hispanics and the growing popularity of baseball among Hispanics in America.

[Blackjack76]

Back on topic, I believe it was said earlier in this thread that the new Rays identity is likely to be announced the week of the Buccaneers' bye week. November something or another, if I recall; check the NFL schedule for the precise week.

The Bucs' bye week is week 10.

According to Paul Lukas, they will be unveiled November 8th. And then there is this from today's Uni Watch blog entry:

Uni Watch News Ticker: I have seen the new Devil Rays uniforms. Can?t show them to you, but I can confirm what?s been reported (the team is now just the Rays) and what?s been rumored (the new colors are navy, yellow, and light blue). As for the design, it?s a total snooze ? not wonderful, not awful, just booooooring. I already miss the current design, which I think has been badly underrated (esp. the home set).

I'll second what my buddy Paul says there.

I will third what my buddy PANTONE says, and I couldn't be more upset about it.

[marlinfan]

First off, that's bad news that Pantone agrees with Paul. I love Paul's reporting, but I think he's got generally terrible taste, so I wasn't worried to hear him give the new Rays unis a solid "meh." But I respect Pantone's aesthetic judgment, so that's worrisome. Makes me glad the team didn't go with Stingrays, since that name needs great uniform design to really work. If they're not going to make great uniforms, better to stick with the safer name.

Back to the Rays...we've talked about this before in another long thread, but if the Marlins can win two WS titles in a decade or so and not get funding for a new stadium, the Rays don't stand a chance. Expect a mass Florida exodus within the next four or five years.

You hear that Portland and Las Vegas?!

The Rays have possibly the most ironclad lease in the big leagues for the Trop. The Rays will play in the Trop until 2027, or until local authorities volunteer to let the Rays go, whichever comes first, regardless of what the team wants.

So there are decent odds that, in a few years, Florida will have one city capable of supporting a big-league franchise in Miami and one big-league franchise in Tampa Bay. But Florida will not lose both of its big-league teams anytime soon.

IDK what makes one lease more "iron clad" than another, but I do know that I've seen multiple examples of leases and/or contracts being broken over the years. That being said, I'm pretty sure if it was in the best interest for the Rays and MLB to move the team I'm pretty sure they'd find a way to do it. After what happened the other day with the Marlins game and the nearly 50 fans who were left watching the game, I can't see them keeping a team their for that much longer.

Its sad too because I really thought baseball would do very well in Miami considering the large amount of Hispanics and the growing popularity of baseball among Hispanics in America.

Based on what is going on behind the scenes, you are wrong.

[Gothamite]

Based on what is going on behind the scenes, you are wrong.

Stuff's been "going on behind the scenes" for years. Nothing concrete has ever materialized from these behind-the-scenes meetings, and there's no real reason to believe that this time will be any different.

I'd love to be wrong about the Marlins. But the history is very consistent, and very clear.

[TheOldRoman]

Ballwonk -

I thought you were referring to the renovations are a failure, not the original construction. I was merely saying that the renovations were an overwhelming success. They didn't make it Camden Yards, but they did make it a much, much better place to watch a game. Obviously, there were a lot of problems with the original structure. But they Sox were just victims of bad timing. If the classical parks didn't come around in the next decade, New Comiskey would have been a marvel for several years. It was state of the art at the time, but it soon went out of style.

There is at least one thing other parks took from Comiskey II. It was the first park to have a concourse connect all the way around the lower deck. Most of the new parks have that now.

[Gothamite]

Yeah, it went out of style after less than a year. Classical parks didn't come around "in the next decade", they came around the following season.

When New Comiskey was opened, it was already obsolete - the construction of Camden Yards (the future of baseball stadiums) was already underway. Staggeringly bad luck on the part of the Sox, they were unable to anticipate the revolution that was right about to start.

I haven't been to it since the renovations were made, but if for no other reason than they had to make such renovations I don't think anyone can seriously debate Wonk's statement that the original building was a failure.

[TheOldRoman]

Yeah, it went out of style after less than a year. Classical parks didn't come around "in the next decade", they came around the following season.

When New Comiskey was opened, it was already obsolete - the construction of Camden Yards (the future of baseball stadiums) was already underway. Staggeringly bad luck on the part of the Sox, they were unable to anticipate the revolution that was right about to start.

I haven't been to it since the renovations were made, but if for no other reason than they had to make such renovations I don't think anyone can seriously debate Wonk's statement that the original building was a failure.

His quote was "But nobody has really followed the White Sox's attempt to put a human face on the concrete-block style, what with it being a complete failure and all." I read that as meaning the attempt to put a human face on the stadium, or the renovations, failed. That is what I was contesting. I am not claiming the design wasn't flawed in the beginning.