Jump to content

Twins Ballpark


no97

Recommended Posts

Any dumb person who is not aware that the Twins share their current stadium with another sports team named the Vikings will probably find this page amusing.

--Roger "Time?" Clemente.

HA!

Never thought about it like that.

"Controlled by Vikings"

:lol:

What's in YOUR luxury box?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You can have your open concourses. For my money, you can't beat the warning track folding chairs at Hawkinson Ford Field in Crestwood, IL. Home of the Windy City Thunderbolts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest fear as a baseball fan is that all of these "new" and "Unique" retro stadiums are doing nothing more than creating another generation of cookie cutters because they are all fundamentally alike. While I love the new Busch, it is one of the biggest culprits of this.

See, I realy don't understand this type of thinking... I don't recall that people felt Sportsman's Park, Crosley, Ebbets, and Shibe were "cookie-cutter" (or Wrigley and Fenway for that matter). The only reason that the parks mentioned were torn down was that, for the most part, the baseball and football teams that shared them wanted larger capacities. Cities, in turn, built multi-purpose (yes, "cookie-cutter") large capacity stadiums for those teams. The re-emergance of the "true" ballpark (while, yes, they are mostly retro, or now, starting to be modern again) is not "cookie-cutter," rather a return to the origional form of the stadia (i.e. a departure from multi-prupose). Seriously, what do you want someone to build, an erector set? A glorified high school bleachers with some suites tacked on top? Please. I'll gladly take a "cookie-cutter" ballpark (as you call it), over a "cookie-cutter" multi-purpose stadium anyday.

Moose

I'm going to take this opportunity to offer a slightly off-topic clarification. None of the neo-retro ballparks of the last 15 years qualify as "cookie cutter" parks. The term "cookie cutter" as applied to the multipurpose bowls of the late 60's and early 70's was used to describe the appearance of said parks from the air. When seen from above, the buildings looked like the metal implements most commonly in use at that time for the creation of uniformly-sized baked goods. Call them copycat if you must, "similarly inspired" if you choose, but please don't call them "cookie cutter."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest fear as a baseball fan is that all of these "new" and "Unique" retro stadiums are doing nothing more than creating another generation of cookie cutters because they are all fundamentally alike. While I love the new Busch, it is one of the biggest culprits of this.

See, I realy don't understand this type of thinking... I don't recall that people felt Sportsman's Park, Crosley, Ebbets, and Shibe were "cookie-cutter" (or Wrigley and Fenway for that matter). The only reason that the parks mentioned were torn down was that, for the most part, the baseball and football teams that shared them wanted larger capacities. Cities, in turn, built multi-purpose (yes, "cookie-cutter") large capacity stadiums for those teams. The re-emergance of the "true" ballpark (while, yes, they are mostly retro, or now, starting to be modern again) is not "cookie-cutter," rather a return to the origional form of the stadia (i.e. a departure from multi-prupose). Seriously, what do you want someone to build, an erector set? A glorified high school bleachers with some suites tacked on top? Please. I'll gladly take a "cookie-cutter" ballpark (as you call it), over a "cookie-cutter" multi-purpose stadium anyday.

Moose

I'm going to take this opportunity to offer a slightly off-topic clarification. None of the neo-retro ballparks of the last 15 years qualify as "cookie cutter" parks. The term "cookie cutter" as applied to the multipurpose bowls of the late 60's and early 70's was used to describe the appearance of said parks from the air. When seen from above, the buildings looked like the metal implements most commonly in use at that time for the creation of uniformly-sized baked goods. Call them copycat if you must, "similarly inspired" if you choose, but please don't call them "cookie cutter."

That is exactly my point...

Seriously, what do you want someone to build, an erector set? A glorified high school bleachers with some suites tacked on top?

What about Petco Park, which is modern and unique?

Nothing... As noted, I'm advocating building ballparks, nothing more, nothing less. In fact, I even said:

they are mostly retro, or now, starting to be modern again

Nothing wrong with modern and unique... As long as it's a ballpark...

Moose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait its beautiful it will be one of the best in baseball. One fan has suggested putting the flag pole that was in the old met in the new stadium. That would bring some historical flare to the new digs. I always remember my dad telling me stories sitting with his dad in the cheap seats at the old met drinking beer and having a good time. When the new stadium opens hopefully that family tradition can carry on in the new stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, what do you want someone to build, an erector set? A glorified high school bleachers with some suites tacked on top?

What about Petco Park, which is modern and unique?

Nothing... As noted, I'm advocating building ballparks, nothing more, nothing less. In fact, I even said:

they are mostly retro, or now, starting to be modern again

Nothing wrong with modern and unique... As long as it's a ballpark...

Moose

Is this Twins park not a ballpark?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is. The point being that the Twins currently play in a football stadium/monster truck venue, NOT a ballpark.

Bingo - Sobriquet! needs to read my initial post. I was talking about multi-purpose stadiums as opposed to ballparks. The Twins are getting a ballpark, and that is a good thing!

Moose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I see now. Sorry.

Hey, speaking of Kauffman earlier, one change I would make would be to move that left field screen to center and replace the crown scoreboard, which I feel is more dated than it is timeless. Add some more fountains in left and bring more symmetry to it. Everything else is great. I like the light structures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on a ballpark related subject, I would like to see the marlins new ballpark exhibit an art-deco south beach look, complete with pastel tones, stucco, and even neon lighting and signage. I think it can be pulled off in a way that conveys traditional and modern much in the same way these preliminary plans for the twins ballpark do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on a ballpark related subject, I would like to see the marlins new ballpark exhibit an art-deco south beach look, complete with pastel tones, stucco, and even neon lighting and signage. I think it can be pulled off in a way that conveys traditional and modern much in the same way these preliminary plans for the twins ballpark do.

The problem with that is that outside of South Beach, which is only a few square miles, there is no Art Deco in Miami. An art deco structure downtown wouldn't work IMO.

These renderings for the Twins Ballpark remind me of Metropolitan Stadium with the stands in leftfield and the 60s look. Personally I like this design a lot, especially the use of glass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to bring up the Marlins possible ballpark again, but I'd like to see them go with something like the style at Disney's Baseball Stadium, but on a larger scale for a major-league sized ballpark. it conveys the Florida area and has some good quirks as well.

cracker_jack_9.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.