From WCBS880:The parking lot is almost complete and there is no longer any evidence that another baseball stadium once sat on the site next to CitiField. Soon, the final parking spaces will occupy the location once occupied by Shea Stadium, Tom Kaminski, flying high in Chopper 880, snapped these photographs on Thursday, May 21, 2009.
And here's photos of the markers placed to commemorate where the bases were.
52 comments:
Shea what? As if those little markers in the middle of all those parking spaces are a respectful reminder of the previous stadium location. I'll bet they are hard to find and will eventually be paved over or worn out.
The Bloomturd administration once again demonstrates that it could care less about the feelings of Met fans and the citizens of Queens and this city!
Actually the wilpons are as much to blame. Considering the amazing events that shea was host to over the years this is a cheap, pitiful rememberance.
And the new stadium, with all of the advertising signs. is butt ugly! Did Toby (The Teabag) Stashitsky pose for it?
This is just another historical slight for the people of Queens. Our elected officials dare not make a move unless it is blessed by King Turdberg. Tony Avella will get my vote and I will advocate for him until election time.
The good news is that people are paying attention and agreeing with me. The bad news is that all of the media are bought and sold. Can someone explain to me why this is a fair mayoral election???
Oh my god, GROW UP people.
Did I enjoy going to Shea? Yes. Did it have a certain amount of history? No doubt. But was it an ideal place to watch a baseball game? No, not really. And was it in need of replacement? It sure was. I've only been in the new one once, for an exhibition game but I thought it was a vast improvement. My buddy, who has a couple of very young sons, was excited that his boys were going to grow up going there and it was going to be THEIR ballpark.
There are only a few markers in the parking lot where the stadium used to be? Oh booo hooo hooo. To the best of my knowledge there's not much more than that where Ebbets Field or the Polo Grounds stood. If you go to Chicago and take in a White Sox game you'll find a plaque in the parking lot marking the former home plate of Comiskey Park. That and a couple of painted foul lines. Even though, as my dad said, taking some practice swings, that's where Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb played. And where they had Disco Demolition Night for godssake.
Who knew New Yorkers were such whiners.
Maybe Ridgewoodian can explain why the taxpayers had to pay for a grown man's hobby and why he's ok with this being used as an excuse to displace the businesses across the street. Or will he pull the "greater good" Bloombergian bullshit out of his ass?
Hey Ridgewoodian---
In the upcoming mayoral election, how many times do you plan to pull the lever for Bloomturd?
You call us whiners but you are such a hypocrite. You say, "My buddy, who has a couple of very young sons, was excited that his boys were going to grow up going there and it was going to be THEIR ballpark." But you criticize those of us who saw Shea as OUR ballpark and lambast our concerns for the lack of recognition for the site on the part of the ballpark owners AND the city.
You all just love to whine and complain about everything. Shea was horrible. It was ugly, the seats were uncomfortable, they positioned you away from the infield, it was drab. You went from the worst ballpark in baseball to a new state-of-the-art ballpark. The Mets invested hundreds of millions of their own money into this, which created lots of jobs and business for Queens.
NY isn't filled with a bunch of whiners, this blog is filled with a bunch of whiners.
The job creation claims by the two baseball teams who got new stadiums was pretty much disproven by the media and politicians. And with their dismal ticket sales and treating their long-time "regular" fans like crap, it's pretty clear that this was all a sham.
Sorry, I prefer going to a game and not being distracted by commercialism in every single square inch of space.
Both Yankee Stadium and Citi Field have smaller capacities than their predecessors, which some in baseball say partly accounts for lower averages. But neither team has sold out since the opening games of their new ballparks.
You don't want to see lots of ads at ballparks? What in the world are you talking about? Ballparks have always had tons of advertising. Look at old pictures from the 40s and 50s of Ebbets Field, Yankee Stadium, etc. There were ads all over the place - on the outfield walls, behind the bleachers, everywhere.
I agree that ads are to be expected but Citifield has HUGE billboards on the north end and it is hard to tell that there is a stadium behind them. These displays are obnoxious. The ads at the old stadiums were pretty much on the outfield fences and not "everywhere" as the previous poster suggests. The Citifield advertising is far more prolific and did not have a positive impact on high ticket prices.
Also, the abundance of food courts distract from the purpose of being at the stadium...to watch a ballgame. A pal of mine brought his son to a game and was upset at the prices of just about everything at the stadium. He said that cheap snacks were virtually non-existent.
Then he told me something that I wasn't expecting...his seats were crap. He and his son could not see the entire field and missed an exciting play. I was under the impression that all of the seats at the new facility were comfortable with great sight lines.
Although his remarks were consistent with similar comments on this site and others, I will attend a game and formulate my own opinion of the new field. However, the lack of respect for the former Shea Stadium is typical of the city's lack of concern for historical sights.
Look at old pictures from the 40s and 50s of Ebbets Field, Yankee Stadium, etc. There were ads all over the place - on the outfield walls, behind the bleachers, everywhere.
I'm looking but I don't see ads "all over the place" like at Citifield so I suggest that you rethink your comment. Here are links to Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds. A little different than the corporate shrine that is Citifield.
http://www.ballparks.com/baseball/national/ebbets.htm
http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/past/PoloGrounds.htm
http://www.ballparks.com/baseball/american/yankee.htm
I guess the word whiner has replaced Archie Bunker on the Queenscrap blog site.
It doesn't matter where the ads are because none of us can afford to go. Baseball is for families with children, not for a bunch of over-fed plutocrats.
These rip-offs are a further sign of the hostility of this city towards ordinary people. I hope that the management of both ball teams and the Bloomberg administration go down in flames.
Sure, there were no ads at Ebbets Field:
http://www.baseballforum.com/attachments/baseball-history-teams-yester-year/214d1152685397-brooklyn-dodgers-1957-ebbets-field-color-postcad.jpg
Or at Polo Grounds:
http://www.dugout-memories.com/goffpol3.jpg
Or the original Yankee Stadium:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2051/2211098529_f533e5a21f.jpg
Wow, some of you are just clueless.
Major League Baseball is not a government controlled entity. The government does not tell private sports and entertainment businesses how much to charge for tickets. If the teams can sell the tickets for those prices, then there are lots of people who are willing to pay to enjoy the game. Don't lash out with bitterness because you are not one of them. Bleacher seats are around $15, what is wrong with that?
"Wow, some of you are just clueless."
Like yourself? Nobody said that the old stadiums had no advertising but it is the size of the billboards and the amount that seem to concern us. The advertisements back then pale by comparison to the obnoxious displays at Shitty Field. Did you have reading comprehension problems all of your life? Did your parents have any children who were not born brain dead?
Bleacher seats are around $15, what is wrong with that?
THERE AREN'T ENOUGH OF THEM!!!
The size of the billboards are a problem? Thanks for another unintelligent comment. Did you even look at the pictures of the old stadiums? Old Yankee Stadium had a huge Longines clock ad right on the front when you walked in! Please know what you are talking about before you comment again.
The clock on the outside of Yankee Stadium was huge. The Longines name was under it. Not 10-foot tall cartoon characters and whatnot. Even so, a wise decision was made to remove it.
The current billboards outside CitiField look ridiculous. They are meant to catch the eye of drivers on the highways, not fans. Baseball stadiums are not built to be roadside ad aggregators.
They are appropriate, however, when your stadium is less a place to play ball and more a monument to corporate greed.
Since we the taxpayers own the stadium which is built on our parkland, do we also get the revenue collected from those billboards? That money could do a lot to fix up FMCP!
Did you even look at the pictures of the old stadiums?
Yes and Shitty Field has a plethora of HUGE signs. None of the venerable stadiums ever looked like the crap that is Shea's replacement. I remember the Longines sign and it was the only large sign but not nearly as large as what we have to look at when we approach the stadium from the north and the Longines sign was functional as it told time. Shitty Field has dozens of signs, some larger than Longines. Here is a link:
http://www.designdepot.com/store/media/OldYankeeOutside.jpg
What drugs are you on?
Please know what you are talking about before you comment again.
A comment from a true jerk off. Must be Evan. His Mom probably gave him a homework assignment to post idiotic comments on the Queens Crap blog to upset the masses during the long Holiday weekend! Evan...don't forget the talc!
"Since we the taxpayers own the stadium which is built on our parkland, do we also get the revenue collected from those billboards?"
Another reason to BRING IN THE FEDS!!!!!!!!
Do you have any idea how ridiculous you sound trying to argue that Citi Field is wrong to have very big signs because old ballparks didn't have huge signs, even though the old ballparks had tons of big signs all over the place? If these signs affect your enjoyment of watching baseball when you are sitting in the ballpark watching the game, then you have personal issues that you should try to deal with in private.
We get it. You want us to accept an eyesore that was partially funded by our own money. What difference does it make if the it is a new stadium or an old stadium? Did the extra revenue help keep ticket prices lower? I don't think so.
Who is benefiting from Shea's replacement? It is a friggin' ball park and people go there to see a baseball game or other event. With all of the food courts, advertising, and other amenities, the focus is money driven and not sports driven. Most families in Queens cannot afford to go to the games now, especially in this poor economic climate!
Now go away and let the adults have their say.
Look at all the oversized billboards on top of the old Ebbets Field! The Wilpons really paid homage to the place by rebuilding CitiField as a temple to corporate greed.
Alan: Hey Ridgewoodian--- In the upcoming mayoral election, how many times do you plan to pull the lever for Bloomturd?
Well, Alan, since as far as I know there’s no one named “Bloomturd” running for Mayor I probably won’t be pulling the lever for him at all. But maybe you’re referring to Mike BloomBERG and just being juvenile about it. If that’s the case, well, I haven’t made up my mind. He’s done things I’ve liked, he’s done things I’ve hated. Not that it’s any of your business at all but I didn’t vote for him either of the last two times. So your apparent attempt to characterize me as a Bloomberg lackey sinks on the rocks of fact.
Alan: …you criticize those of us who saw Shea as OUR ballpark
Not at all. Even though I grew up for my first 18 years in New England and it took me a LONG time to get over 1986 I eventually came to embrace and love the Mets and I spent a lot of time at Shea, especially in the last five or six years. Even when the Mets were at their worst - and I once saw them surrender a late eight run lead to the NATIONALS and lose in extra innings - I always had a blast. On a lark I once applied to be a Party Patrol person - I wanted to get my hands on one of those tee shirt bazookas. I grew to love the whole Shea experience even though I knew the building itself was aesthetically undistinguished and not particularly ideal for watching baseball.
Alan: …and lambast [sic] our concerns for the lack of recognition for the site on the part of the ballpark owners AND the city.
I wonder just what it is you’re looking for. The sites of former ballparks that I’ve seen myself - Comiskey in Chicago, the Vet in Philadelphia - are marked with little more than plaques. That seems to be the standard practice. That’s what the Mets have done. What else do you want?
Anonymous: Maybe Ridgewoodian can explain why the taxpayers had to pay for a grown man's hobby…
Wasn’t that a criticism of Shea Stadium itself? Let’s not forget - it was built and owned by the city; the Mets were merely tenants all those years. You know, I’ve read pages and pages of drivel here over the months about how tickets at CitiField should be free because the taxpayers built it - but I never saw anything similar about Shea. The financing of the place was complicated, to be sure, but my understanding is that the Mets will be paying the city back with interest. But even if they didn’t I’ve always said that sport is an important part of our culture - going all the way back to the days of the Greeks, who wrote some of their best poetry about Olympian victors - and is as worthy of a degree of public support as any other art. (The Metropolitan Opera gets plenty of tax dollars yet somehow I’ve always had to pay them for tickets.)
Anonymous:…and why he's ok with this being used as an excuse to displace the businesses across the street.
Don’t think I mentioned the chop shops in my first post. But the Iron Triangle is an incredible eyesore.
Oh, so if something is an eyesore (only to baseball fans who spend 3-4 hours there per month on average), even though it is that way because of a lack of municipal services going back decades, it should be eminent domained and taken care of. Thanks for clearing up your position for us.
Anonymous: Sorry, I prefer going to a game and not being distracted by commercialism in every single square inch of space.
Well then I would you suggest you move to the North Side of Chicago. These are the major league ballparks I’ve been in: Shea Stadium, CitiField, Old Yankee Stadium (’76-’08 version), Fenway Park, Camden Yards, the Rogers Centre (formerly the SkyDome), U.S. Cellular Field (formerly New Comiskey Park), Citizens Bank Park, and Wrigley Field. Not all of the parks in the Show, but a decent cross-section. With the exception of Wrigley ALL of them are or were plastered all over with advertisements. (If you’re a baseball fan you really should treat yourself to a game at the Friendly Confines - the park is clean and beautiful, with few ads and no blaring music, the sightlines are decent as long as you’re not under the roof, the neighborhood around it is fantastic, and the fans are really cool.) Even sainted Shea. And let’s not forget, during the 90s there was years of controversy over the giant Marlboro billboard. Given that context I don’t find the CitiField ads particularly egregious. Sure, it would be nice if the place were pure, like Wrigley, but that’s just not going to happen. And I will say this: the neon Pepsi sign is actually quite beautiful (and a tribute to the landmark Long Island City Pepsi sign).
Anonymous: NY isn't filled with a bunch of whiners, this blog is filled with a bunch of whiners.
Point well taken. Thank you.
Once again, the obtuse Ridgewoodian fails to understand that what people on this blog are taking umbrage with is the plastering of gigantic billboards on the outside of the ballpark. No other stadium looks like this and it's quite fugly.
Anonymous: Once again, the obtuse Ridgewoodian fails to understand that what people on this blog are taking umbrage with is the plastering of gigantic billboards on the outside of the ballpark. No other stadium looks like this and it's quite fugly.Granted, I’ve yet to circumambulate the whole of CitiField but thus far I’ve yet to encounter any outside advertising as huge and noticeable as the old Banco Popular/Chase/Citi Bank ad that graced the outfield at Shea and was apparently there for those of us coming off the 7 train. I know there’s no arguing matters of taste but if you honestly think CitiField is fugly, especially in comparison to what it replaced, you, my friend, have no taste at all.
Anonymous Oh, so if something is an eyesore (only to baseball fans who spend 3-4 hours there per month on average), even though it is that way because of a lack of municipal services going back decades, it should be eminent domained and taken care of. Thanks for clearing up your position for us.
Aside from the bit about it being an eyesore - which it is, and not just to baseball fans but to everyone who might pass by it - did I write anything to that effect? No. Thanks for attempting to put words in my mouth.
I would love to see a Wrigleyville in Flushing, but I’m not holding my breath on that. Something, though, needs to be done about the Iron Triangle. Yes, it’s unappealing to the senses. From what I understand it’s completely polluted. I was at a car dealership in Woodside on Saturday and the dealer was telling us how cars are stolen off their lots and a lot of them end up in the Willets Point chop shops. So something should be done about that, too. Oh, and I’m pretty sure it’s crawling with damn foreigners, probably a lot of them illegal. How about if Bloomberg came out against doing anything there? Would you then be for it?
Bloomturd should provide the infrastructure that has been lacking for the past few decades and then leave it alone and the eyesore will take care of itself. So what if it's polluted? It was an M3 zone and I would be surprised if it weren't contaminated. That's why we put industrial zones far away from where people live. Bloomturd wants to take that land and have people live on it. Stupid? Yes, very.
Look at all the oversized billboards on top of the old Ebbets Field!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I looked and saw the lighting stanchions. Have you had your eyes checked lately? Perhaps you should do that after you've had your head examined since you are obviously hallucinating in order to make your point!
"Alan: …and lambast [sic] our concerns for the lack of recognition for the site on the part of the ballpark owners AND the city.
I wonder just what it is you’re looking for. The sites of former ballparks that I’ve seen myself - Comiskey in Chicago, the Vet in Philadelphia - are marked with little more than plaques. That seems to be the standard practice. That’s what the Mets have done. What else do you want?"
I think that Met fans who came to games in all sorts of weather and circumstances deserve a lot better than those little markers in the parking lot! Maybe you don't feel such a strong connection to the former ballfield but many of would like to see a little more than what we have been given.
What's with the use of sic? Perhaps it is evidence of your sick mind?
from Wikipedia: "Sic is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", "as such", or "in such a manner". In writing, it is placed within square brackets and usually italicized – [sic] – to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, punctuation, and/or other preceding quoted material has been reproduced verbatim from the quoted original and is not a transcription error.[1]"
My usage of the word lambast was correct as was the spelling.
"Granted, I’ve yet to circumambulate the whole of CitiField but thus far I’ve yet to encounter any outside advertising as huge and noticeable as the old Banco Popular/Chase/Citi Bank ad that graced the outfield at Shea and was apparently there for those of us coming off the 7 train."
So you admit that you are forming opinions without fully investigating the humongous billboards that we feel are eyesores. Way to go! What other opinions have you given to this forum that are not based on fact or personal observation???
Look at all the oversized billboards on top of the old Ebbets Field!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I looked and saw the lighting stanchions. Have you had your eyes checked lately?That was sarcasm. Sorry you missed it.
Alan: What's with the use of sic?
That was to show my disagreement with your use of the word "lambast."
You still didn't say how you wanted Shea to be commemorated. Mets fans deserve more? Fine. What? What exactly would make you quit whining?
And these "humongous billboards" of which you speak? I assume you mean the ones in right and center field? Sure, I'd like to see the one in right gone since it blocks the view of those waiting on line at the Shake Shack and the beer stand. (Of course that would open up a vista of the lovely Iron Triangle so maybe it's a good thing it's there.) As for being visable from the outside, so what if it is? I really don't see how it's any WORSE than the former huge ads they had at Shea and the place is STILL a thousand times more beautiful than Shea ever was.
Alan: What's with the use of sic?
That was to show my disagreement with your use of the word "lambast."
Unbelievable!!! Now you are trying to dictate what words that I choose to use in my missives? Are you absurd?
ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Verb 1. lambast - beat with a cane
cane, lambaste, flog
beat up, work over, beat - give a beating to; subject to a beating, either as a punishment or as an act of aggression; "Thugs beat him up when he walked down the street late at night"; "The teacher used to beat the students"
2. lambast - censure severely or angrily; "The mother scolded the child for entering a stranger's car"; "The deputy ragged the Prime Minister"; "The customer dressed down the waiter for bringing cold soup"
call on the carpet, chew out, chew up, chide, dress down, have words, bawl out, berate, reproof, scold, take to task, rebuke, reprimand, call down, lambaste, lecture, remonstrate, trounce, jaw, rag
castigate, chasten, chastise, objurgate, correct - censure severely; "She chastised him for his insensitive remarks"
brush down, tell off - reprimand; "She told the misbehaving student off"
criticise, criticize, pick apart, knock - find fault with; express criticism of; point out real or perceived flaws; "The paper criticized the new movie"; "Don't knock the food--it's free"
Just because you may not agree with the opinion that I am espousing doesn't mean that you can criticize (or lambast) the use of the word that I used...LAMBAST. Get the point?
As far as recognition for Shea, it would be more appropriate to have reminders that are more than just markers in the parking lot that will get trampled and/or driven on until they wear out. A concrete block with a bronze plaque wouldn't be a bad idea. What I see at present is inappropriate for a venue that not only hosted the Mets and Jets, but many major rock acts including the Beatles, Rolling Stones, the Who, Simon & Garfunkel, and Billy Joel...just to name a few. Shea was an important part of many lives, especially those who grew up in Queens. It deserves more!!!
Finally, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and Shea had a special appeal to me, especially the neon figures that adorned the outside of the stadium. It may not have been the greatest ballpark but it served its purpose and looked good to me, better than the corporate structure that replaced it. I am entitled to an opinion, or do you wish to dictate what I should think and write as well???
If you can't be an athlete, you can always be an athletic supporter!
You are entitled to your wrong opinion Alan, I just hope you know that you are one of the only people in the world who think Shea was better looking than Citi Field. Your whole billboard nonsense is just a reason to complain, nothing more.
Citifield reminds me of a fake-feel stadium from the midwest.
PNC anyone?
PNC is actually a nicer park and has a better view
"You are entitled to your wrong opinion Alan, I just hope you know that you are one of the only people in the world who think Shea was better looking than Citi Field. Your whole billboard nonsense is just a reason to complain, nothing more."
First of all, there is no such thing as a "wrong" opinion so right from the get go you are showing that your intention in this post is to demean my attempt to suggest that Shea deserved better than the current parking lot "tributes". Also, judging from other contributions to this thread, there are several others who appear to agree that the new stadium is not aesthetically pleasing. I was not the person who called it fugly, for example. Of course, it would be a lot more difficult for you to call out someone named anonymous, right? Oh wait, that is what you are calling yourself. How brave!
Is it too much to ask?
http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/past/ebbets2.jpg
http://members.tripod.com/franksballparks/polo2.jpg
Personally, I couldn't care less about the ads. I hope they help defray the cost of the tickets.
What I can't stand is when these stadiums usurp public land, gobble up cash from city taxes that could fund actual public benefits, and then reduce the number of seats as well.
What a fine how-do-you-do to families. Baseball is eating its seed-corn by making this a sport for decrepit old businessmen instead of entertainment for families with children. When the old geezers drop dead, the kids will be watching X-sports instead.
What most of you miss is how the baseball business has changed since the stadiums built in the 1970s and before, like Shea was.
The advent of free agency in the mid-70s revolutionized the economics of baseball. Before that, team owners basically owned their players, and paid them ridiculously low salaries considering their talents. A superstar like Willie Mays or Mickey Mantle could get a $100,000 a year salary, and the average salary in the 1960s was probably around $25,000. Most players had to take jobs in the off-season. It was because the owners exploited their players that they were able to charge affordable ticket prices and not have advertisements everywhere you looked (not to mention selling the stadium's name to the highest bidder).
Free agency changed baseball's economics by 180 degrees. Now the players hold the upper hand, and boy have they used it. I don't begrudge superstars making super salaries, but when mediocrities earn millions of dollars a year, something is out of whack.
Nevertheless, that's the reality of the situation. Ticket prices, parking, food, souvenirs, etc. all cost much more today because players cost much more. You may not like all the advertising, but it does help pay the bills.
The world changes, sometimes not the way we like it. Nothing you can do about it. If you don't want to pay to see the Mets, stay home and watch it on TV or listen to the radio. And don't romanticize Shea - it was never more than an okay place to watch baseball. I have lots of memories about Shea, too, which is fine. But it's time has come and gone. Citi Field isn't perfect, but it's an improvement on Shea.
Post a Comment