And what was the last time a new pro sports venue was named for anything other than a company?
Possibly not the first, but we can start with either Wrigley Field or Fenway Park, which are the two oldest parks in the majors.
Wrigley Field was given that name in 1927. It started out as Weeghman Park in 1914:
I suppose you can point out that it was named for “Wrigley” the man, rather than his company. I’d say it’s a distinction without a difference.
Fenway Park is debatable as to whether it’s a corporate name or not:
Oh, and what do you want to consider a “new sports venue”. I suppose Wrigley can’t count if you really mean a brand new stadium as opposed to a renaming or a renovation for a new sports franchise.
Not the first, but when Anheuser-Busch bought the St. Louis Cardinals (baseball version) and Sportsman’s Park, they wanted to rename the facility Budweiser Stadium.
For the “first pro sports venue named for a company” I’m wondering about the first in history.
I meant to add “…in the United States” for both questions. Poop!
For my curiosity I DO make a distinction between a stadium being named for (or sponsored by) a company and honoring a person. Perhaps that distinction isn’t always possible.
And for the major US Sports leagues, the most recent without a corporate name seems to be Marlins Park, where the MLB Miami Marlins play. opened in 2012.
How do you count arenas that initially have a non-company name but later sell the naming rights to a company? I doubt if it’s the most recent, but the Moda Center in Portland (named after an insurance company) was named the Rose Garden for about 20 years before the rights were sold. Would something like that count towards this question?
The question is tricky because a number of team owners put their name on their business, as well as their stadium. Did Walter Briggs name (what would later be called) Tiger Stadium after himself or after his very successful Briggs Manufacturing Company?
When beer guy August Busch bought the St. Louis Cardinals and their stadium in 1953, he wanted to change the name of the ballpark to Budweiser Stadium. He was talked out of it, and instead named the park Busch Stadium. Then Busch’s brewery came out with Busch Beer.
In 1947 the Tokyo Giants of the Japanese Baseball League were officially renamed the Yomiuri Giants, after the Yomiuri conglomerate.
Exactly the point I made with Wrigley. In his case, I would say that he was so associated with his company that it can’t be named for him without being an advertisement for his company.
Ah, yes. I wonder if any corporate was money involved in its construction.
As another example of what dtilque is talking about, AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas was named Cowboys Stadium when it opened in 2009. (Although as I recall Jerry Jones made little secret of the fact that he was just waiting for a suitably sweet naming rights deal.)
Regardless, the name change to AT&T Stadium didn’t happen until 2013.
Boston’s TD Garden always had a bank’s name, except for a brief interregnum between contracts when the “official” name was up for a daily auction on eBay for charity. There were thirty winners (I have never found a complete list), although “Derek Jeter Center” was rejected.
Not a company, but how about the Flavian Amphitheatre - the Colosseum - in 72 CE as the first?
The Fenway, Wrigley, and Busch examples involved companies/persons who owned the team and/or the stadium. With regards to naming rights by non-owners Wikipedia suggests:
Wrigley and Fenway appear to be the answer, at least for major venues of the 4 big sports in the U.S. that are still operating. 
As for the renaming of an established venue (for a major sport in the U.S.), I’d offer the Hoosier Dome in Indianapolis changing its name to the RCA Dome in 1994. At the time it raised eyebrows, but I noticed it seemed to launch a trend that quickly spread to every major U.S. city, especially when a new venue was constructed. Except for Wrigley and Fenway, I’m hard-pressed to think of a venue built in the last 30 years that isn’t named for a corporation - more knowledgable sports fans can help me I’m sure! Makes it hard to figure out where sports (and concerts, etc.) are actually being held when advertised.
As an aside, I believe Indianapolis (the Colts in particular) kicked off the modern trend of NFL teams relocating to a new city. I recall at the time NFL announcers on the major networks kept stumbling on the Colts new name, calling them Baltimore followed by them saying how weird it was for a team to move. Now, relocated NFL teams are a common thing and no one seems to have a problem with new names.
Raiders moved from Oakland to LA in 1982. Colts moved in 1984.
Philips Stadion - the home of PSV Eindhoven, a leading football team in the Netherlands - has had Philips as part of the name since 1910. OK, PSV started out as the Philips works team, but still.
And the Dallas Texans relocated to Kansas City to become the Chiefs in '63. I suspect it was pretty common in earlier days
Oh, agreed. I imagine a lot of U.S. teams for the major sports relocated during the 1940’s through the '60’s. It would be interesting to see a timeline of team relocations, and I’d wonder if the mid-60’s to the Raiders and Colt move in the early 80’s might show the most team location stability for that 20 year stretch - at least for the NFL.
Not the venue, but the Brooklyn Tip-Tops of the Federal League were named for the bread company run by their owner.
Crosley Field in Cincinnati was renamed in 1934 to promote Crosley cars and radios after Crosley bought the team.