Which ballpark that has opened since Camden Yards will be the first one replaced?
Minnesota’s Target Stadium.
Beautiful ballpark, but now that the WS is being played in November, I don’t see how it would ever finish if the Twins make it to the winter classic.
(This reply is sort of tongue in cheek)
I voted for Rangers Ballpark. The Dallas/Ft. Worth area isn’t anti-development and the Rangers would love a retractable roof stadium. The Rangers get stuck trying to squeeze a lot of games in after long rain delays because Dallas is quite far away from any other American League city so games are hard to reschedule for visiting teams.
I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the Rockies eventually build a retractable roof stadium. The season isn’t going to get any shorter and fickle Colorado weather could cause havoc on a playoff series.
I actually wonder if games could get forced back into the Metrodome if there is a long spell of bad weather in the Twin Cities during the post season?
I have no inside knowledge, but I voted for Camden Yards.
Obviously, there’s nothing wrong with ANY of these stadiums per se, but the Orioles are in a division with the two biggest spending teams in baseball, the Yankees and the Red Sox. Of all the teams in question, the Orioles are the one most likely to think, “We can’t compete in our division unless we have MUCH higher revenues, and our current ballpark, nice as it is, doesn’t give us enough money. We have to demand a newer one.”
I’d definitely agree with the Rangers and the House That W Built in Arlington. I’m sure they look on in envy at what the Astros have in Houston, and given the team’s history of “melting” after July, I’m sure they’d like to have a retractable dome so they don’t have to play in 95 degree heat all through the summer. With the new ownership in place this year, I wouldn’t be surprised to see movement on a new ballpark in the not too distant future.
Another thing I forgot is that the Rangers play a lot of their Sunday games at night in the summer. Since they’re going up against the ESPN East Coast Sunday night primetime game, they can’t be televised. A retractable roof stadium would allow the Rangers to play their Sunday games in the afternoon like most teams do.
It was a toss-up for me between the Rangers and Braves respective stadiums. I ended up picking Turner field because to me its the most…meh. I believe that the Rangers have the most pressing need (with the heat) for a new stadium, but do they have the community support to justify it?
It may be possible to stick a roof on the top of the Rangers current digs-possible, but expensive.
It’s amazing to me how the 1960-1970 era multipurpose stadiums (usually w/ artificial turf) are almost all gone now (Chavez Ravine being the only one left IIRC-Royals Stadium too)-many of them only lasted about 20-30 years. But Wrigley and Fenway are working on their centennials in the next few years.
I actually thought Turner Field was alright. Nothing special, but nothing terrible either.
But I can see Arlington Stadium being replaced just because they can.
Tropicana Field is notably missing from that list, and I believe there’s talk of replacing it.
John DiFool:
Notably, neither of those are multi-purpose, they are both baseball-only.
Angels Stadium and Oakland Coliseum (much as the A’s would love to replace it) remain, though.
I voted for the Rangers’ park not because I think it will be replaced, but rather be abandoned. I can see that team getting bought and moved somewhere.
I voted for Nationals Park since I fully expect the Nationals to move, so technically it will be replaced by a park in another city.
The arguments for the Rangers are sound but the team’s bankrupt. I don’t really see a bankrupt team getting the leverage, financially of politically, to replace a perfectly good stadium, and there aren’t any better markets to move to.
The stadium that started the wave of new stadia is notably missing from the list: Skydome/Rogers Centre. It might be dumped in the next 10-20 years, too, in favour of something less, well, ugly.
:smack:
The A’s may be moving to San Jose very soon now.
I believe that this is indeed the case. I think there’s a clause that allows them to move a game to the Metrodome in the case of sustained inclement bad weather.
Tropicana Field doesn’t meet the requirements. It was built prior to Camden Yards.
I picked the starting date of Camden Yards because I’ve often heard that New Comiskey, which was built right before Camden got everything wrong, while Camden got everything right.
Do you think Toronto would support a new stadium?
If you’re asking whether the municipal government would pay for a new stadium, the answer would a resounding “Hell, no.” Canadian cities don’t even build arenas for our NHL teams(and the situation with Jobing.com arena in Phoenix proves how wise that is). An MLB team wouldn’t have a chance.
I picked Camden yards mainly due to age. I think several of the teams have a better shot of being relocated before their cities will build them another publicly funded stadium.