The Chicago Ballpark That Never Was

[he gone.]

Long read, but I'm sure will spark much debate and conversation. Read and comment away.

 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/the-whit...hanged-history/

[Dick Allen]

I think the only difference a ballpark could make to the White Sox popularity, is location, and across the street really wouldn't make much difference. Yes, the current park was pretty basic, especially compared to the parks built later, but IMO, they have done a nice job with renovation, and it's more than fine. I did read a Detroit Free Press writer say it just gets uglier every year. I have no idea how a guy who lives in Detroit can call anything ugly, but I think it looks really good. The ribbon board going all around now has more stats and numbers. The facade of the the club level being painted darker looks a bit better. The scoreboards are great. All we need is a really good team and we are cooking with gas.

[southsider2k5]

Long read, but I'm sure will spark much debate and conversation. Read and comment away.

 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/the-whit...hanged-history/

 

There are some pretty significant data errors in there. Sox Park does not seat over 40,000. It is more like 38,000. Wrigley is also a bigger stadium in terms of capacity with their renovations. They can seat nearly 42,000 for a game.

[bmags]

I think sox should just push through with this stadium for as long as possible. Since the upper deck changes there is nothing bad per se in the organization or experience within the ballpark. It just lacks "charm", both artificial and realized.

 

Best way to achieve it? Push on through. faux-new age structures like metro/astro dome didn't age well. This will age fine, and eventually will standout from the new age parks.

 

At 50 years old, it will seem quaint and I wouldn't be surprised if there is eventually a backlash against the more ostentatious new builds.

 

Feel your way through it, add to it gradually, build its history. Tell everyone else to screw off.

[Lip Man 1]

Tour de Force story. Very well done. Excellent read.

[bmags]

Having just finished it hot damn that would have been awesome.

[chitownsportsfan]

I think sox should just push through with this stadium for as long as possible. Since the upper deck changes there is nothing bad per se in the organization or experience within the ballpark. It just lacks "charm", both artificial and realized.

 

Best way to achieve it? Push on through. faux-new age structures like metro/astro dome didn't age well. This will age fine, and eventually will standout from the new age parks.

 

At 50 years old, it will seem quaint and I wouldn't be surprised if there is eventually a backlash against the more ostentatious new builds.

 

Feel your way through it, add to it gradually, build its history. Tell everyone else to screw off.

 

I think part of the problem with what you're saying (and it will happen although not to the degree I think you're selling it) is that New Comiskey/TheCell/GRF has been through so many iterations already. The name changes and renovations have made it almost as "faceless" a park as possible. It has no history associated with a long time sponspor, it has no real outstanding features (original or renovated) outside the scoreboard and outside of 2005 the Sox haven't made many memories in the place. I guess Wise's catch as well (and are the OF walls still like that?).

 

It's just a really generic ball park in many ways.

[Bob Sacamano]

Don't have time to read it myself right now, but can anyone give a few bullet points on how the ballpark could have been?

[southsider2k5]

Don't have time to read it myself right now, but can anyone give a few bullet points on how the ballpark could have been?

 

It is a re-do of the old Armor Park proposal. It is definitely something that has been talked about before.

[Jerksticks]

I disagree that it’s boring. I think the flat black and green makes it look like Gotham City. This is Batman’s park. This is a man’s man’s park. I think it’s Badass.

[SoxFan2003]

It's an interesting article. I think with the lease up in 10 years, these articles are going to start popping up more and more.

 

My personal opinion is that with the expansion/gentrification of the South Loop and beyond, the GRF parking lots may become some of the most valuable develop-able land in the City, with its easy access to a major expressway and public transportation. The Armour Park idea could provide a perfect blueprint for future development once the State/City/Owner figure out who is going to pay for it.

[Chisoxfn]

Having just finished it hot damn that would have been awesome.

Yeah - I got excited just thinking about it.

[bmags]

I think part of the problem with what you're saying (and it will happen although not to the degree I think you're selling it) is that New Comiskey/TheCell/GRF has been through so many iterations already. The name changes and renovations have made it almost as "faceless" a park as possible. It has no history associated with a long time sponspor, it has no real outstanding features (original or renovated) outside the scoreboard and outside of 2005 the Sox haven't made many memories in the place. I guess Wise's catch as well (and are the OF walls still like that?).

 

It's just a really generic ball park in many ways.

 

Most of the old ballparks looked pretty similar. There is a heavy nostalgia to them now.

 

It won’t be generic when it ages into relevance by the new builds changing.

[bmags]

It is a re-do of the old Armor Park proposal. It is definitely something that has been talked about before.

 

True but I don't know that I've ever seen the architect drawings before. It's the outfield dimensions that I reallly love. The trend toward outfields have been to conform to similar dimensions or features. Houston obviously felt that pressure (theirs did feel pretty theme-parky and arbitrary, but these were pretty cool.

[southsider2k5]

True but I don't know that I've ever seen the architect drawings before. It's the outfield dimensions that I reallly love. The trend toward outfields have been to conform to similar dimensions or features. Houston obviously felt that pressure (theirs did feel pretty theme-parky and arbitrary, but these were pretty cool.

 

It has definitely been out there, complete with the artists pictures.

[Chi Town Sox]

The name changes are awful but I never understood the hate that this stadium gets. There are so many ridiculous looking stadiums that have been built in recent years that didn't look good when they were built and they still don't look good now. When you go inside these stadiums, there is concrete everywhere...it is what it is and it's mostly not pretty. Who cares that it's not "retro" like Camden? As said above, I also think this will age alright.

 

Once they changed those ugly blue seats, IMO the inside looks really good. The outside of the stadium looks nice with the changes they made a while back.

 

What really sets stadiums apart from others to me is how they showcase the surroundings of the stadium, Coors with the Rockies, AT&T with the Bay, PNC with the river, etc. Armour Park probably would have done that it appears but it is what it is.

 

Lets just turn this thing around and have a winner for the next 6-8 years

Edited April 10, 2018 by Chi Town Sox

[SoxFan2003]

True but I don't know that I've ever seen the architect drawings before. It's the outfield dimensions that I reallly love. The trend toward outfields have been to conform to similar dimensions or features. Houston obviously felt that pressure (theirs did feel pretty theme-parky and arbitrary, but these were pretty cool.

 

Left field and right field look like they might be 200 feet down the lines. I doubt MLB would allow a ballpark to have the old Polo Grounds dimensions anymore. Other than that, I agree with your post.

 

[Dick Allen]

Left field and right field look like they might be 200 feet down the lines. I doubt MLB would allow a ballpark to have the old Polo Grounds dimensions anymore. Other than that, I agree with your post.

Yeah and it looks about 5000 feet out to CF. They would have added another fence like they did in Detroit. The other thing is, it was facing due north, with nothing to even partially slow a north wind. It would have been so cold there in April and May.

[southsider2k5]

The name changes are awful but I never understood the hate that this stadium gets. There are so many ridiculous looking stadiums that have been built in recent years that didn't look good when they were built and they still don't look good now. When you go inside these stadiums, there is concrete everywhere...it is what it is and it's mostly not pretty. Who cares that it's not "retro" like Camden? As said above, I also think this will age alright.

 

Once they changed those ugly blue seats, IMO the inside looks really good. The outside of the stadium looks nice with the changes they made a while back.

 

What really sets stadiums apart from others to me is how they showcase the surroundings of the stadium, Coors with the Rockies, PNC with the Bay, PNC with the river, etc. Armour Park probably would have done that it appears but it is what it is.

 

Lets just turn this thing around and have a winner for the next 6-8 years

 

With the 2003 remodel there really isn't anything wrong with the ballpark. There are things that could be better, but there isn't anything wrong with this park.

[bmags]

Left field and right field look like they might be 200 feet down the lines. I doubt MLB would allow a ballpark to have the old Polo Grounds dimensions anymore. Other than that, I agree with your post.

 

It is really frustrating he included the image with the actual distances that you can't actually make out. Hard to imagine it could be much more than 250

[Wanne]

that's a great read. Really would have been fascinating to see how that would have developed. Have to say...the new ballpark renovations are nice...but the initial design REALLY missed the mark IMO. Especially not having home plate face downtown. LOVED those hand drawings...

[Dick Allen]

that's a great read. Really would have been fascinating to see how that would have developed. Have to say...the new ballpark renovations are nice...but the initial design REALLY missed the mark IMO. Especially not having home plate face downtown. LOVED those hand drawings...

I get the whole skyline thing, but unless you were in the upper deck, and we know how White Sox fans feel about the upper deck, you don't see much if any of the skyline no matter which way the park faced. And the problem with a north or north east facing field is it does keep it colder during those April games and those May night games. If you go to a game now and sit downstairs, it's much colder when you walk out of the park than it was at your seat. The structure blocks the winds from the north a bit.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Dick Allen

[Chi Town Sox]

that's a great read. Really would have been fascinating to see how that would have developed. Have to say...the new ballpark renovations are nice...but the initial design REALLY missed the mark IMO. Especially not having home plate face downtown. LOVED those hand drawings...

 

But with the homes (2 and 3 flats) that have stood North of Armour for years, would they have been forced to knock them down? The view from the inside of the park in the article doesn't look like how it actually looks from Armour Square. The Sears Tower being so close looks like the stadium is on Roosevelt rather than 33rd street. Would only be able to see the city from the upper deck depending on the elevation of the lower deck.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Chi Town Sox

[TheTruth05]

Would have loved this stadium. The currect one is good now and they're still trying and all but man this stadium would have really thrived.

[southsider2k5]

Since we are talking in retrospect, the biggest mistake the White Sox made with the new park is making the entire ballpark above ground. If they had made top of the 100 level at ground level like pretty much every other new stadium in baseball the fell would be totally different.