Cleveland just can't stop winning.I meant to bring this up a while back, but SI released their ballpark rankings (just a few short years after ESPN had already done it).
My issue with how they handled it was that they had the fans rate the parks. Well, isn't this a little inaccurate? Maybe it's because part of my day job involves survey research, but I can't help but feel surveying people about things as personal as their team's ballpark isn't likely to produce a non-skewed result.
Tim and I have been to over 20 MLB ballparks each so we know a bit about this sort of thing. And if I recall correctly, Tim thought his favorite of all the ones we've visited was Citizens Bank Park in Philly. As for me, the ones I've enjoyed the most have been Miller Park in Milwaukee, Pac Bell in SF (or whatever it's called now -- the place where Barry hit pellets into the bay) and Minute Maid in Houston.
According to SI's research, Progressive Field (formerly the Jake) in Cleveland is number one, followed by Miller Park, PNC Park in Pittsburgh, Comerica Park in Detroit, the new Busch Stadium in St. Louis, Safeco Field in Seattle, Coors Field in Denver, US Cellular in Chicago (this one really surprises me), the Big A in Anahem and Citizens Bank in Philly rounding out the top ten.
Where did my beloved Yankee Stadium finish? Well, in 20th place out of the thirty parks in play. As much as I love it there, I guess I can't argue with this. It's not new, it's not state-of-the-art and there's nothing particularly fancy about it. But if you're a Yankee fan, there's a very special feel when you walk into it. Just trust me. When my lovely wife and I went there two weeks ago and walked up the tunnel to our seats, she said, "I just don't get this feeling at an Astros game!" Well, sure, you're not from Houston, honey. But I knew what she meant.
Fenway was right behind Yankee Stadium in 21st place. Fenway and Yankee went 1-2 in "Tradition" and 2-3 in "Fan IQ" (trailing only St. Louis, which I can't argue -- they know their baseball). Yankee Stadium was second to last in both "Affordability" and "Food." While I have no argument about the affordability thing, the food isn't that bad. They have a real food court, plus a cheesesteak grill, gyros, a deli area, etc. It's not horrible. So I would argue that. But I realize it's not as plentiful as the new parks.
It's interesting to me that a couple of pretty new parks finished in the bottom ten, including the Diamondbacks' park, Chase Field, and the Rangers' park, the Ballpark in Arlington. And, like I said, US Cellular, home of the White Sox, made the top ten. This interests me because it's widely regarded as the last park built before the boom of "retro" parks happened. I've been to one or two games there and I liked it but I can see why people might not. Not as much forced "charm" or hills in center field. Those sorts of goofy-ass things.
Other interesting rankings:
The Tigers were rated number 1 in "Team Quality." While I realize they've been competitive again in recent years, they really only had one really good year -- when they made the World Series (and lost) in 2006. Otherwise, this is still the team that lost 109 games five or six years ago. So that's interesting.
US Cellular was rated number 1 in "Traffic," with 1 being the best. I'd ask South-siders to weigh in on this. I don't remember it being disasterous when I went but come on -- it's Chicago! How good could it be?
The bottom five in "Hospitality," in order starting with the worst: Philly, Shea (Mets), Yankee, Fenway, Dodger. Only one Western team in that and they're originally from New York.
A great night out for the whole family? Go to KC. The Royals' Kauffman Stadium provides the cheapest tickets (1), good food (8), really nice fans (2), and cool promotions (7). Eh, but they have a low team quality (25) and, according to SI, the fourth-worst neighborhood of any team (27). Which is, like, ridiculous, since Kauffman is in the middle of a field in Missouri. I guess they just mean it's not a hip, happening neighborhood. When I think bad neighborhood, I think of bullets.
Opinions?
17 comments:
US Cellular is awful. A cookie cutter ballpark with no personality smack dab in the middle of the projects.
I've been to only about 3 or 4 ballparks my whole life, but my thoughts on US Cellular:
Parking is easy and there are plenty of spots. Traffic is also definitely not too bad around there. Tailgating was a blast as well, though when is it not? The stadium itself seemed relatively simple and modest, pretty standard layout. Beer prices were about what you'd expect, not too much but not overly cheap.
I have to agree that the Royals have a great family environment. Everyone brings the kids and it's a great night out for the family with a nice atmosphere. I don't understand the neighborhood comment, since there's absolutely nothing around there other than Arrowhead next door.
i'm shocked petco park in san diego didn't rank higher. it's the most uniquely designed ballpark i've ever seen - they've got this wild sandstone facade all over the ballpark and bright flowery planter boxes all over the place, it's like being in an aztec city. plus the western metal supply building and the hill out in CF where you can watch the game on a picnic blanket. and it's in a booming neighborhood - the gaslamp district in downtown SD and the convention center are a few blocks away and there's bars, restaurants, and hip yuppie condos all over the place. the only drawbacks i could see are the fact that it's kind of small and the fans aren't terribly passionate, but still. sometimes other things can trump the half-emptiness factor.
see my review of petcohere.
i've been to 20, here's my top 5:
1) petco
2) camden yards
3) old busch (cardinals fan, can't help it)
4) great american
5) pnc
honorable mention: citizens bank, new nats park, kaufmann
bottom 5:
5) minute maid
4) new busch
3) yankee
2) anaheim
1) riverfront
honorable mention: wrigley, shea, rfk
i should note that of the top ten listed, i haven't seen the jake, safeco, or coors. i agree that the system they used to rank them was pretty fucked up - as for "traffic" i had no problem getting to the cell, but getting to the park in dc, philly or either of the ny parks can be a huge pain the ass.
J – I’m with you, doing this with a fan survey will lead to some big biases. My team, the Cardinals, is ranked 25 in affordability. $29 average ticket price isn’t exactly what I would call cheap, but compared to some of the other teams that are ranked as more affordable, it isn’t steep either. Midwest town, new stadium, ticket prices go up, people think they are getting put through the ringer for tickets. For how expensive things are in San Francisco, I find it odd that their fans think it less affordable than St. Louis, yet average ticket prices are less. Maybe it is because the team sucks? Same goes for the neighborhoods. Busch Stadium III isn’t exactly in the best neighborhood, though it has gotten better. Maybe because the stadium is right downtown next to the waterfront. Coors field definitely is in a great neighborhood, but it wasn’t like that when they build the stadium. I spent the summer of 1997 in Denver, and at that time the neighborhood was real sketchy. Then all the gays moved in and prettied it up.
Do fan IQ and team quality go together? That would explain St. Louis and Colorado. Funny stuff.
Mostly, I don’t take this stuff seriously because it is so subjective. Go to the Forbes website for the quantitative stuff.
I haven't been to a whole bunch of parks, but here's where I'd rank those that I've visited:
1. Camden Yards
2. Fenway Park
3. Wrigley Field
4. Busch Stadium (old one)
5. Great America Ballpark
4. Shea Stadium
6. Riverfront Stadium
I can tell you the Yankees can suck it.
The Jake is awesome and it will never be "Progressive Field" to me. I haven't been to too many others but Wrigley has a special place in my heart since I went there so many times from Purdue with big groups of people looking to have fun.
I agree that on a lot of things the ranking system used may be suspect - but if the fans from a ballpark say the food sucks, then I can't think of any reason why that's not valid. So for some things, I'll take their word on it :)
cant get a damn knish in Yankee stadium. I agree witht he food ranking....
Since I am too poor to buy food at ballparks and appreciate an atmosphere where you get to, understand this now, actually watch the game without all the extracurricular crap going on at Ballparks I'll have to put Fenway and Wrigley as my co-No. 1's of the 14 parks I have been to.
The ivy on a bright summer day makes me weep, and Fenway was just damn impressive when I was there.
I can bust out my whole list later. I've been to 22 team cities... what I mean by that is I've been to Riverfront and Great American in Cincinnati, but I only count that as once, so I say cities instead of stadiums.
My home town park is Jacobs Field. Yes, Jacobs Field. I'm not sure where Progressive Field is, but it looks okay.
My top two parks are Citizens Bank in Philly and PNC in Pittsburgh. My bottom two are Great American in Cincinnati and Fenway in Boston.
Yes, Fenway is the worst stadium I've ever been to. If you're taller than 5 feet tall and weigh more than 81 pounds, you're going to have a problem fitting into those horrible seats. It's beyond cramped. There's no parking. The fans are all incredibly obnoxious. The food isn't good, but it certainly is expensive. Terrible. I think they should burn it down.
re: fenway
tim, amen about the seat thing. i'm 6'5" and i literally had scars on my knees from the seat (really a wooden bench in a row) in front of me. beautiful stadium, awesome atmosphere, but the seat thing ruined it for me.
Tim, I think they should burn you down.
Face!
Boilerdowd, it makes sense that you'd like Fenway since you can easily fit into the Fenway seats.
Your stature and gigantic head and hurtful words won't intimidate me.
b-dowd -- I love your rankings...
They go:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 6
Personally, I like Camden yards the best. But I have only been to 7stadiums, and two of those are no longer baseball stadiums. But the food is great, the stadium is beautiful, and after the game you can stroll right out to the inner harbor area and to a bunch of bars and restaurants.
The new Nationals stadium is pretty awesome, but the area around it is still being developed. There isn't a parking lot for it, either! So yeah, getting there can be annoying. At least you can park for free at the old stadium and take a free shuttle bus.
Perhaps those U.S. Cellular haters haven't been since they spent tens of millions renovating it? The revamped seating and whole new kids areas are pretty cool. Food has always been good there, too. Fireworks (exploding scoreboard) are always spectacular there, too.
Wrigley is the best... in my humble opinion. You have to appreciate tradition, however, to enjoy that experience. There is no jumbotron for those of you who have ADD.
I really love the Ballpark in Arlington, it's a great park with top notch sightlines. Also great are Citizens and PNC.
US Cellular is pretty bad, it's better than it used to be. The Metrodome is the worst excuse for a ballpark ever.
Also, Safeco Field is very good experience. The food there is top notch, however, that doesn't influence my opinion one way or the other. I'm not there to eat.
At the beginning of the survey, SI said that "this is a measure of how satisfied fans are with their hometown ballpark experience." Thus, Fenway is obviously going to rank very low, no matter how much the new ownership group does to improve the setting. They have done a lot, and they have done a great job, but the vast majority of die-hards haven't been to many games in recent years. It's all about the "pink hats." Fenway is now the hip, happening place to be, so excessive demand and short supply means that Joe Everyfan gets squeezed. Instead, he sees the minor leaguers play in Pawtucket (50 miles southwest) or Portland (90 miles northeast). J-Money, how often do you think Yankee fans who can't get into the Boogie Down go to Scranton or Trenton? When the AAA affiliate used to be in Columbus and the AA affiliate was in Norwich and Albany before that, were those even viable options? One of the things about this area is that there are enough medium-sized cities nearby to host minor-league affiliates.
Tim, Fenway is an "urban ballpark." It's in the middle of a densely-populated city neighbourhood, which is also a popular nightclub destination. There's not supposed to be parking. Same thing with the Stadium in the Bronx (although I don't think that's a nightclub destination). If you must drive, you are supposed to find a spot a couple of miles or so from the park and take public transit in. I live six miles from the park, but close to a bus line that goes in there, so when I would go to the park, I would take the bus, or if I were in a group with friends and they were driving, I would have them park behind my father's office building (which also contains property he manages) or on a side street in neighbouring Brookline, where there is supposed to be a two-hour limit, but nobody enforces it unless they get called (although Brookline cops are starting to get calls about that). Then, I/we would take the T in, although the T over there is a streetcar/trolley line that is far from efficient, which gets worse on game days.
Also, the food has actually become pretty good. Can't go wrong with a Fenway Frank. Inside the park, the options aren't as good, except for the new concourse they built behind the bleachers, but at the main entrance, which is not officially in the park (it's on Yawkey Way, although the closing of the street to everyone but ticked patrons is a sore spot to many who miss the independent vendors), Jerry Remy has a hot dog and sausage stand, and Luis Tiant makes Cuban sandwiches, among other things. The prices aren't great, but it's a sports venue; what do you expect?
I'll give you that they need a new park, and that they should move the Sports Museum of New England into the Fenway site and building, but unfortunately, the city is only 48 square miles of land area, and it's pretty much built out, so real estate is at a premium, and there isn't much space available where they can put a park. The waterfront would be excellent, but there isn't much public transit there yet, and before when they tried to build facilities there, the Southie pols exhibited excessive NIMBYism. Thus, they built a courthouse on the ideal spot for a park, which has the name of a Southie pol. Still, where else are they going to put it? Dorchester? Ha!
--Eric
Post a Comment