Master Index of Archived Threads


Wallace Matthews has good things not to say about Citi Field

batmagadanleadoff Apr 05 2009 12:10 AM

Stadium a reflection of the team Wallace Matthews 7:58 PM EDT, April 4, 2009 Having spent Friday night at Troubled Assets Relief Program Field in Flushing and Saturday afternoon at the new Yankee Stadium up in the Bronx, I can tell you with full confidence that both ballparks are a perfect reflection of the teams that play in them. One makes no apologies for what it is. The other tries to convince you it is something it is not. If the new Yankee Stadium is a cathedral, it is devoted to the worship of Benjamin Franklin and his lesser saints, Ulysses S. Grant, Andrew Jackson, Alexander Hamilton, Abe Lincoln and, of course, George Washington. And if The TARP is Ebbets Field Redux, then Gary Sheffield is the second coming of Jackie Robinson. Um, not. Both teams, of course, perpetuate the same myth, that these incredibly costly edifices were constructed for the benefit of their fans, when in fact they benefit only the owners. But that's where the similarity between the two parks ends. The essential difference between the two new ballparks is the essential difference between the Yankees and Mets. Yankee Stadium is ridiculous, offensive, infuriating and magnificent in its wretched excess. And The TARP is charming, precious and sickening in its phoniness. But then, what would you expect from a team that has the audacity to spend nearly a half-billion dollars on three ballplayers and charge upwards of $2,500 for a single ticket while the country plumbs the depths of a recession? And what more could you hope for from an organization that seems to revel in its status as the little brother in a big town and depends upon a team that hasn't existed for a half-century to provide most of its history? Both are impressive brickpiles that would stand up well if they occupied two different towns, but placed side-by-side within eight miles of one another, there is simply no comparison between the two ballparks. The Yankees spent $1.3 billion on their new playground, and every cent of it shows. It is vast and sweeping, and at the same time, comfortable. It looks like a Stadium but feels like a ballpark. If you venture up to the last row of the upper deck and watch the game with a view of the facade in your sightline, as I did yesterday, it almost feels as if you're sitting in the actual House That Ruth Built. And when the PA system went out in the sixth inning of the game and the only sound in the park was the sound of a baseball hitting a bat or a glove, it was perfect. The Mets, on the other hand, spent about half as much and got half as much. Although it holds 13,000 fewer people and had no more than 35,000 people on a rainy Friday night, it was a slow go negotiating its narrow, low-ceilinged passageways. The lines at its concession stands were terrible. And its open-air food court, which might be inviting on a warm summer night, was an ordeal in a chilly April downpour. But in any weather, you walk around The TARP and you get the feeling you could be in any one of a half-dozen off-the-rack ballparks in a half-dozen nondescript cities. It feels like Camden Yards, or what used to be known as Jacobs Field, or The Ballpark at Arlington, or Busch Stadium, or - worst of all - Citizens Bank Park, home of the world champion Phillies. There is no view of the surrounding area from any of the seats, and no sense while inside the park that it is located anywhere within New York City. For a an organization that supposedly cherishes the memory of the Brooklyn Dodgers, its dream ballpark could just as easily have fit into Dubuque. And while they have tried hard, way too hard, to build artificial nostalgia into a park that could have really used an identity of its own, in truth, The Tarp has less in common with Ebbets Field than with its Flushing Meadow Park neighbor, the National Tennis Center. Its insides are pricey, exclusionary and faintly snooty while wearing the outer skin of a blue-collar ballpark. The new Yankee Stadium, on the other hand, makes no pretense of being anything other than what it is: a rich kid's playground. Within its imposing limestone walls are some things I never thought I would see in a baseball stadium. On the main level, there is a Peter Max Art Gallery, named after the "official artist of the New York Yankees,'' a title that is sure to break LeRoy Neiman's heart. There, if you happen to have an extra $66,000 in your pocket, you can go home with an original on-canvas painting of an American flag. Or, for $10,000, you can own a painting of Lou Gehrig making his famous farewell speech. By contrast, a small print of the original Yankee Stadium, "personally embellished'' by the artist himself - which looks as if he stuck his finger in a jar of paint and made a squiggle across the bottom - goes for a populist-priced $475. The nice young ladies who run the place even have shopping bags for you to carry it out in. A few yards down the rightfield line, there is a man in chef's regalia slicing thick steaks behind a plate-glass window under a sign for Lobel's of New York, a Manhattan steak house. But you can't buy any of those steaks at Yankee Stadium yet - for that, you have to travel to the restaurant on Madison Avenue. "I'm kind of like a living advertisement,'' the man said. "To get people interested in the restaurant. Bet you never saw anything like that in a ballpark before.'' Indeed. By contrast, I had the feeling that everything I saw at The TARP, I already had seen somewhere else, and just as good. The reality is, when you're sitting and watching a baseball game, it looks pretty much the same no matter what park your seat is located in. The rest of it - the merchandising shops, the gourmet restaurants, the art gallery and the hot dog stands - are props designed to induce you to spend even more money than you've already spent to get in the door. It's true in Flushing and it's especially true in the Bronx. At least in the Bronx, they don't try to convince you otherwise. http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ ... 274.column

SteveJRogers Apr 05 2009 12:45 AM

Oh good, I was just busy trashing this column elsewhere, might as well do it here: ] Stadium a reflection of the team Wallace Matthews 7:58 PM EDT, April 4, 2009 Not the most unbiased observer, especially when talking Met related issues. Come on, you (poster on other board) should know that by now. Wally, Klapish, Madden, etc. Don't take these Met/Wilpon hating Yankee ass-kissers as gospel that the Mets are doing a bad job. ]And if The TARP is Ebbets Field Redux, then Gary Sheffield is the second coming of Jackie Robinson. Um, not. That isn't what anyone ACTUALLY said, only detractors have said that it was, only the exterior rotunda area is Ebbets-like. ]And The TARP is charming, precious and sickening in its phoniness. It should be noted that Mathews was a big detractor of Shea. Maybe he should write what his perfect baseball stadium should be? ]But then, what would you expect from a team that has the audacity to spend nearly a half-billion dollars on three ballplayers and charge upwards of $2,500 for a single ticket while the country plumbs the depths of a recession? I'll give them that much. ]And what more could you hope for from an organization that seems to revel in its status as the little brother in a big town and depends upon a team that hasn't existed for a half-century to provide most of its history? Okay, SERIOUSLY, when have the Mets ever actually done ANYTHING to act like the Yankees are in their radar? Sure you can say the fanbase perhaps, but the Mets have never acted like "Oh, the Yankees did this, lets react." It never happened. And did Mathews look outside at the Met player banners adorning the Left Field side and Right Field side? Endy's and Swoboda's catches in silhouette form? Wally knows that aside from the Ebbets Club, the JRR and some t-shirts, EVERYTHING in the ballpark screams METS, METS, METS! And for crying out loud, don't treat this as a Wilpon thing, this was going on back when a former minority owner of the New York Giants was the head of the group that bought the Mets. Why do you think Willie Mays was brought back to New York in 1972? Veteran leadership? ]The Mets, on the other hand, spent about half as much and got half as much. Although it holds 13,000 fewer people and had no more than 35,000 people on a rainy Friday night, it was a slow go negotiating its narrow, low-ceilinged passageways. The lines at its concession stands were terrible. And its open-air food court, which might be inviting on a warm summer night, was an ordeal in a chilly April downpour. That's not even fair and Wally should know better. Who the hell was at that game for the game? And who in their right mind would expect vendors to be on the ball right away. I mean they were still training staff on Friday night! The fans were there to check out the place, period. The lines were long because this was the vendors and the stadium's first chance to handle a large crowd. Better it be a meaningless exhibition game than on April 13th. And the open air food court riff sounds like a line that was pre-written months ago, despite the fact that just about every stadium post-Camden now has open-air concourses filled with stands. ]But in any weather, you walk around The TARP and you get the feeling you could be in any one of a half-dozen off-the-rack ballparks in a half-dozen nondescript cities. It feels like Camden Yards, or what used to be known as Jacobs Field, or The Ballpark at Arlington, or Busch Stadium, or - worst of all - Citizens Bank Park, home of the world champion Phillies. Does it matter? Sure the PR machine's come-on was "state of the art, best in league, blah blah blah" but to quote Greg Prince of FaithandFearInFlushing.com: ]I wasn't blown away. I wasn't necessarily right that this was going to be missing something, but I couldn't tell yet. I was reminded, in a one-two punch of snap judgment, of Citizens Bank Park and Nationals Park. My very first glimpse of the new home of my Mets reminded me of two venues devoted to two rivals of my Mets. Fine parks both. Neither ever blew me away...It's a good park. It's a fine park. It's not a great park on first contact, but first contact is just that. It has running room. We will see how we interact with it, whether we spend so much time meeting and greeting and eating that we don't focus on the field and yell as we always did at Shea. But we're Mets fans. We'll figure it out. This coming from someone who'd rather Citi Field never existed and the Mets still be playing at Shea FWIW. ] There is no view of the surrounding area from any of the seats, and no sense while inside the park that it is located anywhere within New York City. For a an organization that supposedly cherishes the memory of the Brooklyn Dodgers, its dream ballpark could just as easily have fit into Dubuque. Good GOD! Wally realizes that there is no neighborhood there? Sure the U-Haul and Serval Zippers were nice landmarks to glimpse at from the upper levels of Shea back in the day (along with the Whitestone and a glimpse of the Manhattan skyline), but generally speaking Shea/Citi wasn't/isn't in an urban setting. It is better off that the field is closed to the outside world. And you know what, you can still see everything you could from Shea on the non-field side just as well. Again, Greg Prince: ]You can gaze out at the Queens that surrounds you from all kinds of intriguing vantage points when you're away from your seat. Stare south at the Unisphere and remember why they call that thing in the outfield WORLD'S FARE. Project east toward downtown Flushing and believe you can reach out over Little Albania and touch the U-Haul sign. The skyline of Manhattan twinkles to the West. LaGuardia's fun to watch beneath the northern sky. I don't care for being cut off from a view of the outside world at my seat, but I love the way the world is there for the taking in once you get up and walk around. Come to think of it, why do you need all that when you are, well you know, watching the baseball game itself? Do you need to see beyond the horizon? Landmarks? Neighborhoods? Sprawling landscapes? No, not really. ] And while they have tried hard, way too hard, to build artificial nostalgia into a park that could have really used an identity of its own, in truth, The Tarp has less in common with Ebbets Field than with its Flushing Meadow Park neighbor, the National Tennis Center. He is finally getting it! ]Its insides are pricey, exclusionary and faintly snooty while wearing the outer skin of a blue-collar ballpark. But so is every other ballpark in this country. And that goes the same with the actual blue-collar ballparks as he puts it, Wrigley and Fenway. Lets not kid ourselves and act like teams with parks older than Dodger Stadium in LA (all two of them now) are keeping the prices at pre-1960 prices or whatever Wally deems affordable. ]By contrast, I had the feeling that everything I saw at The TARP, I already had seen somewhere else, and just as good. The reality is, when you're sitting and watching a baseball game, it looks pretty much the same no matter what park your seat is located in. The rest of it - the merchandising shops, the gourmet restaurants, the art gallery and the hot dog stands - are props designed to induce you to spend even more money than you've already spent to get in the door. Wally now admits this column was pre-written, at least the Citi Field version. ]It's true in Flushing and it's especially true in the Bronx. At least in the Bronx, they don't try to convince you otherwise. It amazes me how much Wally thinks the Mets are trying to con anyone. Not like anyone going to these games, or ordering the food doesn't realize how freakishly expensive everything is, in relation to the real world cost of same goods and services. FWIW, the Mets actually reduced some of the prices on the regular items (beers, hot dogs, sodas), not much of course, but a reduction is a reduction. To say nothing about the fact that this has been going on for quite sometime, and somehow this is news to Wally? Oh he's right of course, but there are easier and less harsh ways to make this point without continuing to bash the organization. Again, Mr. Faith & Fear: ]The prices are ridiculous. The prices were getting ridiculous at Shea for a long time. In 1977, M. Donald Grant justified the shunning of free agents to Sport magazine this way: "The board discussed it and we thought it wasn't good for the fans. We don't think fans can afford it. if you continue to pay these prices, the fan is going to have to pay between $7 and $8 to get into the game." Somewhere Down There, the chairman of the board of Met Hell is having a good laugh. We sign free agents, we pay our players well, we tear down a stadium to replace it with a field and all $7 gets you is a little change for your frank. But at Citi Field, to a certain extent, you get what you pay for. The food is way better. The service is way better. The physical comfort is way better. The bathrooms, pending a mass run on beer, are way better. Yet even as I couldn't see the world outside because of the way the park "envelops" you (Jeff Wilpon's phrase), I remembered on the train home there is a world out there and it's not doing so hot. Jason was a lower-case prince and treated me to my first game at Citi Field. That was $38 for a game that didn't count. I didn't keep track of my noshery bill, but the total spent was close to that figure (I don't plan to eat that well every trip in, but boy am I tempted). These are not throwaway figures in the course of an evening or a week or a season. What I am left to mourn of Shea Stadium is the way of life it represented before, during and, for a not inconsiderable period, after Don Grant. You could walk up and buy a pretty cheap ticket on no planning. You could buy four to bring your kiddies, bring your wife. It got more difficult as the years went by, but it was manageable. And you were guaranteed, in ways that counted, to have the time of your life. In Citi Field, upstairs is filling in fast and first. When those cheapish seats are snapped up, your options ascend financially like one of those old World's Fair rockets. What was $38 in short right Friday night for an exhibition will be $75 for the proverbial weeknight against the Marlins by the end of this month. And that's the Value date. A Friday night against the Brewers in between? That's Gold, baby — Gold. That's sixty bucks in left field reserved. Per person. Never mind all your fancy sections that are beyond the means of most of us. That's absurd, and not in that Marvelous Marv Met sense of the word. I didn't want to think about how much things cost at my first-ever game at Citi Field or how much they'll cost for the one after that and the one after that. But it costs a lot. Shea has Citi beat on that, even if all you paid for was baseball, crappy food and snarling personnel (or was it snarling food and crappy personnel?). The market will dictate whether these prices will hold, whether every Mets fan who wants to will or can go, whether they have to skip the quesadilla or whatever so they can handle the $18 parking. I hope something can be arranged and that those wide seats with loads of leg room don't go unoccupied. They deserve to have asses in them and legs unfurl from them, respectively. Again, you (original board poster, not batmags) posted a pre-written hatchet job by a known Met-hater. Please, do not use Wally's columns as evidence in your goal to prove that Citi Field is going to be a disaster.

Edgy DC Apr 05 2009 06:11 AM

Did Wally make a not joke?

bmfc1 Apr 05 2009 06:29 AM

Lupica must be bored today. He fawns all over Jeter to the point where I double-checked the byline to make sure that it wasn't Madden. Lupica's too good for this kind of crap: "It is still a great Yankee drama watching him try." Yes, just watching Jeter reach in vain for another ball a foot out of his range is "great Yankee drama." Ugh.

OlerudOwned Apr 05 2009 10:02 AM

="bmfc1"]Lupica must be bored today. He fawns all over Jeter to the point where I double-checked the byline to make sure that it wasn't Madden. Lupica's too good for this kind of crap: "It is still a great Yankee drama watching him try." Yes, just watching Jeter reach in vain for another ball a foot out of his range is "great Yankee drama." Ugh. No he isn't.

Frayed Knot Apr 05 2009 10:56 AM

In today's column, Wally alternately calls the Met clubhouse "vanilla" and, a few paragraphs later, "none too stable".

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 05 2009 11:03 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 05 2009 11:08 AM

New Baseball Year's Resolution: I'm done with well-I-never-ing to Wallace Matthews and his asshattery (which, near as I can tell, nobody you'd take seriously takes seriously-- I'd wager he's known among more people via Rob Neyer, Joe Posnanski and the Fire Joe Morgan boys than among folks who come to him with sincere interest in what he's saying). Life's too short, and there's too much actual baseball writing to process and debate.

OlerudOwned Apr 05 2009 11:07 AM

The last Matthews article I saw before this one argued for Chamberlain to be moved to the bullpen. Yes, people are still arguing that. It's like reading a fart.

Edgy DC Apr 05 2009 12:12 PM

I don't know. I think taking Matthews' brand of shit down helps raise the profile of serious baseball writers, and help us cultivate more of it. By the way, in regards to serious baseball writing, last week, I stumbled over Bill James' comments on Robin Ventura in the player rankings section of <i>The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract</i>. It had almost nothing to do with Robin Ventura, but it was some <i>great</i> baseball writing.

batmagadanleadoff Apr 05 2009 12:29 PM

="Edgy DC"]Did Wally make a not joke? Ummm .... yes. But maybe it was an editorial compromise between Wally and the superior who actually green-lighted the piece. Wally probably wanted to write Shitty Field.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 05 2009 12:31 PM

="Edgy DC":1erjtn8c]I don't know. I think taking Matthews' brand of shit down helps raise the profile of serious baseball writers, and help us cultivate more of it.[/quote:1erjtn8c] There are enough other folk that write things with which I strongly disagree, or folk that genuinely try and write something provocative and good but miss. To me, Matthews is beneath contempt-- he's so obviously mailing his stuff in that it's not worth taking apart. FJM could barely have created a better straw man-- even Mariotti and Plaschke are less putrid-- if they'd tried. (And yeah, BJ's stuff is great; and it's so subtly good, I almost forget how good he is until I take the time to read him in a quiet room.) Kong76 Apr 05 2009 02:20 PM Funny, attending today's Citifield "open house" and enjoying the sunshine and new digs I didn't once think about the Yankees. Guess some guys like Wally Nonews can't seem to shake them from his cobwebbed noggin'. He's really not worth the time, Steve ... but you did a good job there. MFS62 Apr 05 2009 02:39 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 05 2009 03:59 PM As Steve picked up on, if Wally is going to grouse about the TARP, you know he has an agenda. Good rebuttals, Steve. Later metsguyinmichigan Apr 05 2009 03:57 PM A writer calling Citi TARP Field maybe should suggest calling Yankee Stadium "Taxpayer and Fans Field." Perhaps, if they could have taken some money for naming rights, they would have needed so much from the taxpayers, or would they need to charge $2,000 for a seat. But that wouldn't fit Wally's template. Nymr83 Apr 06 2009 07:05 AM Mushnick in The Post today rips Yankee stadium for 1) bad tv camera angles and 2) gigantic "distracting" advertising, while saying that the advertising at citi field is reasonable and unobtrusive.