Most Popular team in New York

[Greenpeach]

I just finished reading Roger Kahn's book, "The Era". It made me wonder which New York team (Dodgers, Yankees, Giants) had the largest following during the height of New York baseball 1947-1957.

The popular assumption is that it would've been the Yankees because of their overwhelming dominance & star laden roster. Is this assumption fact or fiction ?

[westsidegrounds]

Fact.
Yankees highest seasonal attendance total '47-'57:
2,373,000, 1948
Lowest:
1,475,000, 1954

Brooklyn highest:
1,807,000, 1947
Lowest:
1,020,000, 1954

Giants highest:
1,600,000, 1947
Lowest:
629,000, 1956

(totals are rounded off)

[Greenpeach]

Originally posted by westsidegrounds
Fact.
Yankees highest seasonal attendance total '47-'57:
2,373,000, 1948
Lowest:
1,475,000, 1954

Brooklyn highest:
1,807,000, 1947
Lowest:
1,020,000, 1954

Giants highest:
1,600,000, 1947
Lowest:
629,000, 1956

(totals are rounded off)

I don't know if we can use raw attendance numbers to measure popularity. Don't forget that Yankee Stadium pre-1976 sat approximately 70,000. Meanwhile, Ebbets Field had a listed capacity of 32,000 & the Polo Grounds had a listed capacity of 55,000. If you went by percentage of seat sold then you could make the case that the Dodgers were more popular.

[jrh31584]

Weren't the Polo Grounds in fairly bad shape towards the end of this time period?

[Greenpeach]

The Polo Grounds was located in Harlem. Many white fans became afraid to attend night games there in the years after WWII. The Giants had trouble guaranteeing the safety of its patrons. In 1950, a customer was killed by a stray bullet from a roof top sniper. The Giants were forced to schedule a disproportionate amount of day games. There was talk that the Giants were going to lease Yankee Stadium from the Yankees. Yankee Stadium was located right across the Harlem River in the Bronx. But this never materialized. Stoneham then looked into building his own park, but he didn't have adequate financing to successfully complete the project. At this point, Stoneham looked into relocating the team to Minneapolis, the home of the Giants' Triple A affiliate (Millers). The move could be made fairly cheaply because they already owned the territorial rights. Plus, Minnesota was in the process of building a brand new stadium(Metropolitan Stadium) in hopes of attracting a team. However, along came Walter O'Malley........... :laugh

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by Greenpeach
[B At this point, Stoneham looked into relocating the team to Minneapolis, However, along came Walter O'Malley........... :laugh [/B]

With a better offer...Stoneham gets northern California to himself, instead of having to share the Upper Midwest with the Cubs, Braves, & White Sox....O'Malley does all the legwork, and Horace hardly has to lift a finger -- except to signal for another round.

[The Commissioner]

I'm not sure whom had the largest following, but I would venture to say none had a more loyal following than the Dodgers. Just the briefest perusal of their forum here at Baseball Fever will confirm that.

[JACKIE42]

Originally posted by The Commissioner
I'm not sure whom had the largest following, but I would venture to say none had a more loyal following than the Dodgers. Just the briefest perusal of their forum here at Baseball Fever will confirm that.

Amen to that.

[Greenpeach]

Originally posted by westsidegrounds
With a better offer...Stoneham gets northern California to himself, instead of having to share the Upper Midwest with the Cubs, Braves, & White Sox....O'Malley does all the legwork, and Horace hardly has to lift a finger -- except to signal for another round.

1957 Polo Grounds attendance - 653,923

1975 Candlestick attendance - 522,919

Net Loss (130,004)

For Comparison:

1975 Dodger Stadium attendance - 2,539,349

1975 Shea Stadium attendance - 1,730,566

Horace Stoneham sold the Giants in January of 1976.

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by Greenpeach
1957 Polo Grounds attendance - 653,923

1975 Candlestick attendance - 522,919

Net Loss (130,004)

For Comparison:

1975 Dodger Stadium attendance - 2,539,349

1975 Shea Stadium attendance - 1,730,566

Horace Stoneham sold the Giants in January of 1976.

Polo Grounds attendance:
1951: 1,059,000
'52: 984,000
'55: 811,000
'56: 629,000
'57: 653,000

Seals Stadium (a minor league park!)
1958: 1,272,000
1959: 1,422,000

Candlestick Park:
1960: 1,795,000
1961: 1.390,000
1962: 1,592,000


For a guy without access to a Time Machine, Horace did pretty well, looks like.


(totals rounded off)

[Greenpeach]

I wasn't hoping that the Giants would stay in the Polo Grounds. The stadium was old & antiquated in a rapidly deteriorating neighborhood. However, Robert Moses was already talking about building a new multi-purpose stadium in Flushing Meadow. If Stoneham would've been smart, he would've leased Yankee Stadium for a few seasons & waited for the completion of the new stadium in Queens. He should've let O'Malley go west by himself or with another team. The Giants would've owned half of New York. Can you imagine the type of crowds that they would've drawn with a team consisting of Mays, McCovey, Marichal & Cepeda in a brand new stadium in Queens ? They would've drawn two million on a consistent basis with that club.

Attendance last five years (1971-1975)

1975 - 522,919
1974 - 519,987
1973 - 834,193
1972 - 647,744
1971 - 1,106,043

In 1974 & 1975 they finished last in the National League in attendance. There was a slight bump up in 1971 because of the Western Division Championship.From 1968-77 the Giants only broke 1 million in attendance once. No wonder Stoneham said upon selling the club that the biggest mistake he made was moving the club out of New York.

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by Greenpeach
I wasn't hoping that the Giants would stay in the Polo Grounds.
in a brand new stadium in Queens ? They would've drawn two million on a consistent basis with that club.[QUOTE]

Always felt the Polo Grounds defined the Giants at least as much as Ebbets Field did the Dodgers. Move to Queens?!?!? The Giants were Manhattan's team, the Broadway wiseguys' team, the Big City team. Flushing freaking Meadows?!?!? They might as well move to SF.
As for Robert Moses, he was a dictatorial egomaniac. Stoneham grew up rubbing shoulders with NY pols, if he didn't want to put his future in RM's hands he pretty certainly knew what he was doing.

[QUOTE] From 1968-77 the Giants only broke 1 million in attendance once.

Yeah, but their first ten years in SF they broke a million two every year. Sorry, but the Move was certainly hurtful, may (MAY) have been economically shortsighted, but it wasn't stupid.

And looking at it from the perspective of September 1958, without foreknowledge of the future, nobody would have said it was.

[Greenpeach]

Originally posted by westsidegrounds
Yeah, but their first ten years in SF they broke a million two every year. Sorry, but the Move was certainly hurtful, may (MAY) have been economically shortsighted, but it wasn't stupid.

And looking at it from the perspective of September 1958, without foreknowledge of the future, nobody would have said it was.

I never said Stoneham was stupid. I just indicated that I believe & history has born it out that he jumped the gun with the move out west & the Giants would've been better off staying in New York. He made an error judgement. In business it happens all of the time.

As far as the Giants being "Manhattan's team", by September of 1957 that was no longer the case. The Yankees had been Manhattan's team since the hey day of Joe DiMaggio. As for the Giants belonging to Manhattan this is ridiculous. Professional sports teams move all the time to follow population shifts. New Yorkers still go see the Jets & Giants play in the Meadowlands even though it's in Jersey. Giant & Jet fans aren't concerned about tradition. The only thing they care about is a winning team. Are you saying the Giants should still be playing in Yankee Stadium because of their history ? I doubt many fans would agree with that assessment.

The population of New York City started moving out to Queens & Long Island right after WWII. The GI's that were coming home wanted to get married, start a family & have a nice house with a big front yard. Flushing Meadow was the right place to build the new stadium if you wanted to follow demographic patterns of the new York metro area. Robert Moses may have been an egotistical jerk, but he was right about the location of Shea Stadium.

I think we agree on a lot of things & disagree on others. But, I've really enjoyed debating this issue with you. :waving

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by Greenpeach
I never said Stoneham was stupid. I just indicated that I believe & history has born it out that he jumped the gun
I think we agree on a lot of things & disagree on others. But, I've really enjoyed debating this issue with you. :waving

My pleasure!

I just feel that I'm (in a perverse way, maybe) sticking up for the Giants in defending Stoneham's rationale for the move -- like, "Yeah, Our owner moved the team three thousand miles away, but he sure wasn't suckered into it by a two-bit grifter like O'Malley."

[brokenbat]

I think Stoneham's problem was he was lazy. He had the most popular team in the city except in Brooklyn and he had no idea how to market it. His real compitition in the city the Yanks have always understood marketing and ran circles around him. If he had not been so impatient about a new stadium he could have waited, let the Dodgers leave, moved to Shea in 62 and added all the Dodger fans to the Giant fans and given the Yanks a run for the money. In the end, moving to San Fran ultimately cost him the team and I believe a few world championships due to playing in that windy cold park for 40 years. I don't think he was just plain greedy like O'malley but made a very bad business decision which he later came to realize and regret because it cost him his team.

[mojorisin71]

Most popular team in New York? MOST DEFINITELY THE DODGERS, thank you. If you were talking about winning and stuff, then it would have to be the Yankees. The Giants were losing steam in the 1950s, and the Polo Grounds were slowly deteriorating.

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by brokenbat
made a very bad business decision

Maybe possibly perhaps longterm -- but the SF crowds were double what they'd been in the last few years in NY. And that's after a thrilling pennant race in '51 and a World Championship in '54.

Remember we're talking about an era when fans buying tickets was pretty much it as a revenue source.

If O'Malley had been allowed to go out west on his own you can be sure no Dodger fans would have started rooting for the Giants. Hanging on just didn't seem like an attractive option.

[Greenpeach]

Originally posted by westsidegrounds
Maybe possibly perhaps longterm -- but the SF crowds were double what they'd been in the last few years in NY. And that's after a thrilling pennant race in '51 and a World Championship in '54.

Remember we're talking about an era when fans buying tickets was pretty much it as a revenue source.

.

A couple of things that we all should keep in mind. The first is that since 1950 all home games of all three New York City teams were televised on local television. This fact, plus the worsening neighborhood surrounding the Polo Grounds & the beginning of "white flight" to Queens & Long Island probably led most directly to the drop in their attendance in the 1950's. However, I don't know what type of revenue Stoneham was getting from his radio & TV contracts. At the gate they were certainly struggling (like a lot of teams), but I'm sure that their media revenue was much greater than teams in smaller markets such as St. Louis & Pittsburgh.

One of the main reasons Stoneham changed his mind about moving from Minneapolis to California wasn't because of attendance issues, rather it was because O'Malley convinced Stoneham that pay-per-view (cable) baseball was the waive of the future & he had connections out in California. OM was going to get a pay-per-view contract for both teams. Of course, around the corner to OM meant 15 years in reality. The company OM put his faith in (Fox ?) was bankrupt & out of business within two years of the move West. If Stoneham had done some research ahead of time, he would've realized that the technology wasn't available yet for such a grand scheme.

[westsidegrounds]

Originally posted by Greenpeach
(Fox ?)

Skiatron?
(Which may hve been part of Fox or vice versa?)
Interesting article on the early technology, called

"Pre-History of Pay Cable Television" by Megan Mullen

is on line (address is too long to type, just use Google).

One proposal from Horace that fell by the wayside was for a city-built stadium on the West Side between 60th & 72d.

Now that would have been sweet.

[Greenpeach]

Originally posted by westsidegrounds
Skiatron?
(Which may hve been part of Fox or vice versa?)
Interesting article on the early technology, called

"Pre-History of Pay Cable Television" by Megan Mullen

is on line (address is too long to type, just use Google).

One proposal from Horace that fell by the wayside was for a city-built stadium on the West Side between 60th & 72d.

Now that would have been sweet.

Matthew Fox was the head of Skiatron. It was very late (or early depending on your point of view) when I made my previous post. :laugh

[WESWESTRUM]

I count Jimmy Cannon as the best sportswriter of my lifetime and what he said goes. In his column of August 7, 1952, he wrote and I quote:
"We are so big three ball clubs represent us in the big leagues. The transients come to admire the cold skills of the Yankees.....Naturally, most of the Brooklyn partisans come from the Borough, but there are many in other settlements who pull forthe Dodgers for reasons that I never fully understand......It is the Giants who are the home team in New York. The old settlers appreciate them. It is the team of the old neighborhoods, which are small towns with traditions of their own and also the club of the people who make their living in the lurid arts and are loosely classified as the Broadway mob."
Attendance figures of that era mean nothing. My father used to take me by the hand as we walked down Edgecombe Avenue toward my Jerusalem in Coogan's Bluff. My mother refused to let the girls go to day games because the neighborhood was so dangerous. Also it just so happened to be the one time the Bums had a dynasty and the Yankees had their most successful teams. Yeah Brooklyn had its heart torn out in the midst of the only glory they had known and my heart bleeds for those who died inside like my brother, but there was another, better franchise that was leading the National League in pennants and was second in World Series when they left, and still to this day leads all of baseball in total victories, and that is Harlem's finest, Manhattan's own, the New York Giants.

[GIANT]

Horace Stoneham was his own worst enemy. He complained about attendance yet he never changed his ways. He consistently went for slow footed sluggers the 1947 team is a prime example. He habitually hired former Giant players Mel Ott and Bill Rigney both "yes" men. He was smart enough to hire Leo Durocher (who was anything but a "Yes" man), when Branch Rickey fired him and hired Burt Shotton. It was Durocher who turned the Giants around convincing the ever meddling Stoneham to acquire players such as Eddie Stanky and Alvin Dark. From 1945 until their departure in 1958, the Giants won two pennants and one World Series. Durocher was the manager of both of those teams. Without Durocher, Stoneham teams led by his nephew, Chub Feeney finished in the second division. Attendance usually coincides with the product on the field.

Attendance in the National League was used by Stoneham as a crutch. There was a migration from the inner cities to the suburbs. Yet, Stoneham allowed Giant home games to be televised but not the road games. If your losing money because of attendance, why give the product away. Bill Terry for one offered to purchase the team and Stoneham refused to sell. If he was losing money, why not cut his losses? Stoneham was making money, he just thought he would make more money in San Francisco. He made a bad business decision.

[EbtsFldGuy]

The point about the deteriorating area surrounding the PG can't be overstressed, in my opinion. What others have said here is true. Travelling to the PG at night was perilous.

While it is true that the Mets thrived there for 2 years, the NYC fans were hungry for NL ball (which had been gone for 5 years by the time of the 1962 Mets debut), and the City put heavy police presence there for the games.

The Phillies were forced to leave Connie Mack because North Phila had become treacherous.

In one form or other, white flight was a large factor for the Giants, the Dodger and the Phillies.

Was it the only factor in their moves? No. But it played a significant part.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

The point about the deteriorating area surrounding the PG can't be overstressed, in my opinion. What others have said here is true. Travelling to the PG at night was perilous.

While it is true that the Mets thrived there for 2 years, the NYC fans were hungry for NL ball (which had been gone for 5 years by the time of the 1962 Mets debut), and the City put heavy police presence there for the games.

The Phillies were forced to leave Connie Mack because North Phila had become treacherous.

In one form or other, white flight was a large factor for the Giants, the Dodger and the Phillies.

Was it the only factor in their moves? No. But it played a significant part.
Yes the area around the Polo Grounds was bad back then but if the Giants or even the Mets had decided that they wanted to stay there the polo grounds could have been renovated and the area improved. look if the yankees can still play across the river from the polo grounds than baseball today could still be played at the Polo Grounds.

[Greenpeach]

Horace Stoneham was his own worst enemy. He complained about attendance yet he never changed his ways. He consistently went for slow footed sluggers the 1947 team is a prime example. He habitually hired former Giant players Mel Ott and Bill Rigney both "yes" men. He was smart enough to hire Leo Durocher (who was anything but a "Yes" man), when Branch Rickey fired him and hired Burt Shotton. It was Durocher who turned the Giants around convincing the ever meddling Stoneham to acquire players such as Eddie Stanky and Alvin Dark. From 1945 until their departure in 1958, the Giants won two pennants and one World Series. Durocher was the manager of both of those teams. Without Durocher, Stoneham teams led by his nephew, Chub Feeney finished in the second division. Attendance usually coincides with the product on the field.

Attendance in the National League was used by Stoneham as a crutch. There was a migration from the inner cities to the suburbs. Yet, Stoneham allowed Giant home games to be televised but not the road games. If your losing money because of attendance, why give the product away. Bill Terry for one offered to purchase the team and Stoneham refused to sell. If he was losing money, why not cut his losses? Stoneham was making money, he just thought he would make more money in San Francisco. He made a bad business decision.

In the late 1980's I was listening to a radio interview on a Memphis station with Bill Terry. He said that in 1956 Stoneham had agreed in principal to sell the Giants to a group headed up by Terry. Terry's plan was to lease Yankee Stadium from the Yankees until the new stadium in Flushing Meadow was completed. Unfortunately, word was leaked to the press about the pending deal & Stoneham was so embarrassed that he pulled the Giants off the market.

[WESWESTRUM]

Yes the area around the Polo Grounds was bad back then but if the Giants or even the Mets had decided that they wanted to stay there the polo grounds could have been renovated and the area improved. look if the yankees can still play across the river from the polo grounds than baseball today could still be played at the Polo Grounds.
My point about the the neighborhood being dangerous was that people can't use attendance figures to show the GIANTS weren't popular. Of course that skunk Stoneham should have kept the Giants here. He had no right. He should have been forced to sell. The same goes for the Bums, the Boston Braves, the St. Louis Browns, the Philadelphia A's, and the Washington Senators.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Weren't the Polo Grounds in fairly bad shape towards the end of this time period?

The answer to this question is No. the polo grounds as a structure was in great shape and could have stood for years.but as what has been pointed out here is the fact that the area around the PG was not that great.The Polo Grounds was not falling down.and everyone has to remmber when the stadium was torn down in 1964 the current edition of the polo grounds was only 53 years old.

[MattM]

The Polo Grounds could have been the home of the Jets, had the wrecking ball not come so soon, especially since the Giants had moved to Yankee Stadium in 55. If you look at the seating, and shape of the stadium, that place would have been ideal for football.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

The Polo Grounds could have been the home of the Jets, had the wrecking ball not come so soon, especially since the Giants had moved to Yankee Stadium in 55. If you look at the seating, and shape of the stadium, that place would have been ideal for football.

The Polo Grounds was home of the New York Titans(JETS)from 1960-1963. the AFL team called the polo grounds home.So the Jets did call the PG there home.

[MattM]

The Polo Grounds was home of the New York Titans(JETS)from 1960-1963. the AFL team called the polo grounds home.So the Jets did call the PG there home.

No I know that. I just meant that it's too bad that before the Jets actually joined the NFL, they could have had the Polo Grounds, and not be playing in New Jersey now.

[EbtsFldGuy]

Yes the area around the Polo Grounds was bad back then but if the Giants or even the Mets had decided that they wanted to stay there the polo grounds could have been renovated and the area improved. look if the yankees can still play across the river from the polo grounds than baseball today could still be played at the Polo Grounds.

I agree.

But the sad fact is that NYC seems to have had only token interest in keeping the Giants, and made little move to prevent their move.

The PG, like Wrigley and Fenway, should still be here today.

And so should Ebbets Field.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

I agree.

But the sad fact is that NYC seems to have had only token interest in keeping the Giants, and made little move to prevent their move.

The PG, like Wrigley and Fenway, should still be here today.

And so should Ebbets Field.

You are right but you would think that the city of new york would have learned something after ebbets field and the polo grounds was torn down,now they are going to tear down yankee stadium?

[Greenpeach]

You are right but you would think that the city of new york would have learned something after ebbets field and the polo grounds was torn down,now they are going to tear down yankee stadium?

Donald, Yankee Stadium was torn down after the 1973 football season. It's no longer "The house that Ruth built." It's "The house that Mayor Lindsay rebuilt." I have to laugh when I hear younger fans getting upset about the Yankees tearing down "historic" Yankee Stadium. Hell, the city of New York did that over 30 years ago.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Donald, Yankee Stadium was torn down after the 1973 football season. It's no longer "The house that Ruth built." It's "The house that Mayor Lindsay rebuilt." I have to laugh when I hear younger fans getting upset about the Yankees tearing down "historic" Yankee Stadium. Hell, the city of New York did that over 30 years ago.

Yankee stadium was renovated back in 1974-75. that was something that did not happen to the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field.i am sure today alot of giants and brooklyn fans would rather have those stadiums around instead of those apartments.

[Greenpeach]

Yankee stadium was renovated back in 1974-75. that was something that did not happen to the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field.i am sure today alot of giants and brooklyn fans would rather have those stadiums around instead of those apartments.

Donald, I don't care what the PR spin out of the Bronx was in 1973. Yankee Stadium was demolished in 1973 & a classic 1970's cookie cutter stadium was built on the same spot. Renovation ? No. Demolition ? Yes.

My point was, that all of this crying going on about the Yankees tearing down of "historic Yankee Stadium" after next year is a joke. It died over 30 years ago.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Donald, I don't care what the PR spin out of the Bronx was in 1973. Yankee Stadium was demolished in 1973 & a classic 1970's cookie cutter stadium was built on the same spot. Renovation ? No. Demolition ? Yes.

My point was, that all of this crying going on about the Yankees tearing down of "historic Yankee Stadium" after next year is a joke. It died over 30 years ago.

The stadium was renovated in 1974-75 and i dont care if you dissagree with it because its a fact i am 46 and was around then so i am not a kid as you said in a other post.You can have you CRAPPY new stadium after next season.When they move out and tear down the stadium i hope they never win again.
AND GREENPEACH stay on topic. this is the new york giants forum not the new york yankees forum, remmber that.

[penncentralpete]

in 1962, i PLAYED in the "original" yankee stadium. i changed in the yankee clubhouse and used the showers, sat in the dugout, came to bat, played the outfield, etc. i was a member of a semi-pro team (newark cardinals) and the yanks were on the road at the time. IMHO yankee stadium was NOT the same at all after 1975. now, staying on the subject.......................i also believe with all my heart and soul, that the majestic polo grounds was NOT crumbling nor falling down in 1963. although i never played in the PG, i did attend many games there as a fan both in the 50's and again in '62 and '63. the ONLY thing "wrong" with the PG in the '60's was the surrounding neighborhood was a bit "shakey". whether that could have been addressed and improved, the polo grounds would be the home of the new york mets to this very day! a grand old structure it was! long live the POLO GROUNDS!!!! respectfully, pete trunk, NJ

[Greenpeach]

The stadium was renovated in 1974-75 and i dont care if you dissagree with it because its a fact i am 46 and was around then so i am not a kid as you said in a other post.You can have you CRAPPY new stadium after next season.When they move out and tear down the stadium i hope they never win again.
AND GREENPEACH stay on topic. this is the new york giants forum not the new york yankees forum, remmber that.

Donald, we are almost the same age. I spent half my youth at old Yankee Stadium. I think I know what I'm talking about. I only mentioned Yankee Stadium because you did in a previous thread.

PS: In addition, I spent many years in Detroit & visited Tiger Stadium dozens of times. It was a grand old stadium, but had way too many obstructed view seats & the food was pretty lousy too.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

Donald, we are almost the same age. I spent half my youth at old Yankee Stadium. I think I know what I'm talking about. I only mentioned Yankee Stadium because you did in a previous thread.

PS: In addition, I spent many years in Detroit & visited Tiger Stadium dozens of times. It was a grand old stadium, but had way too many obstructed view seats & the food was pretty lousy too.

THE SEATS AND VIEW WERE GREAT AT TIGER STADIUM and so was the HOT DOGS.:twocents:

[Greenpeach]

THE SEATS AND VIEW WERE GREAT AT TIGER STADIUM and so was the HOT DOGS.:twocents:

I used to sit in the General Motors box seats by the Tiger dugout. They were great seats. However, when Tiger Stadium was being used a full 30% of the seats were considered obstructed view. That was the highest % in major league baseball including Fenway, old Comiskey & Wrigley. In order to ensure that you didn't have a post blocking your view you had to purchase a box seat or sit out in the bleachers.

Tiger Stadium had the worst selection of food I've ever had at a professional stadium. The pizza was terrible & the hot dog buns were always stale.

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

I used to sit in the General Motors box seats by the Tiger dugout. They were great seats. However, when Tiger Stadium was being used a full 30% of the seats were considered obstructed view. That was the highest % in major league baseball including Fenway, old Comiskey & Wrigley. In order to ensure that you didn't have a post blocking your view you had to purchase a box seat or sit out in the bleachers.

Tiger Stadium had the worst selection of food I've ever had at a professional stadium. The pizza was terrible & the hot dog buns were always stale.

The hot dogs at tiger stadium were rated as one of the best in the majors.and the seats were great even if you had a post there. you needed the posts to have the great upper deck view. the COCHRANE plan would have taken out alot of the posts in the stadium. comerica park will NEVER compare to Tiger Stadium. and also this is the new york giants forum please stay on topic

[Greenpeach]

The hot dogs at tiger stadium were rated as one of the best in the majors.and the seats were great even if you had a post there. you needed the posts to have the great upper deck view. the COCHRANE plan would have taken out alot of the posts in the stadium. comerica park will NEVER compare to Tiger Stadium. and also this is the new york giants forum please stay on topic

I got news for you my friend, there were many obstructed view seats in the upper deck reserved section. And the biggest crime was that the Tigers management never saw fit to mark these tickets obstructed view. So you never knew if you were going to have a post blocking your view of the field until you actually showed up at the park. Thanks a lot Mr. Fetzer !!

It would have cost more to renovate Tiger Stadium under the Cochrane plan then it did to build Comerica Park and you still would've had a lack of quality parking spots.

PS: You were the poster who brought up "historic" Yankee Stadium in this thread. When did you become the board moderator ???

PSS: Shouldn't your board name be TigerStadium1999 ? What's with the PoloGrounds1957 handle ??

[POLO GROUNDS 1957]

I got news for you my friend, there were many obstructed view seats in the upper deck reserved section. And the biggest crime was that the Tigers management never saw fit to mark these tickets obstructed view. So you never knew if you were going to have a post blocking your view of the field until you actually showed up at the park. Thanks a lot Mr. Fetzer !!

It would have cost more to renovate Tiger Stadium under the Cochrane plan then it did to build Comerica Park and you still would've had a lack of quality parking spots.

PS: You were the poster who brought up "historic" Yankee Stadium in this thread. When did you become the board moderator ???

PSS: Shouldn't your board name be TigerStadium1999 ? What's with the PoloGrounds1957 handle ??
PLEASE TAKE THIS TOPIC OVER TO THE DETROIT TIGERS OR STADIUM FORUMS. this is the new york giants forum.lets get back on topic