PDA

View Full Version : End of the concrete donut clone era in baseball


PeteU
09-24-2007, 09:06 AM
From the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/23/AR2007092300498.html

Nats Provide Fond Farewell, End RFK Era With a Victory
Nationals 5, Phillies 3

By Barry Svrluga
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 24, 2007; Page E01

When the ballpark closed to baseball the first time all those years ago, it did so in sheer chaos, with countless among the 14,460 in the stands spilling onto the field, ripping up the grass, forcing a forfeit loss to the New York Yankees. Baseball was leaving the District. There was no telling if it would ever return.

But yesterday, below a brilliant blue sky, 40,519 made their way to the beat-up concrete yard known as RFK Stadium, the largest crowd of the season wishing their Washington Nationals well. So much had changed since 1971. Baseball is back to stay, and the park buzzed. Home plate wasn't ripped out by hooligans but rather dug out by team owner Theodore Lerner and Manager Manny Acta in a fitting postgame ceremony. And the home team won, taking a 5-3 victory over the Philadelphia Phillies that allowed all those fans to file out wearing smiles that were absent a generation ago.... [MORE]
_______________________________________________

RFK Stadium was the first of the concrete donuts to be built, and the last to be closed for baseball.

I don't know if I can provide a fitting eulogy for either RFK or the entire concrete donut cookie cutter era. Perhaps one should have been saved for posterity to tell future generations of baseball fans that these were the types of ballparks that once dominated the scene in the 1960s and 1970s. But then again, is it really worth saving something so bland and derivative? Dodger Stadium and Kauffman Stadium (and a renovated Angels Stadium) are the sole parks of the 1960s-1980s era which deserved to be saved. That Three Rivers Stadium was reduced to rubble is of no great loss to the game in the end.

Sure, one can make the point that the retro-era ballparks brought on in 1992 by the construction of Oriole Park at Camden Yards have become something of a cookie-cutter class themselves, with many of them featuring similar brick exteriors or monochromatic dark green seats. And one wouldn't necessarily be wrong in saying that. But that being said, I don't think there was anything worse than seeing RFK, Fulton-County, Busch II, Riverfront, Three Rivers, and Veterans Stadiums pop up, not only failing to provide much distinction between themselves, but really not being true baseball parks for the teams that played in them.

RFK had an interesting wavy roof and upper deck. And for those who enjoy upper decks, its upper deck was reasonably close for a columnless upper deck. And that's about all the good I can say for the place. Other than that, I can only say that I hope never to see a circular concrete donut clone stadium in baseball again.

Sean O
09-24-2007, 09:50 AM
It's a terrible shame that RFK has to go, and even worse considering its replacement. With a little attention and money, certainly infinitely less taxpayer money than the horrible new park, it could've been saved for years to come.

The upper deck was as close as can be, the roofline gave the stadium something unique (unlike the new park, which is GABP part 2), and it had history. Tear down everything from pole to pole, put field-level seating in the outfield, lock the PSCSLD seating, tear out the football boxes or convert them to luxury boxes, glass the outside, and put something unique to Washington in the outfield.

Instead, we get something from a future dystopia:

http://www.jdland.com/dc/images/stadium-rendering-east-0610.jpg

Horrible.

PeteU
09-24-2007, 10:43 AM
To call the new Nationals Park "horrible" is a stretch, in my opinion.

Somewhat disappointing, yes. They could have done a lot better with the exterior, something that would invoke the classical greco-roman buildings of the nation's capital. Instead, you got something that looked more suitable as a Northern Virginia office park. And unless you are sitting in the upper deck, the Capitol and Washington Monument will not be visible thanks to several large parking garages.

But the Nationals will still be better off moving out of RFK. Disappointing as the new park might be, the modern fan comforts of ballparks that have come around since 1962 when RFK opened will come available to the fan. And unlike next year when Yankee Stadium closes its doors forever, there's no sense that a classic park of baseball, full of great moments of baseball history will be lost. Between the Nationals and the Senators, the stadium saw only one winning season and one .500 season, and no truly great moments in baseball history ever occurred there.

It is dubious how practical an Angels Stadium type makeover of RFK would have been. Most of all, it would have required extensive engineering just to add in the luxury boxes. The mezzanine decks were very shallow and probably couldn't carry the weight of luxury boxes as they are now. It would need a good deal of structural reinforcement. The outfield upper deck seats at RFK were always horrible and would need to be removed, replaced by ground level seating. Still, the view wouldn't be all that scenic, as RFK faces away from the iconic city center of Washington DC. So the view would instead be of the less-than-desirable Anacostia part of town.

The one good thing about RFK over the new park is that it has significantly more parking space, and two or three Metro lines running to its station, as opposed to just the one line running to the new park's station. I can forsee some logistics problems getting to and from the ballpark. But in terms of the ballpark itself, the team is much better served moving into a park of its own and leaving RFK behind.

Smirkman
09-25-2007, 09:53 AM
It's shell was designed by the same team that did the DC Convention Center (below).

The ballpark looks better in person and up close as the skin is still being added. The ballpark may have some flaws, but it should be quite attractive and match the modern downtown DC architecture. Remember that an attempt has been made to make the ballpark look different than so many of the retro parks.

Many also hated the East Wing of the NG (bottom). A classic.

jimmyjimjimz
09-25-2007, 03:31 PM
I thought the new Nationals stadium opened in 2009. What are they gonna do with RFK? Where are the Redskins gonna play? Oh wait, they got a new stadium, right? I can't remember. I'm forced to go to work every Sunday, so I haven't watched football in about 2 years.

marlins739
09-25-2007, 06:03 PM
The Redskins moved out of RFK a while ago in 1996 for FedEx Field outside DC in Maryland, and the Nationals are moving into their new park (what are they going to call it anyway?) in 2008. The MLS' DC United still play in RFK, but they're working on getting a new stadium of their own.

Yankeefan90
09-25-2007, 07:17 PM
I don't know how much of an improvement the new National's park is. To me it looks like a hybrid of the modern era parks mixed with that cookie cutter concrete clone donut. The Natinals park to me is not very nice looking at all.

Smirkman
09-26-2007, 08:56 AM
Most donuts are round and closed.:confused:

Seattle1
09-26-2007, 12:58 PM
Mmmmmmm....donuts!

Smirkman
09-26-2007, 01:25 PM
Doh......!

sflnyc
09-27-2007, 12:26 PM
Technically, the concrete donut clone era is still on life support. After the plug is pulled on Shea Stadium after 2008, there will be only on patient left, that being the Oakland Alameda County Colieseum (I call it that b/c I love the way name rolls of the tongue). The A's are to replace that stadium soon itself.

All that would be left will be the two stadiums, not parks, here in Florida (surprise!!), which I wouldn't consider part of the cookie cutter boom.

Elvis
09-27-2007, 12:54 PM
Technically, the concrete donut clone era is still on life support. After the plug is pulled on Shea Stadium after 2008, there will be only on patient left, that being the Oakland Alameda County Colieseum (I call it that b/c I love the way name rolls of the tongue). The A's are to replace that stadium soon itself.

All that would be left will be the two stadiums, not parks, here in Florida (surprise!!), which I wouldn't consider part of the cookie cutter boom.

I wouldn't call Tropicana a cookie-cutter. It's a baseball-only stadium. To me, the 60s-70s cookie-cutters mean football/baseball stadia.

nymdan
09-27-2007, 01:15 PM
Most donuts are round and closed.:confused:

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/5374/donutqt3.jpg
:-D

PeteU
09-27-2007, 03:49 PM
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/5374/donutqt3.jpg
:-D

That wouldn't happen to be a glazed Shea, would it? :)

Onemoredayatshea27
09-27-2007, 04:44 PM
Wouldn't this be Shea?

http://www.herogearstore.com/U-2_Airplane_Cookie_Cutter_small.jpg

Sorry for the link, my computer wasn't able to upload a picture for some odd reason.