Shea Stadium:from palace to dump in a decade

[mandrake]

I don't know if this has been covered already. I recently went to Shea and I was trying to pinpoint when Shea went from cutting edge to obsolete. When it opened with the World's Fair, it was much ballyhooed as the best stadium, with features like "Stadiumrama"..which never really worked out. The Jets set AFL attendance records(1969), and the Mets drew 2.7 million(1970). But soon after, it suddenly became known as a 'dump'. I think it may have changed so rapidly in 1974-75 when 4 teams used the place and the field never recovered. We had Jets tickets in Loge 32 row E, and by the mid 70's the place had made its down turn. I recall the fans in front of us always getting soaked when the drain pipe could not handle the rain water from the mezz, and the Jets never fixed it. (Blamed it on the Mets and NYC). The bathroom located near our section was a disgrace. By the mid 1970's, I recall sitting in the general admission seats for the Mets and seeing broken seats (the old wooden seats) not getting fixed. The Jets were already talking about moving in 1977 when they played a regular season game vs Colts at Giants Stadium. So what did happen between 1964 and 1977??

[metfan13]

I don't know if this has been covered already. I recently went to Shea and I was trying to pinpoint when Shea went from cutting edge to obsolete. When it opened with the World's Fair, it was much ballyhooed as the best stadium, with features like "Stadiumrama"..which never really worked out. The Jets set AFL attendance records(1969), and the Mets drew 2.7 million(1970). But soon after, it suddenly became known as a 'dump'. I think it may have changed so rapidly in 1974-75 when 4 teams used the place and the field never recovered. We had Jets tickets in Loge 32 row E, and by the mid 70's the place had made its down turn. I recall the fans in front of us always getting soaked when the drain pipe could not handle the rain water from the mezz, and the Jets never fixed it. (Blamed it on the Mets and NYC). The bathroom located near our section was a disgrace. By the mid 1970's, I recall sitting in the general admission seats for the Mets and seeing broken seats (the old wooden seats) not getting fixed. The Jets were already talking about moving in 1977 when they played a regular season game vs Colts at Giants Stadium. So what did happen between 1964 and 1977??

NYC had major fiscal problems in the early-mid 70's. The city nearly went bankrupt. Upkeep for a stadium was low on the priority list. Then add in the lack of concern for the team and stadium by Mrs. payson's daughters once she passed away and you had a recipe for disaster. Both the team and stadiums were dumps by the late 70's.

It had a bit of a resurgence under the Doubleday-Wilpon ownership.

[mandrake]

But we are only talking about 10 years or so !!!! I can not imagine any of these new ball parks being a 'dump' in a decade, especially if they led the league in attendance (Shea led football and baseball at one time in 69-70)

[SteveJRogers]

NYC had major fiscal problems in the early-mid 70's. The city nearly went bankrupt. Upkeep for a stadium was low on the priority list. Then add in the lack of concern for the team and stadium by Mrs. payson's daughters once she passed away and you had a recipe for disaster. Both the team and stadiums were dumps by the late 70's.

It had a bit of a resurgence under the Doubleday-Wilpon ownership.

To add to that, Doubleday and Wilpon both had opposing views about the future of the Met ballpark.

While they undertook a massive makeover of Shea during the entire decade of the '80s (starting with the 1980 paint job, culminating in 1988 when the neon players were put outside Shea), Fred always wanted a brand spanking new place. But Doubleday thought the problems could be fixed by constant makeovers and tinkering, essentially Doubleday wanted Shea to be the baseball version of Monteceillo! :rofl:

Probably the reason why that late '90s project never got off the ground and the project that is Citi Field didn't start until after Wilpon wrested control of the team away from Doubleday.

[tugger]

So what did happen between 1964 and 1977??
The Mets traded Tug McGraw.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/184/468728775_2c0f4dba75.jpg?v=0

[metfan13]

But we are only talking about 10 years or so !!!! I can not imagine any of these new ball parks being a 'dump' in a decade, especially if they led the league in attendance (Shea led football and baseball at one time in 69-70)

Leave anything outside, untended for 10 years in the northeast and see what happens.

NYC spent nothing. The Mets spent nothing. The 70's happened.

[Jim Vaz]

Like some of the posters have said, NYC at the time was in terrible shape. The city just didn't spend the money to fix the place as it should have. I can remember the days when there was no toilet paper, the bathrooms smelled worse then porto potties, and you came out of the place ready to take two 5 hour showers.
Sometime in the late 80's or early 90's the place seemed to be cleaned up some, but by then it was already evident that the venue itself was becoming obsolete when compared to the new wave of stadiums going up in Baltimore and Texas and other places.

[Jim Vaz]

Leave anything outside, untended for 10 years in the northeast and see what happens.

NYC spent nothing. The Mets spent nothing. The 70's happened.

And thats the thing too, people forget about the pounding structures take in the northeast. Snow, ice, rain, freezing, melting, high heat, freezing cold.
People say how well maintained Dodger Stadium is, but really if you were to leave that place alone not much would change other then some weeds growing and some faded seats from the sun. Other than that the weather is constant and consistant. The dry arid air of Los Angeles also helps preserve structures. If you don't maintain something in the northeast it will corrode quickly.

[mandrake]

And thats the thing too, people forget about the pounding structures take in the northeast. Snow, ice, rain, freezing, melting, high heat, freezing cold.
People say how well maintained Dodger Stadium is, but really if you were to leave that place alone not much would change other then some weeds growing and some faded seats from the sun. Other than that the weather is constant and consistant. The dry arid air of Los Angeles also helps preserve structures. If you don't maintain something in the northeast it will corrode quickly.


Well, for arguments sake, why did Yankee Stadium, Fenway Park, Wrigley Field fare so much better? What about the other cookie cutter stadiums ; Vet, 3 Rivers, Riverfront ? They were all in the same boat and fared much better. No other stadium ever went into such a steep decline in just a decade or so. Even ancient places like Philly's Municpal (JFK) Stadium lasted much longer, as did Soldier Field, Tiger Stadium and others. You would be hard pressed to see any other Stadium fall so quickly. Heck, even the Polo Grounds lasted many decades before it was deemed run down!

[History Of Baseball Fan]

I've always thought Shea was an ugly looking park. It looks like a half or 3/4 cookie cutter ! and to think they left the Polo Grounds for that dump !

[mets16]

I've always thought Shea was an ugly looking park. It looks like a half or 3/4 cookie cutter ! and to think they left the Polo Grounds for that dump !

I wouldn't quite call it a dump. I went to RFK, a stadium built a little earlier than Shea, and probably endured the same neglect as Shea after the skins left. But as I was walking around, you see cracks in the foundation, something you don't see in Shea. Heck, it may just be an emotional thing but I will never forget my first game at Shea, the green grass and everything, that is the thing I will always remember. It doesn't have the "aura" but it has something else. I think it looks the best of the cookie cutters and lasted the longest... Do me a favor leave your house in the rain ,snow, and sun and never fix it up when something goes wrong and tell me how much of a beauty it is.

[metfan13]

Well, for arguments sake, why did Yankee Stadium, Fenway Park, Wrigley Field fare so much better? What about the other cookie cutter stadiums ; Vet, 3 Rivers, Riverfront ? They were all in the same boat and fared much better. No other stadium ever went into such a steep decline in just a decade or so. Even ancient places like Philly's Municpal (JFK) Stadium lasted much longer, as did Soldier Field, Tiger Stadium and others. You would be hard pressed to see any other Stadium fall so quickly. Heck, even the Polo Grounds lasted many decades before it was deemed run down!

As I said earlier, Mets ownership in the 70's also didn't care.

Yankee Stadium at that time had just been refurbished.

Anyone from the NY area who remembers the 70's will remember the state of the NY subway system, Times Square, the Westside Highway (and other roadways). The city was a mess.

[trueblue9441]

one thing i dont understand is why 3/4 or so cookie cutter like shea if expanded could have sat approximately 75 or 80,000 people while some other cookie cutters could only seat 60,000 or so.. can someone answer that for me? it would be greatly appreciated

[CoreyNYC]

one thing i dont understand is why 3/4 or so cookie cutter like shea if expanded could have sat approximately 75 or 80,000 people while some other cookie cutters could only seat 60,000 or so.. can someone answer that for me? it would be greatly appreciated

Think of all the space available in the Shea OF. As currently configured, it seats approx 55,000, Surely if they made Shea a full circle, they could have fit in another 20-25,000 seats.

Obviously Shea has more seats from (just past the) foul pole to (just past the) foul pole than Three Rivers, Riverfront, Busch, or the Vet did.

[compaq]

it was just bad design. People thought it was the future because it was different it was just so bad.

[YankeeFanBx]

As I said earlier, Mets ownership in the 70's also didn't care.

Yankee Stadium at that time had just been refurbished.

Anyone from the NY area who remembers the 70's will remember the state of the NY subway system, Times Square, the Westside Highway (and other roadways). The city was a mess.
You are so right , NYC was a mess, especially the subway system and the roadways.
Let's not forget Yankee Stadium, before being refurbished, it was a mess too.
The South Bronx, don't ask!

[Power Wally]

Shattered.

[TJH1923]

But we are only talking about 10 years or so !!!! I can not imagine any of these new ball parks being a 'dump' in a decade, especially if they led the league in attendance (Shea led football and baseball at one time in 69-70)

The early press on Shea gave it warm and fuzzy write up at the urging of Robert Moses. I would not go so far as to call it a palace though. It was a shinny new ballpark that NYC needed desperately and it came 7 years too late.

The reason Shea led in football and baseball attendance was simple.....the product playing in the stadium was good.

[alpineinc]

The early press on Shea gave it warm and fuzzy write up at the urging of Robert Moses. I would not go so far as to call it a palace though. It was a shinny new ballpark that NYC needed desperately and it came 7 years too late.


Virtually everyone loved Shea at the beginning, Moses or otherwise. The Mets announcers (especially Ralph) can be heard gushing about it throughout the audio of the first game at Shea in '64.

[tomzpc]

It may be a dump but it's our dump. Lots of great memories there. I'm looking forward to Citi next year but I'll always miss Shea. Been going there since the early 70's and I've sat all over the place. Even after all these years I still get a great feeling everytime I walk through the tunnel and see the field.

[sflnyc]

As has been mentioned before, NYC in the 1970's was falling apart. See famous Pres. Gerald Ford quote to NYC "Drop Dead" regarding financial assistance.

After reaching a record ridership in 1970, the subways fell apart with the graffiti and crime and ridership dropped over 50% in the decade alone and took 35 years to reach that level again. City couldn't afford the upkeep and practiced "Deferred Maintenance" meaning "no maintenance". The grimy disgusting NYC that I knew in the 1970's has long since disappeared and the City is light years away from that decade in every aspect. When I want to remember the NYC of my childhood, I pop in the DVD's of French Connection or Pelham 123* and go Damn!

There is my 1970's retrospective.

:dance

*-BTW, I can't wait until the remake of Pelham 123 comes out

[mandrake]

I agree, Shea is our dump. It will always feel like a home to me. I first went there in '68, and I was there for the Billy Joel concert on 7/18/08, so I had a nice 40 year run at Shea.

Someone asked why other cookie cutters had a lower capacity than Shea. The reason is that Shea is MUCH higher than the others (Busch, Riverfront, etc). The original plans called to fill in the outfield and raise capacity to approx 90,000. Nelson Doubleday knew the upper deck was too high and stated that fans should not be charged to sit that high. He believed Shea could be renovated by removing the upper deck (19,000seats), and adding outfield seats changing the capacity to around 45,000 for baseball. Wilpon had visions of Ebbets Field so we know what happened.

But my question still remains; why was Shea the only stadium to ever be declared a 'dump' so soon after it was brand new. Remember the Mets stunk in 1964 and they still outdrew the pennant winning Yankees by over 400,000 based on the 'state of the art stadium'. This trend continued for ten years.
And Yes, Yankee Stdium was terrible by the early 70's, but the place was nearly 50 years old by then. Polo Grounds and Ebbets field were over 40 years old when they lost some of their glitter.

[compaq]

http://fromtheflightdeck.com/assortedaircraftpics/pics/Shea%20Stadium.jpg
http://www.destination360.com/north-america/us/new-york/images/s/shea-stadium.jpg

[metfan13]

I agree, Shea is our dump. It will always feel like a home to me. I first went there in '68, and I was there for the Billy Joel concert on 7/18/08, so I had a nice 40 year run at Shea.

Someone asked why other cookie cutters had a lower capacity than Shea. The reason is that Shea is MUCH higher than the others (Busch, Riverfront, etc). The original plans called to fill in the outfield and raise capacity to approx 90,000. Nelson Doubleday knew the upper deck was too high and stated that fans should not be charged to sit that high. He believed Shea could be renovated by removing the upper deck (19,000seats), and adding outfield seats changing the capacity to around 45,000 for baseball. Wilpon had visions of Ebbets Field so we know what happened.

But my question still remains; why was Shea the only stadium to ever be declared a 'dump' so soon after it was brand new. Remember the Mets stunk in 1964 and they still outdrew the pennant winning Yankees by over 400,000 based on the 'state of the art stadium'. This trend continued for ten years.
And Yes, Yankee Stdium was terrible by the early 70's, but the place was nearly 50 years old by then. Polo Grounds and Ebbets field were over 40 years old when they lost some of their glitter.

And the answer remains the same. Neglect by the city and ownership. Don't know how many more times or how many ways it can be said, but anyone growing up near NYC in the 70's knows exactly what I'm talking about. Stadiums require regular maintenance. As do roadways, subways, buildings and neighborhoods. Neglect them and you get NYC/Shea in the late 70's.

[SteveJRogers]

And the answer remains the same. Neglect by the city and ownership. Don't know how many more times or how many ways it can be said, but anyone growing up near NYC in the 70's knows exactly what I'm talking about. Stadiums require regular maintenance. As do roadways, subways, buildings and neighborhoods. Neglect them and you get NYC/Shea in the late 70's.

Yeah, but the question isn't really how it came to be a dump, but more why, after NYC underwent its transformation, after a major renovation project in the 1980s, Shea is still considered a dump.

Its more like the Wilpons spent the 1990s forcing the issue about a new stadium by NOT doing the upkeep to repair the damage done by the 1970s. THATS what the question is, why is Shea now in such a state of "disrepair" that a new stadium becomes neccessary. Not why it fell into disrepair in the first place.

[metfan13]

Yeah, but the question isn't really how it came to be a dump, but more why, after NYC underwent its transformation, after a major renovation project in the 1980s, Shea is still considered a dump.

Its more like the Wilpons spent the 1990s forcing the issue about a new stadium by NOT doing the upkeep to repair the damage done by the 1970s. THATS what the question is, why is Shea now in such a state of "disrepair" that a new stadium becomes neccessary. Not why it fell into disrepair in the first place.

Some of that is just people continuing to perpetuate a myth. Wilpon/Doubleday did put money into the stadium and improved it a lot. But by then cookie-cutters were out of fashion so Shea was never going to be popular with non-Mets fans. Now in recent years with the push to get Citi Field built there's been little incentive to put any money into Shea.

[TJH1923]

Virtually everyone loved Shea at the beginning, Moses or otherwise. The Mets announcers (especially Ralph) can be heard gushing about it throughout the audio of the first game at Shea in '64.

Why wouldn't you love Shea? Compared to the neglected Polo Grounds (I like PG, but it was allowed to deteriorate long before the Mets called it home), Shea was an excellent upgrade. I just would not call it a palace nor would I call it a dump. I especially hated the two years the Yankees played there.

All the descriptions of NYC in the 70's are accurate. I hope it is never allowed to get that bad again!

[SteveJRogers]

Some of that is just people continuing to perpetuate a myth. Wilpon/Doubleday did put money into the stadium and improved it a lot. But by then cookie-cutters were out of fashion so Shea was never going to be popular with non-Mets fans. Now in recent years with the push to get Citi Field built there's been little incentive to put any money into Shea.

A case could be made though that in order to GET to the point where any project for a new stadium would neccessitate the Mets to just stop the upkeep alltogther. And that probably would be around 1990 or so.

In other words, the Wilpons probably WERE a major factor in the decline of Shea to "dump" like status starting after the huge makeover of the '80s.

Shea became a "dump" because they WANTED it to be, not because it always was a dump.

There are plenty of fans who actually think Shea is not a dump and should NOT be replaced (never mind the cost of tickets at Citi Field) and are disgusted at how the Mets treated Shea to the point where they wouldn't be opposed when the Wilpons started to beat the "we need a new stadium" drums."