Mets new Ballpark

[oyvey]

Looks pretty nice.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/02/ny...ty/02shea.html

[chelloveck]

Not awful but nothing special from that pic.

[The Dynasty]

Not awful but nothing special from that pic.

I think it looks gorgeous. It aint no Yankee stadium tough

[Panamaniac42]

looks nice enough. Shea is disgusting, so anything's an improvement.

[Snatch Catch]

I think it looks great- a lot like Ameriquest, actually.

[RhodyYanksFan]

Someone want to post the pic? I'm not signing up for NY Times to see it.

[Snatch Catch]

Someone want to post the pic? I'm not signing up for NY Times to see it.

You SHOULD sign up- there'll be plenty of Yankee articles to read in the coming months.

[UncleSam]

If they actually get that built, it will be fantastic. Plus, attendance will spike up tremendously. I mean, it will still be in Queens, but it looks like a beautiful place for a ballgame.

[RhodyYanksFan]

You SHOULD sign up- there'll be plenty of Yankee articles to read in the coming months.

Looks a little like Ebbetts Field.

When I think NY sports, I don't think of the NY Times. Is it really good coverage? I usually go to Newsday for Yankee articles.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

I think it looks nicer, actually a lot nicer, than the model I've seen of the new yankee stadium. Hopefully that will be rectified with some revisions.

[oyvey]

I think it looks gorgeous. It aint no Yankee stadium tough

The question is will the new Yankee Stadium be Yankee Stadium?

[MaDR]

Better than what they have now.

[SI Baseballman]

Here are the dimensions taken straight from the Mets 2006 yearbook:

LF - 335, LC - 379, CF - 408, RC - 391, RF - 300

[WTrain44]

I think it looks nicer, actually a lot nicer, than the model I've seen of the new yankee stadium. Hopefully that will be rectified with some revisions.

Unfortunately I have to agree. Wow... the Mets will have a nicer stadium than the Yankees. What is this world coming to?

[stephen_nh]

Here are the dimensions taken straight from the Mets 2006 yearbook:

LF - 335, LC - 379, CF - 408, RC - 391, RF - 300

Isn't there an MLB policy that sets minimum outfield dimensions? I don't know what they are, but certainly greater than the 300' indicated here for right field.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Isn't there an MLB policy that sets minimum outfield dimensions? I don't know what they are, but certainly greater than the 300' indicated here for right field.

The rulebook says 320' is preferable, but lists the absolute minimum as 250'. http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/of...jectives_1.jsp

[stephen_nh]

The rulebook says 320' is preferable, but lists the absolute minimum as 250'. http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/of...jectives_1.jsp

Thanks for the link. But that rule has the effect of validating all existing (and past) ballparks. I'm pretty sure I read several years ago that there was a requirement for new stadiums to have foul lines well over 300 feet.

Of course, even if I did read it, that wouldn't necessarily make it true.

[WebsterMulligan]

Unfortunately I have to agree. Wow... the Mets will have a nicer stadium than the Yankees. What is this world coming to?

So what. Yankee Stadium will always have more championship banners flying over it.

BTW: The newly proposed Mets stadium looks great.

[Mr. Mxylsplk]

Thanks for the link. But that rule has the effect of validating all existing (and past) ballparks. I'm pretty sure I read several years ago that there was a requirement for new stadiums to have foul lines well over 300 feet.

Of course, even if I did read it, that wouldn't necessarily make it true.

Looking at that link more carefully, it says that stadiums constructed after 1958 must have minimums of at least 325 down the lines. But Pac Bell (or whatever it's called now) is only 309 down the right field line, so the league must have decided not to enforce that.

[WTrain44]

So what. Yankee Stadium will always have more championship banners flying over it.

BTW: The newly proposed Mets stadium looks great.

Excellent point my friend.

[Casey37]

If they actually get that built, it will be fantastic. Plus, attendance will spike up tremendously. I mean, it will still be in Queens, but it looks like a beautiful place for a ballgame.

I'm curious, what do you mean by "it will still be in Queens" ?

[Dog Named Fred]

Someone want to post the pic? I'm not signing up for NY Times to see it.

if you want to read any newspaper online that requires registration, but don't want to give your info, i'd suggest going to www.bugmenot.com. it will give you dummy email addresses and passwords that are registered with different newspaper websites

[chelloveck]

More renderings have been released...

The exterior is nice but the inside is a bit generic, very Jacobs/Comerica.

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/m...ark_images.jsp

[chelloveck]

I think it looks nicer, actually a lot nicer, than the model I've seen of the new yankee stadium. Hopefully that will be rectified with some revisions.

I'll disagree.

[RhodyYanksFan]

Looking at that link more carefully, it says that stadiums constructed after 1958 must have minimums of at least 325 down the lines. But Pac Bell (or whatever it's called now) is only 309 down the right field line, so the league must have decided not to enforce that.

It may be 309 down the line, but to get the ball out it has to be like 20' high at that point thus making it like 329'. Same goes with the Green Monster. The reason they have it is because they couldn't make the field longer, so they just made the wall higher to even it out.

It looks nice, but it still wont' be Yankee Stadium so it's all good. BTW how come there were no planes flying 500' overhead in the pictures?