I will agree with the "attraction" angle. Hell, our local minor league park would even fit that bill. I think this is a sign of the times. Ballparks ARE a part of a very BIG business...and today must attract and cater to those who frequent the place, the fan base.
I know. The "old ballpark" and everything that came with it is just about gone forever. That doesn't mean that I have to like it.
I think I see where you're coming from, now. I'll be at Yankee Stadium friday for the Rays game. I'll tell better then. But just having watched the Yankees-Mets game at Shea,er Citi Field, my first impression was of a claustrophobic place...tall, steel-gray stands,holding out the light. At least Yankee stadium retains the look and field demensions of the original. Friends have told me, sitting in a seat at the new place almost looks the same...It is the concourse, restaurants, museum etc that makes the place so different....and the wide halls,less tight for the crowds. Am I right or wrong?
At Yankee Stadium, they did a phenomenal job of making the inside suggest the old stadium. It's really beautiful. But your experience watching the game is going to vary WILDLY depending on where you're sitting. At the old stadium, the best seats in the house were in the upper deck, between the bases. It was the perfect view. Now, the upper deck is so high off the field and so steep, you feel VERY removed from the action. And if you never had the bleacher experience at the old place, forget it, that's over too. The new bleachers are a HORRIBLE place to watch the game. Yes, the concourses are about a billion times better from the old house. It used to take an hour just to get out of the building from the upper deck.
At Citi Field, I think that the average seat has a better view than in Yankee. However, there are many, many sections that have obstructions. If you sit in the outfield, you're going to lose at least part of the playing field. Any long fly ball- you have to rely on the crowd reaction to find out what happened (don't count on the scoreboard, you can't see that either.) But in general, the average upper deck seat has a very, very nice view.
My #1 complaint about Citi Field (and most new parks) is the idiotic, nonsensical dimensions. Old ballparks had quirks in the outfiled out of necessity. Parks like Fenway and Ebbets Field and Tiger Stadium had to be built to fit onto city blocks, so the outfield walls were always funky. Nobody ever thought to make it 250 feet down the right-field line, or build a 36 foot wall in left field just because it was cool. They had no choice. That's ACTUAL charm. This new trend of building in quirky angles and nook and crannies in the outfield for no good reason is just plain stupid. At Citi Field, they even went so far as to draw the home run line on the wall with irregular angles just because they thought it would be charming! There's a 90 foot incline in center field at Minute Maid park FOR NO REASON. What the hell?!? I love interesting architecture in stadiums, but manufactured charm is just not my style.
Just in case you are interested, I do think that several new stadiums got it right and are vast improvements. Target Field in Minneapolis, PNC in Pittsburgh, and AT&T Park in SF are my favorites of the new stadiums. Camden Yards, and Coors Field are bubbilng under.
Anyway,I'll see for myself friday!
You have a very, very good shot at seeing Jeter's 3,000th hit. That would be awesome. If you eat at the game (and I recommend that you do not- there's a million better options nearby), try to steak sandwich with fresh horseradish from Loebell's. It's a crime at $15, but it's fantastic. Have fun!