Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Rangers, Arlington and the Ballpark


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

#101 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 09 November 2016 - 11:44 PM

Overall, I couldn't care less about professional sports, but I'm curious about just how often all of these new retractable roof stadiums are actually open.  Are they open enough to make the added expense of having the ability to open the roof worthwhile, or is it just the latest gimmick?

 

Not any real evidence other than what I occasionally see on tv, but I would say most are closed far more often than not.  AT&T Stadium, in particularly, has probably had less than a dozen events under an open roof.  



#102 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 10 November 2016 - 06:54 PM

This looks pie in the sky 

 

TL_masterplan_aerial.jpg



#103 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 10 November 2016 - 07:05 PM

Maybe a little.

 

Okay, probably more than a little.

 

In related news, the Rangers are looking for fan input on the new ballpark.  (Or they're just building a mailing list of possible season ticket holders.)

 

http://www.mlb.com/t...k/new-ballpark/



#104 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 10 November 2016 - 11:17 PM

Yet another disappointing outcome in a local proposition election.

 

Maybe when the new ballpark is built, we can use it for "bad weather," and the current ballpark for "good weather."

 

Looks like they're close enough together for that to be feasable.


- Dylan


#105 Bonfire98A

Bonfire98A

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 11 November 2016 - 10:12 AM

When AT&T Stadium was built, I always thought it should have included a possible baseball configuration.  That way, we wouldn't need another entirely new stadium -- the Rangers could simply play at AT&T in July and August, and at the Globe the other months of the season.  (Of course, AT&T couldn't ever host baseball with the big JerryTron hanging from the ceiling, but that's another story for another day.) 

 

In fact, the newest NFL venue, Minnesota's US Bank Stadium, was built exactly that way, like its predecessor the Metrodome.  It wasn't done for the Twins, but for the Golden Gophers so they could play home games in the winter.

 

ows_146863323468984.jpg



#106 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 21 November 2016 - 11:03 PM

Forgot to respond to this last week.  I had no idea that stadium was able to be configured for baseball and it converts better to baseball than most football stadiums.  The crazy asymmetry of the outfield probably makes for some interesting plays, but the ridiculously over-sized foul territory on the first base side shows the problem with playing baseball in a football stadium.  That creates a defensive advantage that's hard to ignore.  There's a reason why there's only one stadium (Oakland) playing home to an NFL and MLB franchise and both franchises are clamoring to get out of it. There have been some interesting football configurations for college bowl games in MLB stadiums, but they're far from perfect.  In one, I think it was at Wrigley, they had to play toward one end zone on offense because of the tight fit in the other.



#107 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 30 November 2016 - 02:40 AM

U.S. Bank Stadium's baseball setup is only good for college baseball... and that's the way I should be. It's absolutely horrible for the Majors. That's why you don't see those types of stadiums anymore.

As far as the current Ballpark in Arlington goes... I'm pretty sure y'all already know my thoughts on it.


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#108 Bonfire98A

Bonfire98A

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 09 December 2016 - 02:52 PM

U.S. Bank Stadium's baseball setup is only good for college baseball... and that's the way I should be. It's absolutely horrible for the Majors. That's why you don't see those types of stadiums anymore.

As far as the current Ballpark in Arlington goes... I'm pretty sure y'all already know my thoughts on it.

 

Obviously AT&T Stadium would make for a less than ideal baseball venue, given its primarily rectangular configuration for football.  But knowing what we know now, if it had been built to accommodate baseball, we wouldn't even be talking about Arlington building its fourth major professional stadium (well, since the first one was old Arlington Stadium, let's say three-and-a-half).  

 

I guess I'd rather have seen the home schedule split between GLP and AT&T during the summer months, with the Rangers playing in both venues for many years to come, than to see what is happening now, with a perfectly good ballpark about to get replaced.  It just all seems so incredibly wasteful.



#109 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 09 December 2016 - 06:20 PM

The next time I accidentally stumble upon a Texas Rangers game on TV, I will actively root *against* the Rangers.

 

And yes, I'm a native Texan.


- Dylan


#110 johnfwd

johnfwd

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,916 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southwest
  • Interests:Running, bicycling, bowling, nightclub life, science, technology.

Posted 05 January 2017 - 11:46 AM

Here's an update from Channel 5, announcement of the new stadium architect.

 

 

http://www.nbcdfw.co...-409686045.html



#111 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 05 January 2017 - 12:50 PM

Wow the new renderings look awful. Those hugely exaggerated arches and keystone's are just silly.

#112 Doohickie

Doohickie

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,394 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:76123

Posted 05 January 2017 - 02:10 PM

Maybe the structure is needed for the retractable roof.


My blog: Doohickie

#113 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 05 January 2017 - 02:26 PM

Wow the new renderings look awful. Those hugely exaggerated arches and keystone's are just silly.

 

To be fair, any new ballpark design is going to be a disappointment compared to the perfectly good ballpark that already exists next door.


  • JBB likes this

- Dylan


#114 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 05 January 2017 - 02:59 PM

I'd have much preferred a modern or contemporary look. The throwback/retro thing has ran its course IMO.

#115 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:14 PM

I'm willing to hold off final judgment since those are obviously very early renderings. It's kind of an odd mish-mash of throwback and modern. The closed-in, boxy look of the outfield reminds me too much of Minute Maid in Houston. I get the inclusion of the archways since it's a nod to the old stadium, but none of those are visible from the field and the new ones almost look over-exaggerated. I don't hate the bullpens being open to the field of play like that, but a lot of ballparks do that these days. I also like those elevated seating levels in left field. They look much closer to the field than the current upper 2 levels. Again, it's early, but it lacks a lot of the character of Globe Life. Some of that could be chalked up to missing elements in the renderings - non-field amenities, lack of ads and video presentation areas, etc.

I'm with PeopleAreStrange: I have a hard time seeing a new stadium live up to what I like about the old one. I'm glad they're staying put (20 minute drive), but I've grown comfortable and satisfied with Globe Life, especially in the last decade.

#116 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 06 January 2017 - 05:09 PM

The public reaction seems to really be concerned about the similarities to Houston's ballpark.

#117 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 07 January 2017 - 08:32 AM

After looking at more images, it really doesn't look as much like the Houston ballpark as I originally thought. There's only so much they can do as far as basic design goes if they're planning a generic box with a roof on it and actually lowering the seating capacity. That said, if it's going to look like another facility, they could definitely do far worse than Minute Maid.

#118 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 07 January 2017 - 03:24 PM

I'd have much preferred a modern or contemporary look. The throwback/retro thing has ran its course IMO.

 

I hope that the look is modeled more towards AT&T Arlington Stadium.  I don't think that the design could go wrong if it were a smaller version of the football stadium.



#119 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:25 AM

It will be called...

 

Globe Life Field

 

http://www.star-tele...e169084627.html



#120 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:41 AM

I'm not terribly surprised they stayed on. I would imagine the team gave them some sort of first right of refusal since their original deal extended beyond the life of the existing stadium by a few years. I kept hearing rumors that it might be Dr. Pepper since they announced yesterday that they were not renewing their naming rights deal with the Rangers AA park in Frisco.

#121 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 24 August 2017 - 09:44 PM

It will be called...

 

Globe Life Field

 

http://www.star-tele...e169084627.html

 

A simple tweet would have sufficed... 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#122 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 24 August 2017 - 10:00 PM

You could say that about 99% of all news releases, but a 140 word Tweet doesn't have the sex appeal of the press conference.



#123 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 21 September 2017 - 02:58 PM

Updated renderings released today:

https://www.facebook...ersNewBallpark/

Much better than the original renderings released several months ago.

#124 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 22 September 2017 - 09:41 PM

DKRSc6nVwAAxwj_.jpg

 

DKRSc6nVoAERSMJ.jpg

 

DKRSuvxUMAAXgLB.jpg

 

 

...still don't know how to feel about this. I like it, but feels like there's something off about it. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#125 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 22 September 2017 - 10:32 PM

I like that they ditched most traces of the throwback look. The old one nailed it, no need to even try again.

#126 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 23 September 2017 - 01:00 PM

Looks like a mix of styles. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#127 PeopleAreStrange

PeopleAreStrange

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburbia

Posted 23 September 2017 - 09:19 PM

Still a massive waste of money to replace a good ballpark.


- Dylan


#128 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 23 September 2017 - 11:07 PM

Still a massive waste of money to replace a good ballpark.

 

 The new complex will be not be just for baseball alone, it will be an entertainment complex and a destination of and in itself.  Where the current ballpark is dark during the off season, the complex will be very active year round.  It is a higher use of the investment; weather-proof complex that will assure that all events go on as schedule.  No more double headers or two games for the price of one. 



#129 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:15 AM

Still a massive waste of money to replace a good ballpark.

I want the Rangers to keep using The Ballpark for at least a couple more decades, but unfortunately, that's the current business of major pro sports.

But at the very least, it won't be bulldozed and it'll be used for something else when the club moves over to the new park, so it's not really a "waste". This may actually be the best thing that will ever happen to Arlington... well, until they get REAL public transportation. 


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#130 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 25 September 2017 - 05:21 PM

I'll believe the old park being reused when it happens.

 

I think it's a colossal waste of money, but I'm glad to keep my short drive to see a game.  I'll enjoy watching them in air conditioned comfort, but I believe that baseball is a game best enjoyed outdoors and that winning fills seats, not a lack of perspiration.  I'm very interested in seeing how Texas Live turns out and if it spurs adjacent development.



#131 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:15 PM

Still a massive waste of money to replace a good ballpark.

 

 

....I think it's a colossal waste of money, but I'm glad to keep my short drive to see a game.....

 

It was an almost forgone conclusion that

 

#1. The Rangers wanted a climate controlled stadium

#2.  Forget regional comradery, other cities were readying themselves to get the team

#3. Dallas had plans in the work to give the Rangers a climate controlled stadium in its downtown; and was hotly pursuing the team.

 

To argue that the stadium is a colossal waste discounts the real possibility that Arlington could have lost the team to Irving or Dallas.

 

The Texas Rangers is the one team that I feel is my local team; and without a doubt - TCU Horned Frogs....GO FROGS!



#132 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:29 PM

I drove by today. There is a ton of work going on at the live site.



#133 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:13 PM

I'm not discounting that at all. I would have said the same thing regardless of where it ended. Replacing the current park is a waste of money.

#134 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:55 PM

Sorry for the double post, but I think I should clarify.  I think it's a waste of taxpayer money to build a new stadium, but the team can do as they please.  That being said, Arlington did the right thing by spending the money.  They would have lost the team if they hadn't.



#135 renamerusk

renamerusk

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,845 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Worth South

Posted 25 September 2017 - 09:14 PM

This is symptomatic of why regionalism is both a myth and a danger.  It is a myth that cities within the region are respectful and will show deference to any other city within the region; and danger if as a city you fall for the baloney.

 

Every city in the region is vying to get the "prize' for itself and is will not hesitate to pursue what it believes is in it self interest.

 

Arlington had a keen awareness of the predatory instincts of neighboring cities; it acted quickly and wisely.  Now if Fort Worth would only demonstrate some awareness, it might win the next great prize.



#136 Jeriat

Jeriat

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SWFW

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:28 AM

I'll believe the old park being reused when it happens.

 

Considering the amount of what I've heard, I wouldn't doubt it. Too much opportunity there to add to Texas LIVE!


7fwPZnE.png

 

8643298391_d47584a085_b.jpg


#137 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:43 AM


I'll believe the old park being reused when it happens.

 
Considering the amount of what I've heard, I wouldn't doubt it. Too much opportunity there to add to Texas LIVE!

Yeh, they'll definitely need to add a lot of surface parking...

#138 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 26 September 2017 - 09:05 AM

Every article on the new stadium mentions that the team retains the right to demolish the old one. I don't think that's a coinicidence. It was a facility designed for professional baseball. Adapting it for another use is going to be difficult and expensive. I've always thought the reuse plans were pretty ambitious and just a way to make the city and voters feel better about tossing aside a 25 year old facility that was designed to last a century.

#139 Austin55

Austin55

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tarrant

Posted 26 September 2017 - 09:58 AM

Yep. The promises to keep the old one were purely political. 


  • JBB likes this

#140 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,427 posts
  • Location:Bedford

Posted 26 September 2017 - 06:58 PM

I had a chance to look at some high quality versions of the renderings.  I like several things about the design: the use of red brick without copying the existing park exactly, it's more complementary, the high pitch of the upper level seats bringing them closer to the field, the field level suites, the tie in of Texas Live with the concourse, the archways over the outfield concourse, the use of natural light.  There's nothing that really bothers me.  According to the Star Telegram, there's a couple of Arlington city council members that were underwhelmed by the design.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users