Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Busch Stadium Better Than New Yankees and Mets' Ballparks, So Says New York Times

Posted By on Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:00 AM

Someone really, really likes Busch Stadium. That person is New York Times sports writer George Vecsey.

Fresh from a trip to St. Louis last week for an All-Star Game promo, Vecsey penned a piece for the Times on Monday comparing Busch Stadium to buried treasure. More specifically, he noted that the bronze statues of former Cardinals great outside the stadium seem to hold vigil "like ancient Xian statue-warriors guarding the Chinese emperor for eternity."

And Vecsey chastises New York for building two expensive, new ballparks with lots of flair but little soul.
click to enlarge The Mets' new Citi Field
  • The Mets' new Citi Field
Meanwhile, New York has the $1.5 billion fortress of the Bronx, which I like to think of as Yankeeland, where the great tradition is enclosed behind forbidding walls, with great swaths of empty luxury seats embarrassing baseball if not the un-embarrassable Yankee management. And in Queens, there is the $800 million Mets stadium named for a failing bank subsidized by us, with sightlines that are enraging thousands of fans who expected more from their costly investment.
Vecsey continues...
click to enlarge Yankee Stadium, c. 2009 - FLICKR.COM/PHOTOS/ARNAUDT
  • Yankee Stadium, c. 2009
The DeWitts have paid attention to the basics at Busch III: wide corridors, attractive food stands, lots of pleasant corners and plenty of the traditional red brick, once made by the Berras and the Garagiolas at the Laclede brickworks. There are plenty of income-producing advertisements, but Busch III somehow seems more tasteful than the new Mets and Yankees palaces, which have all the subtlety of a Nascar automobile.

Best Things to Do In St. Louis


Never miss a beat

Sign Up Now

Subscribe now to get the latest news delivered right to your inbox.

© 2018 Riverfront Times

Website powered by Foundation