You seem to be suggesting that it would have been easy to keep the 600 seats without an obstruction, but how do you accomplish that? Recess the restaurant a bit? Then, I guess you could argue why not add some more seats in the new shadow so you can at least give more fans the options of paying to enter the facility. Of course, if you do that, someone will criticize these added seats, which creates a no-win cycle.

If you gave me a half-cooked hot dog while everyone else was eating steak, would I want to eat it unless I was absolutely starving? Maybe, but you can bet I won’t ever come back there again.

Again, here is how the Yankees could have done away with obstructed seats…they could simply told the builder not to put seats in the shadow. There…problem solved. The only problem is that 600 people who would probably want to pay $5 for them would no longer have the chance.

Sure, except for the 600 people sitting in those seats!

The “outrage” is over Trost’s comments, which are misleading at best, and the fact that there was no need to have those 600 seats be obstructed view. When someone – we won’t get into that, Neil does an admirable job covering it – pays over a billion dollars for a brand new, state of the art stadium, you’d think it would include no obstructed view seats. Otherwise, how is it state of the art?

On a happier note, if you go here you can see streaming video of the Yanks getting ready to take batting practice. (Swisher is taking swings as I type this.)

deMause has clearly made a niche criticizing new ballparks, but I have found his commentary to be sanctimonious at best. His comments above illustrate that.

Finally, on the issue of seating capacity, it should be noted that the new Yankee Stadium will trail only the Los Angeles Dodgers in number of seats sold, and that would be the case even if they decided to eliminate the 600 obstructed views. The fact is that the Yankees did make an effort to maintain a sizeable capacity and it is likely that did increase the sight lines. It seems like the knee jerk reaction is to criticize, but everyone who has toured the new place has raved about it. I am sure that once people get in side, the fact that a few bleacher seats have obstructed views will seem rather minor.

Whatever virtues Trost and Levine have (had?) on the inside business part of the Yanks, they really seem to have no virtues when it comes to dealing with the game of baseball, or its fans. In fact, since (IIRC) both were essentially brought on board to help bring about a New Stadium, with that Stadium opening in a few weeks, perhaps its time for them to go.

Thanks!

The last few years each I have spent a month in Italy, teaching a course (that’s all I’ll say!). Since I have to babysit, er, mold the young minds of students, my free time is not a flexible as you would think. It always works out that the teams closest play away, or I have some other obligation, etc. on the weekends when FIBS (Federazione Italiana Baseball Softball) Serie A teams play.

But this year I *think* I’ll be able to get to a game in Bologna!

Trost is such a lying sack of shit. For three years they were fuzzy about the seating capacity, and only at the end were the lower estimates confirmed.

For years all we heard about were improved sight lines, etc., then he tells us they knew all along that a significant portion of the bleachers (more than 10%) would have an “architectural shadow.”

As of just a few days ago he told Neil Best that the bleachers were 12$, take it or leave it. Now he suddenly says that the “shadowed” seats were wrongly priced.

I don’t mind the new Stadium per se, but the organization, or at least their front men, are wretched.

Don’t think for a minute that I didn’t keep the hide and tell the tale (downplaying the “old ball” and “BP” elements depending on the audience). I think the hide spent some time on my bulletin board at work.

Conditions notwithstanding, hitting that ball and watching the other guys react was a sweet feeling.

Trost’s quote was fascinating to me because he managed to be so illogically equivocal. No kidding, if you sit in a seat close to the sports bar (I thought it was a restaurant), you might not be able to see the other side. The point, Mr. Trost, is that there are some seats where you definitely will not be able to see the other side. He acknowledges that such seats exist, but dances around what happens when you sit in one of them (you “might not” be able to see). Amazing.

I can’t wait to see a published report somewhere of what its like to sit in the one of the seats nearest the sports bar.

And they did, too!