that said, the homemade signs on the upper deck are well known by any of us who watch games on a regular basis. alas…

Thanks Alex, Cliff and William for your great posts on the Stadium, am really getting a feel for it now. Of course though, it’s soulless and a monument to greed compared to the classic feel of Fenway.. (sorry, just prepping for my new ESPN gig..)

The bleachers are now a much better seat. Not only are they closer to the field, but there is a lot more room between the rows. The access to the rest of the park is also a big plus. Of all the sections, I think the bleachers enjoy the biggest upgrade, which is nice considering those are the cheapest tickets (and at $14 a relative entertainment bargain).

Also, for the second straight day, I was able to head right behind the plate and watch a full inning on the Field Level concourse. Not only are you close to the field, but the view is complete. If you have the strength to stand, it’s an amazing place to watch the game.

One point where I’d disagree with Alex is I don’t think the field is overwhelming at all. Everything on the field and in the stands seems to be very well integrated. Also, there were far fewer ads in the outfield than I had imagined. The only flashy thing about the outfield area is the diamond vision, but I think the novelty of it will wear off and it will blend in better after a few visits. Regardless, its crystal clarity is impressive and if used right should be a great feature of the new place.

Ironically, I found the old place to have a lot more distractions (ones I enjoyed, however) in the outfield area. Whereas the old place had a hodgepodge, the new place is much more orderly. I kind of like a little craziness in the outfield, so that’s one area where I prefer the look of the old place.

What is like a pinball machine, however, are the concourses and hall areas, but once you get to the field, the focus very much seems to be baseball. Aside from the restaurant (which reminds me of an airport terminal) and the diamond vision, there really aren’t many amenities visible from the stands. I think the newness of the place combined with the fact that it was an exhibition game were the reasons no one seemed to be paying attention to the game. Once the games count, I expect the crowds to be very much into the action. My biggest question (and concern) is whether the size and openness of the park will disperse the sound and lessen the “jungle effect”.

It sounds like a lesser version of Chase Field.
http://arizona.diamondbacks.mlb.com/ari/ballpark/index.jsp

I visited Chase Field about 3 years ago. It was like putting a mall inside an airplane hangar, and then putting a baseball field inside of THAT. The acoustics were HORRIBLE. The suites could have been confused for doctor’s offices. There was ZERO intimacy in the place.

Remember when ballparks didn’t need to constantly bombard you with aural/visual clues? Sigh.

Beyond that, Alex’s description above hits the nail on the head as far as I’m concerned. I particularly like his point about the lack of a place for fans to drape home-made signs and the lack of a public address echo. My first impressions of the new stadium were positive, but the more it sinks in, the less I like about it.