Recent Blog Posts

Good Riddance to the House Ruth Didn't Build

By TIM MARCHMAN | January 17, 2007

Yesterday, ESPN's Buster Olney reported that, according to his sources, Major League Baseball will soon announce that the 2008 All Star Game will be played in the Bronx, in Yankee Stadium's last season. As a symbolic hail and farewell to the stadium, it can't come soon enough. Good riddance!

Click Image to Enlarge

New York Yankees / AP

A rendering of the new Yankee Stadium, which is expected to be ready for the beginning of the 2009 season. According to an ESPN report, the All Star Game will be played in Yankee Stadium in 2008 — its final year.

One can only hope that neither baseball nor the Yankees will maintain the absurd pretense that the park where Derek Jeter plays is the same one in which Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, and Mickey Mantle played. It isn't, and an All Star Game being played in a park that was built a couple of years before I was born will be about as much a goodbye to "The House That Ruth Built" as playing a game in Prospect Park would be a goodbye to Ebbets Field.

That many people don't realize this is a testament to short memories and a testament to the power of the Yankees brand and its association with tradition and nostalgia; it's nonetheless true. In 1974 and 1975, Yankee Stadium was destroyed. The facade was removed, the columns and pillars supporting the upper deck were removed, the dimensions were changed, wooden seats were replaced with plastic ones, the press box and clubhouses were remodeled, luxury boxes were built, and so on. It was a new park in everything but name, and a rather ugly one. The changes were made at taxpayer expense to ensure profits for a privately held entity, and their general effect was to make the park uglier and a worse place for most people to watch baseball.

People with the cash to sit in luxury boxes got a better deal, but everyone else got the shaft. Look at a picture of the first Yankee Stadium, and you'll note that as in Wrigley Field or Fenway Park, people in the upper decks are perilously close to the field. That's because a park that incorporates columns and pillars can support decks extending much closer to the action. One that removes those elements, as the new Yankee Stadium did, has to recess the upper decks. This is why you need binoculars to watch a game from those seats these days; it does prevent the odd field-level seat from being stationed behind a girder, though, and thus ensures convenience for the high-paying few at the expense of the comparatively low-paying many.

Looked at this way, the park at 161 Street is less a shrine to the Yankees' dynastic qualities and more of a ridiculous reminder of how baseball teams manage to rip off cities. For no evident reason, the city destroyed a perfectly good ballpark it owned, built a new one for $180 million in 2005 dollars, and then signed it over to a plutocrat. In the process, the city destroyed something of great historical and aesthetic value and replaced it with a bowl of concrete so impractical it would barely last more than 30 years.

Of course the city is making the same mistake all over again. The new, new Yankee Stadium, which will swallow up 22 acres of parkland and replace it with Astroturfed garage rooftops and the like, will seat spectators even further from the action than the old, new Yankee Stadium, and the cost looks to run close to a billion dollars, with most analysts estimating that the public will subsidize roughly $400 million of it — all this for a project of no discernible benefit to anyone other than the Yankee organization. Probably in 2039, it will host an All Star Game while everyone grows misty about how Babe Ruth played there.

Like anyone else, I have countless wonderful memories of great times I've had watching baseball at the stadium; it isn't a ballpark in the same sense that Wrigley Field is, but the quality of a ballpark is far less important than what goes on there (people manage to get sentimental over Shea, for Pete's sake), and mostly what's gone on at Yankee Stadium is great baseball. It's still always worth keeping in mind that when anyone involved with baseball starts talking a lot of bosh about history, tradition, and the heritage we share, what they mean is that they want to spend your money to make more money for themselves, and that when Major League Baseball decides to celebrate the past, it's because they think they can sell it. An All Star Game in New York City will be pretty great. The certain-to-come YES Network special in which Michael Kay cries while preaching about how Whitey Ford and Andy Pettitte toed the same slab of championship destiny, and how one can breathe in that destiny by making a last trip to the hallowed ground in the South Bronx? Not so much.

tmarchman@nysun.com


Reader comments on this article

Comment By Date

This is what I have been saying all along. If you are old enough to remember the original stadium, then... [MORE]

Mark Pierce 

Jan 17, 2007 01:56

Nice article about the stadium. I never was at the 'old' stadium, but I never felt the history at the... [MORE]

Baseball Fan 

Jan 24, 2007 02:04

You hit it on the head, man -- very well put about how nobody mentions the '70s era-blandness of the... [MORE]

Greg 

Jan 17, 2007 15:54

Egads! The thought of professional baseball wanting to charge higher prices to attend their events. Something that has happened since...oh...the... [MORE]

James 

Jan 18, 2007 00:10

While it's true that the new Yankees stadium will feature an upper deck farther from the action than the House... [MORE]

Neil deMause 

Jan 18, 2007 07:29

or does the upper deck start at AA? I can't remember [MORE]

rich 

Mar 30, 2007 08:07

Your facts are only half-true. A lot of what was there before is still there now. And don't forget that... [MORE]

Joe Pep 

Jan 18, 2007 16:21

The old park, the new park. I'm not old enough to remember what the park was like, but I am a... [MORE]

Brian D 

Jan 19, 2007 20:17

i first visited yankee stadium in april of 2001 and i enjoyed it very much. i had 2 of my... [MORE]

joyce harper 

Jan 31, 2007 13:27

Mr. Marchman: You read for all the world like one of the authors of contemporary books about ballparks. And in the... [MORE]

Jim Meyer 

Feb 8, 2007 20:07

Tim Marchman made some very good points in his article regarding Yankee Stadium, and I strongly agree with one in... [MORE]

Eddie 

Feb 9, 2007 00:40

The reason, as you say, Yankee Stadium is not the same stadium but it is the same field... it is... [MORE]

chris ippolito 

Feb 12, 2007 23:44

I've been to "The Stadium" twice in my life, and will go there again before its gone. My trips were... [MORE]

Pete 

Feb 19, 2007 00:14

my comment is, it's hard to tell what this sportswriter is writing about, much less what his point is in... [MORE]

mike b 

Mar 9, 2007 02:13

TIM MARCHMAN'S ARTICLE, I FELT, IS ACCURATE AS FAR AS THE STADIUM REALLY NOT BEING THE STADIUM IT WAS. THE... [MORE]

MIKE IN CONNECTICUT 

Mar 21, 2007 09:11

Were they supposed to not replace anything in the stadium since Ruth played there? Should we be sitting on the... [MORE]

simon 

Apr 1, 2007 10:36

In addition to the structural changes that came with the renovation even the FIELD was changed. It was lowered by... [MORE]

Doug 

Apr 9, 2007 00:15

Stop your crying - this article is really an attack on "rich" George Steinbrenner. Sounds like mostly jealous sour grapes... [MORE]

Dave Alan 

Apr 20, 2007 13:16

if by " mostly what's gone on at Yankee Stadium is great baseball" you mean a bunch of gorssly overpaid... [MORE]

farbermiller 

Feb 13, 2008 09:30