Splicetoday

Sports
Jul 14, 2008, 07:50AM

Bronx Farce

Major League Baseball’s wave of nostalgia over the final season at Yankee Stadium obscures the fact that this teardown was unnecessary.

Yankee stadium.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

Photo by Shelley Panzarella

Wouldn’t it be grand if, on Tuesday night, just as the All-Star game was getting underway, an unrelenting thunderstorm blanketed New York City and forced the postponement of this annual parade of sports celebrities? Sorry to be a killjoy, but after listening to promos on ESPN, Fox and YES for the exhibition contest this past month, I’m tempted to watch a movie or one of those obscure Japanese channels on cable rather than endure the endless teary-eyed tributes to Yankee Stadium that have consumed more airtime than even the presidential campaign. I’m as sentimental about the history of baseball as the next schlub, and have seen more games at the Stadium than any other ballpark, but aside from the well-deserved tribute to late Bobby Murcer—who was unfortunate enough to be dubbed the second coming of Mickey Mantle and played for the Yanks during their blessed fallow period in the mid-late 60s and early 70s—the continuous blather about the final season at one of America’s great “cathedrals” that’s guaranteed to be spewed that night promises to be nauseating.

Unlike the demolition of Shea Stadium, which is a dump where the only seats that won’t cause a crick in your neck are directly behind home plate, there was no reason for the Yanks to move across the street except for the extraordinary new stream of revenue it’ll bring the Steinbrenner family. When the new Yankee Stadium opens next year—a replica of the current one—the only difference for fans will be the increased cost of attending a game, with prices so high that going to a ballgame will nick your wallet more than a Broadway play.

In The New York Sun last week, Thomas Hauser put this grab for dollars—and let’s not forget that New York taxpayers will bear some of the brunt—into perspective. He wrote: “The original stadium once seated 71,699 fans for baseball. Its current capacity [after a facelift in the mid-70s] is 57,545. The new stadium will accommodate 55,000 [actually a few thousand less]. More significantly, it will be constructed in a way that positions the most expensive suites at field level. That’s like the Vatican tearing down St. Peter’s Cathedral to build a new house of worship with a Jumbotron and luxury pews. The new Yankee Stadium will have 1,800 ‘legends’ seats at prices ranging from $2,500 to $5,000 per seat per game. Those prices are obscene.”

I certainly have nothing against the profit motive, and although owner George Steinbrenner was in his heyday an often entertaining tabloid buffoon, give him credit for spending millions upon millions not just for the sake for attendance totals but because he wanted to the Yanks to win every year, which is what one would expect from a wealthy man who acquired a franchise as the fulfillment of a childhood dream.

What sticks in my craw is that building a new Yankee Stadium is just so unnecessary: sure, the current venue could be spruced up—hiring a new, and better-paid, fleet of enthusiastic concession stand employees would be an immense improvement, since right now you can miss two innings standing on line for a beer and pretzel—but with over four million spectators watching the Yanks play every year now, you’d think this could be done without passing down the cost to already-strapped customers. Hauser’s mostly correct when he says, “The new Yankee message isn’t ‘bring your kids.’ It’s ‘bring your clients.’”

There’s nothing sinister or modern about conducting business at a ballgame: salesmen making pitches to potential clients who happen to be sports fans makes a lot of sense. In fact, when I owned the weekly New York Press, we sprung for season tickets and the investment—about $15,000—was recouped by the successful wooing of new advertisers by the end of May, a most pleasant set of circumstances. Yet one of the glories of Yankee Stadium, even in the 1990s, was the congregation of a legitimate mixture of people from all sorts of backgrounds. You’d see, all in one section, guys in suits trying not to get mustard on their ties along with wholesome families, bare-chested youths with “Jeter Rules” painted on their bodies and older New Yorkers, scorecards in hand, who might engage in conversation about seeing Joe DiMaggio’s graceful defense in center field or seeing Phil Rizzuto on the subway before a game.

Maybe this is alarmism run amok, but if the reports about outrageous ticket prices are correct, it’s possible that in the future Yankee Stadium will be populated by the elite alone, which pretty much sucks. And, just like the Boston fans who’ve been priced out of Fenway Park and flock to other stadiums to see the Sox play, displaced Yankee diehards will be on the move as well.

The final year at Yankee Stadium—and as the Daily News’ Mike Lupica pointed out today, it’s no longer “The House That Ruth Built,” but rather “The House That Mayor [John] Lindsay Rebuilt In the 1970s”—is a manufactured gift to the Steinbrenners by the media, with increased television ratings because sometimes the public are sucker-bait lemmings. The only reason for constructing “The House That Jeter Built” is to provide ostensible justification for outlandish prices for corporate sites, general admission seats and $11.95 dogs. What consumers get from this one-sided deal are slightly more comfortable chairs, more bathrooms and a juiced-up sound system for ubiquitous Beach Boys and Aerosmith songs that’ll increase your headache between innings.

As someone who grew up on Long Island and later on lived for 16 years in Lower Manhattan, I’m not a heartless bastard who’s bereft of fond Stadium memories. One summer day in 1966, my dad skipped work at his car wash and we sat in two-dollar bleacher seats and relished another Yankee loss, with a Tom Tresh homer giving fans the sole reason to cheer. I saw Yaz play there in ’67 when he carried Boston to an improbable pennant. And through the years I was verbally—and once physically—abused for daring to wear a Bosox cap at games that were critical in that storied rivalry. More recently, I remember having tickets for the first home game of the 2001 World Series against the Diamondbacks and, to my older son’s immense disappointment, giving them away. It wasn’t long after 9/11, of course, and there just wasn’t any way I’d risk a possible terrorism attack on the subway to the Stadium for a baseball game. As it happened, one of my older brothers did arrive on time that night for the contest, but left after a half hour because the security lines were too long.

My family is going to attend a Sox game at the Stadium at the end of August, but it’s more an excuse for a visit to the city than any desire to see the “cathedral” one more time. With any luck—not that I’m counting on it—the 2008 Yanks won’t make the playoffs and the Steinbrenners will be forced to choke on their avarice when the team plays the last home game of the season on Sept. 21 against the Orioles. That would be a fitting finale to this unseemly chapter in baseball history.

Discussion
  • That the new stadium holds less people than the old one is, in my opinion, the biggest sham. I think most people would agree that most professional sports teams are run as corporations, but the Yankees (disclaimer: they're nothing to me) seem to top the lot in terms of vicious bottom-line pandering (I was about to throw in the Redskins as an example, but they, unlike the Yankees, never win). But Russ, I must ask: what are the seating arrangements at the Bosox stadium? I've heard its way expensive with not enough seats with terrible sight line problems.

    Responses to this comment
  • AS: I can't defend Fenway outrageous prices, currently the highest in MLB. It didn't use to be that way: in 2000 my family of four bought tix at face value right behind the Sox dugout. And the bonus was Pedro Martinez (who wasn't pitching that day) saw one of my sons, decked out in a Sox uniform and gave him a piece of bubblegum. I think the difference is that the expansions at Fenway are paid for by the team. The seats there are still cramped, and the two-beer limit is stupid (but very Boston) and too much rain can flood the park, but the atmosphere (just like at the current Yankee Stadium) is terrific.

    Responses to this comment
  • Uh, I can't afford tickets at Fenway since mostly rich people scoop them up. Sometimes I get lucky and the dad of a friend will give me a game from the season ticket he bought 20 years ago and obviously keeps renewing. As for Yankee Stadium, new or old, A-Fraud still plays there, so I have no interest in contributing to his salary.

    Responses to this comment
  • Hey Russ, I agree with two of your points but really disagree on a third. Yes, the media's year-long rhapsodic eulogy for the Stadium is as much a convenient drum roll for the new one. And yes, the Steinbrenners will over-grab on all manner of new Stadium pricing because they can; supply and demand. But thirdly, while all the 'cathedral' talk is a touch saccharine I'd say it's largely allowable: 1. Baseball is nothing if not sentimental; it lends itself to fond memories 2.Yankee Stadium has been the venue for and witness to far more than the 26 Yankees' world championships and numerous mythical players. it's also hosted scores of other baseball greats (Mays, Williams, Aaron, Robinson, et al) not to mention boxing title fights, pro football, NYC high school title games, even non-sports events. Lots of intense,almost-religious memories for millions. So Russ, you sound like a bitter pre-2004 Red Sox fan. It's only a little harmless 'cathedral' talk. Relax, your team has one twice now. Only 24 more to go.

    Responses to this comment
  • What everyone seems to forget, and it certainly doesn't make it right, is that a professional sports franchise is a private business. Yes, the public donates their time, money and emotions to support "their" team but at the end of the day, it's all about cash. Living in Seattle has thrown me into the middle of a professional sports team relocation. From an emotional and traditional aspect, I really, really hate to see it happen but from a capitalistic standpoint, how can it justifiably be prevented? Yes, this is a bit of a tangent but I think it directly relates to the Yankees. Is a new stadium necessary? Of course not but it will put a lot more money into the Steinbrenner family pockets and only a fool would say no to so much public financing. I'm as big of a sports fan as anyone but I definitely realize that it's not, and never will be, about the fans.

    Responses to this comment
  • I want to know more about these "legends" seats, I mean, how can a baseball ticket cost $5,000! Fenway is way overpriced, but I doubt it will stay that way forever, when the sox get bad, the true fans with stay, and the fare-weather's will leave, and the stadium will return to normal.

    Responses to this comment
  • I don't know about you, but yankee stadium is pretty uncomfortable and ugly. it's not the most necessary teardown, but at least it'll be an aesthetic and pleasurable improvement.

    Responses to this comment
  • Jaye 220 seems to have a very realistic grip on the perspective of professional sports team owners. By definition owners are genuine super-fans but they ultimately want to make money or at least not lose any on their sports business.When the Sonics move to Oklahoma City the new ownership will go out of its way to romance the prospective local fan base - and for once it will seem to be about the fans- but over time those same owners will turn into jaded bottomline owners. As for Snorelock's question - how can a Fenway seat cost $5,000? - the answer is because enough people have enough money and are willing to spend it that way. And Snorelock is right, when the Sox eventually take a slide there won't be enough people willing to spring for $5K seats. And Sox ownership - truly smart businessmen in the real world- may well start to look for a club sale when the fat profits shrink.

    Responses to this comment
  • We went to a game in Sacramento (Athletics AAA team, the River Cats), had good seats at $35, which already seems high to this geezer. By comparison, just returned from a trip with other geezers to see games in the bushes of Indiana, and the best seats at Indianapolis Indians (AAA, guess what big club) were $13, more my speed. But I suppose seats in Pawtucket and Scranton are outrageous. Now, to address the subject at hand, I will have my barf bucket with me this evening for the sentimental drivel, but wait, the mute button! Oy, will it be Tim McCarver? God help us all.

    Responses to this comment
  • I completely agree with jaye220's take on sports business. Of course, the Steinbrenners can do what they want in a supply and demand world. And of course if the government of New York was stupid enough to give partial financing by fleeced taxpayers, they would accept it. As I wrote, I'm a proponent of the profit motive; I'm just baffled that the Yanks could bamboozle city hall, when the new stadium won't bring additional jobs or commerce to the blighted area in which the team plays. That said, while I agree with Carreraman that the Stadium is iconic for so many events over the years, the media hype is nauseating. It's not as if the Yanks are moving to Oklahoma City or even Manhattan. They're going across the street!

    Responses to this comment
  • I actually did watch the game and it was great, one of the best in a long time. I'm thinking that the Yanks, with Matsui down and Damon hurting, will get Matt Holliday at the trading deadline. Jeter is finally showing his age, no Dorian Gray for him.

    Responses to this comment
  • I'm glad the A.L. won since the Angels will be invincible at home, dashing the hopes of Cubs fans across the country.

    Responses to this comment
  • I like Noscull's breezy slam of Tim McCarver, one of the worst analysts covering baseball today. I don't think he was always this awful--and is still better than Joe Buck, who has all the sincerity of A-Rod--but now he makes mistakes every inning and then has to correct them. It's sort of like letting an 85-year-old drive on the highways.

    Responses to this comment
  • McCarver sucks and so does Buck, but with the exception of Jon Miller, everyone on ESPN is worse, and that's no small feat.

    Responses to this comment
  • The Yanks are never dead, and maybe all that hoopla gave them a boost. My team, Vlady's Angels, will crush them in the playoffs though.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment