From a few months ago when I first started going.pappysoulard wrote:The plaza looks great from above at the gym. will be interesting if/when fans are allowed back into the stadium.
Agreed, but I'm pretty sure the main reason why it's branded "Fox Sports Midwest Live!" is because the Cardinals pre-game and post-game broadcast studio is literally located on the second floor of the building behind the sign facing Clark Avenue. The Cordish development in the Philly sports park is called Xfinity Live! Philadelphia.chriss752 wrote: ↑Feb 23, 2021My hope would be they find someone else other than Bally to put over the Live! name. I'd prefer it simply becoming "Cardinals Live!" or "St. Louis Live!".
Can we get an Edward Jones or Stifel sponsorship with a stock ticker and a closing bell in the main room? Not that it's really hoppin at 3:00 on a weekday.
- 2,419
Years down the line, after the district is entirely built out, I wonder if Ballpark Village Phase 1 might eventually be removed for larger uses.
Of course, I worry about Busch III now being 15 years old. There are ballparks in MLB that are showing shelf lives of 20-25 years. Globe Life Park in Arlington and Turner Field in Atlanta are significant examples of this.
Busch III is great. I love it. But can we say that it's state of the art anymore? Or that it ever was?
When are the Cardinals going to require massive upgrades to the stadium to keep up with rest of the league? It seems that ask will be coming sooner than later.
Of course, I worry about Busch III now being 15 years old. There are ballparks in MLB that are showing shelf lives of 20-25 years. Globe Life Park in Arlington and Turner Field in Atlanta are significant examples of this.
Busch III is great. I love it. But can we say that it's state of the art anymore? Or that it ever was?
When are the Cardinals going to require massive upgrades to the stadium to keep up with rest of the league? It seems that ask will be coming sooner than later.
^ I see literally no reason to start speculation on the Cardinals asking for a new stadium or significant upgrades.
The team routinely upgrades the stadium (they just spent millions last year renovating party suites...before that it was millions to add the party decks and what not) and yes...when it opened it was state of the art and I’d say it compares quite favorably to other ballparks...even today. Especially with its surroundings...most parks don’t have something like a BPV.
And the “retro parks” of which Busch Stadium was a part of all still seem to be going strong. Turner was built for the Olympics and I’d hardly say compares to Busch.
Other than the Texas example, Busch and the other retro’s seem to be in no rush to get replaced.
The team routinely upgrades the stadium (they just spent millions last year renovating party suites...before that it was millions to add the party decks and what not) and yes...when it opened it was state of the art and I’d say it compares quite favorably to other ballparks...even today. Especially with its surroundings...most parks don’t have something like a BPV.
And the “retro parks” of which Busch Stadium was a part of all still seem to be going strong. Turner was built for the Olympics and I’d hardly say compares to Busch.
Other than the Texas example, Busch and the other retro’s seem to be in no rush to get replaced.
- 805
And the main reason for the Texas Rangers stadium was air conditioning.sc4mayor wrote:^ I see literally no reason to start speculation on the Cardinals asking for a new stadium or significant upgrades.
The team routinely upgrades the stadium (they just spent millions last year renovating party suites...before that it was millions to add the party decks and what not) and yes...when it opened it was state of the art and I’d say it compares quite favorably to other ballparks...even today. Especially with its surroundings...most parks don’t have something like a BPV.
And the “retro parks” of which Busch Stadium was a part of all still seem to be going strong. Turner was built for the Olympics and I’d hardly say compares to Busch.
Other than the Texas example, Busch and the other retro’s seem to be in no rush to get replaced.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 3,762
Fenway and Wrigley were built in 1912 and 1914, respectively. i don't think the NFL top-tier neuroticism has infected MLB yet, at least not to anywhere near the same extent.
- 1,610
Crazy to think how moderate summers in Arlington were back in '94 when they built The Ballpark at Arlington.SeattleNative wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021And the main reason for the Texas Rangers stadium was air conditioning.sc4mayor wrote:^ I see literally no reason to start speculation on the Cardinals asking for a new stadium or significant upgrades.
The team routinely upgrades the stadium (they just spent millions last year renovating party suites...before that it was millions to add the party decks and what not) and yes...when it opened it was state of the art and I’d say it compares quite favorably to other ballparks...even today. Especially with its surroundings...most parks don’t have something like a BPV.
And the “retro parks” of which Busch Stadium was a part of all still seem to be going strong. Turner was built for the Olympics and I’d hardly say compares to Busch.
Other than the Texas example, Busch and the other retro’s seem to be in no rush to get replaced.
If this was supposed to be a joke at the expense of the Air Conditioning comment, there were comments immediately after completion about how hot the stadium was. Unlike most retro ballparks that were built open to a skyline view, Ballpark in Arlington was very stupidly built as a donut. Not sure why they didn't want to show off Arlington, TX's famous skyline. It lacked the breezes that other stadiums such as Busch needed. It wasn't just the lack of air conditioning, it was the lack of any air movement at all. I don't remember the source or the explanation but I heard that pitchers were avoiding the entire Rangers system because of it.Bart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021Crazy to think how moderate summers in Arlington were back in '94 when they built The Ballpark at Arlington.
- 805
Wouldn’t surprise me if they were. And for a long while, until the late 2000s, the Rangers would see extreme fatigue by about August every year and fall out of the race. They had some good teams built around Pudge, Arod, and Palmeiro in the early 2000s.aprice wrote:If this was supposed to be a joke at the expense of the Air Conditioning comment, there were comments immediately after completion about how hot the stadium was. Unlike most retro ballparks that were built open to a skyline view, Ballpark in Arlington was very stupidly built as a donut. Not sure why they didn't want to show off Arlington, TX's famous skyline. It lacked the breezes that other stadiums such as Busch needed. It wasn't just the lack of air conditioning, it was the lack of any air movement at all. I don't remember the source or the explanation but I heard that pitchers were avoiding the entire Rangers system because of it.Bart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021Crazy to think how moderate summers in Arlington were back in '94 when they built The Ballpark at Arlington.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 9,555
Fox Sports sign was removed because Fox Sports no longer exists, it was sold to Ballys casino so now it will be Ballys Sports
Not exactly... Sinclair Broadcasting owns the regional sports networks (RSNs) that formerly bore the name "Fox Sports ______". Last year, they entered into a partnership with Bally's Corporation which would entail rebranding all of the Fox Sports RSNs that Sinclair acquired from Disney (who was forced to sell them by federal regulators after they acquired 21st Century Fox because they already own ESPN) as "Bally Sports ______". Sinclair still owns the networks, but Bally's has the naming rights, as well as some strategic integration of betting technology with the RSNs.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Feb 25, 2021Fox Sports sign was removed because Fox Sports no longer exists, it was sold to Ballys casino so now it will be Ballys Sports
That said... Fox Sports still exists. But it has nothing to do with the properties owned by Sinclair. It is is the larger national sports media group which is still owned by Fox Corporation (Disney acquired everything EXCEPT the FOX broadcast network, Fox News, and FOX Sports national). They still own Fox Sports 1, Fox Sports 2, Fox Soccer Plus, as well as all of the sports broadcasting rights held by the main Fox network (ie MLB All-Star Game and World Series, NFC regular season games, Super Bowl every three years, etc.).
The Texas Rangers of the early 2000s during A-Rod's brief tenure there were not good teams. They won 73, 72, and 71 games respectively in the 2001 through 2003 seasons, finishing dead last in their division each year. One of the most remarkable things Alex Rodriguez did while he was there was to win the 2003 AL MVP award, despite playing on a last place team. In the 26 years the Rangers spent at Globe Life Park, the only two worse seasons they had than the three years A-Rod was there were 2014 and 2018 (67 wins each year).SeattleNative wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021And for a long while, until the late 2000s, the Rangers would see extreme fatigue by about August every year and fall out of the race. They had some good teams built around Pudge, Arod, and Palmeiro in the early 2000s.
- 1,291
Seems unlikely that the DeWitts would have invested as much money into BPV as they have if they thought it was going to be 'pointless' in the future, like if the stadium moved. Busch III might not be the best stadium in the league, but it's still solid and has a good atmosphere all the time, not to mention good sightlines - it's the stadium equivalent of the Cardinal's front office strategy of winning 90 games every year; nothing flashy, but it gets the job done more often than not. I'd bet it still has a good few decades of service life at least. I guess they could strip most of the baseball branding in favor of a generic 'district' if the stadium truly moved, but I wouldn't be surprised if Busch IV - or whatever it ends up being called - is built in the same spot as the current stadium when the time comes.KansasCitian wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021Years down the line, after the district is entirely built out, I wonder if Ballpark Village Phase 1 might eventually be removed for larger uses.
Of course, I worry about Busch III now being 15 years old. There are ballparks in MLB that are showing shelf lives of 20-25 years. Globe Life Park in Arlington and Turner Field in Atlanta are significant examples of this.
Busch III is great. I love it. But can we say that it's state of the art anymore? Or that it ever was?
When are the Cardinals going to require massive upgrades to the stadium to keep up with rest of the league? It seems that ask will be coming sooner than later.
- 1,610
No, more a jab at the stupidity of the situation in which they suddenly realized it's hot in Texas, so we need to spend an additional ~+$1b to correct our oversight from 25 years ago (with at least 50% of that $ being public funds).aprice wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021If this was supposed to be a joke at the expense of the Air Conditioning comment, there were comments immediately after completion about how hot the stadium was. Unlike most retro ballparks that were built open to a skyline view, Ballpark in Arlington was very stupidly built as a donut. Not sure why they didn't want to show off Arlington, TX's famous skyline. It lacked the breezes that other stadiums such as Busch needed. It wasn't just the lack of air conditioning, it was the lack of any air movement at all. I don't remember the source or the explanation but I heard that pitchers were avoiding the entire Rangers system because of it.Bart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021Crazy to think how moderate summers in Arlington were back in '94 when they built The Ballpark at Arlington.
- 443
Well when your metro is growing at more than 1 million per decade these things are easier to swallowBart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑Feb 25, 2021No, more a jab at the stupidity of the situation in which they suddenly realized it's hot in Texas, so we need to spend an additional ~+$1b to correct our oversight from 25 years ago (with at least 50% of that $ being public funds).aprice wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021If this was supposed to be a joke at the expense of the Air Conditioning comment, there were comments immediately after completion about how hot the stadium was. Unlike most retro ballparks that were built open to a skyline view, Ballpark in Arlington was very stupidly built as a donut. Not sure why they didn't want to show off Arlington, TX's famous skyline. It lacked the breezes that other stadiums such as Busch needed. It wasn't just the lack of air conditioning, it was the lack of any air movement at all. I don't remember the source or the explanation but I heard that pitchers were avoiding the entire Rangers system because of it.Bart Harley Jarvis wrote: ↑Feb 24, 2021Crazy to think how moderate summers in Arlington were back in '94 when they built The Ballpark at Arlington.
Starbucks is now open at 6 Cardinal Way. Hours are 7AM to 1PM.
Not seeing how that would be realistically possible. Even with the advance of construction technology, it's hard to fathom a scenario in which Busch III could be demolished and a new stadium be built in the exact same spot all within the span of about 5-6 months.Trololzilla wrote: ↑Feb 25, 2021I wouldn't be surprised if Busch IV - or whatever it ends up being called - is built in the same spot as the current stadium when the time comes.
Because if you can't do that... where exactly do the Cardinals play in the interim? To the best of my knowledge, no Major League Baseball team has ever built a new stadium in the exact same spot as the one it was replacing. The only instance I can think of with an NFL team doing that is the Minnesota Vikings, and it required them to spend two years as tenants in the University of Minnesota's outdoor TCF Bank Stadium (which itself had just been built a few years before the Metrodome came down).
Where would the Cardinals play for the roughly two seasons in which they wouldn't have a home?
^ I could see compromise, were you would go without a season at Busch. You could squeeze a year and half to demo and rebuild the structure above the field itself. No reason or need to rebuild the field and or the foundations. Simply design, demo and build a new above ground structure. Even if a new structure would include a roof you could still design and build a self supporting structure with some new foundation on perimeter and do a lot of pre fab off site during regular season play.
As far as where to play that one season away from Busch, Mizzou? don't know the facilities and or KC around Royals schedule?
As far as where to play that one season away from Busch, Mizzou? don't know the facilities and or KC around Royals schedule?
Sauget...GCS Credit Union Ballpark? Highly unlikely, and highly unlikely the Cards look at building a new stadium for a long time as the push for new stadiums of the 90's/early 2000's was about adding luxury boxes, better sight-lines from the dual purpose stadiums they were replacing, and in many cases reducing the amount of seats, making for a more intimate setting. I see Busch III checking all these boxes for years to come. Perhaps in the future, stadiums will require new revenue generators stadiums of today do not already incorporate, I'm sure of this. It is then we'll hear the call for Busch IIII.
However, with the setting around Busch III only getting better, and with the construction methods this current stadium was built with, I'm curious if retrofitting this stadium is the future, both the exterior and interior. I imagine they can replace those brick panels with new brick, glass or other materials, replace seats and add/replace luxury suites, etc. all with relative ease.
However, with the setting around Busch III only getting better, and with the construction methods this current stadium was built with, I'm curious if retrofitting this stadium is the future, both the exterior and interior. I imagine they can replace those brick panels with new brick, glass or other materials, replace seats and add/replace luxury suites, etc. all with relative ease.
Many stadiums have gone through pretty comprehensive renovations without requiring the home team to play elsewhere. Fenway, Wrigley, Kauffman, Progressive and Dodgers Stadiums have all had major renovations without leaving. Often the updates and upgrades are implemented piecemeal in the 5-6 month spans between multiple seasons.
A whole lot of trendy new amenities could be added in phases in the center field quadrant of the ballpark, without disrupting the baseball season. In fact, it was designed that way. It's part of the reason that part of the ballpark looks so temporary.
Having said that, there is an option for a new ballpark, directly southwest of Busch III, or a bit further, on the Nestle Purina campus. They would just need to shift and/or bury the rails, if those rails are even there or active a decade or two from now. The current ballpark site could then be turned into Ballpark Village Phases 4-6, and they could even incorporate the perpetually-planned Chouteau Lake/greenway project into it all...
Having said that, there is an option for a new ballpark, directly southwest of Busch III, or a bit further, on the Nestle Purina campus. They would just need to shift and/or bury the rails, if those rails are even there or active a decade or two from now. The current ballpark site could then be turned into Ballpark Village Phases 4-6, and they could even incorporate the perpetually-planned Chouteau Lake/greenway project into it all...
- 1,291
^ True that - a bit further south and expanding the footprint of BPV would be welcome, too.. But yeah I was thinking that if they were really dead set on building in the same spot then they could always try for a phased demo/construction.
With or without a stadium it would be interesting to know if DeWitt/Cordish have considered expanding their BPV footprint or not, or something similar. I thought that DeWitt/Cordish would have gone after 300 S Broadway and parking lots on east side of Busch. Or Cupples properties, either the lot that Koman bought & proposed Cupples X on and or Opus Spruce street development. But somehow they took a pass or maybe made a half hearted attempt to secure properties. Heck, you have the old Steakhouse and they could still make a deal for one or two of the garages on either side of BPV (prime target for tear down and podium/tower replacement). So in some respects they already had a chance to lock in more real estate for future phases literally next door.urbanitas wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2021Having said that, there is an option for a new ballpark, directly southwest of Busch III, or a bit further, on the Nestle Purina campus. They would just need to shift and/or bury the rails, if those rails are even there or active a decade or two from now. The current ballpark site could then be turned into Ballpark Village Phases 4-6, and they could even incorporate the perpetually-planned Chouteau Lake/greenway project into it all...
Like a few other comments. Purina has a lot of underutilized space and if Chouteau Lake/Greenway ever gets going then you have an avenue for a developer to come with a Village Like type development south of Busch. Add some recreational ballfields south of Busch and call it BPV II, etc. Or even, DPV for Dog Park Village and market it as a first of its kind pet specific/pet friendly village.