CHICAGO - Soldier Field (61,500)

[rantanamo]

NFL
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Chicago_Bears_logo.svg/100px-Chicago_Bears_logo.svg.png
Chicago Bears

9x Champion:
1921, 1932, 1933, 1940, 1941,
1943, 1946, 1963, 1985



Home of the NFL's Chicago Bears

Can you fit a new modern stadium inside of an old one? One complete with hundred of luxury suites, club seating and put fans close to the action? Yes. There are bigger stadiums out there, with fancy awnings, retractable roofs, etc. They all try to be the most modern, yet most are big repeats of the same thing. Then you have Soldier Field, that shows there is innovation in design.

Pre-renovation Soldier Field
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/9079/5445605WVSpXrNnFt_fs.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/5336/be22.jpg

New Soldier Field
http://www.newspagedesigner.com/users/111/SoldierField.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/3299/P1010500.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/2928/grhc2004_aerial-2003-11b.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/3319/270632906hNkCkG_ph.jpg
http://five24.net/images/uploads/soldierfieldsunrise-1500.jpg

Atriums, concourses and walkways
http://www.webwaymonsters.com/fanpics/Hampton99/Hamptonfull/tn_New%20Soldier%20Field%20072.jpg
http://www.webwaymonsters.com/fanpics/Hampton99/Hamptonfull/tn_New%20Soldier%20Field%20010.jpg
http://www.webwaymonsters.com/fanpics/Hampton99/Hamptonfull/tn_New%20Soldier%20Field%20014.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/843/img_1778sized.jpg
http://img56.exs.cx/img56/7125/100401897azbwqrfs5mi.jpg

Gameday football
http://home.wi.rr.com/jvweb/bears3.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/9812/img_1783.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/9879/201730202lMhhQm_fs.jpg

Gameday football
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/3572/229659561AXXhVf_fs.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/5796/168214984MkWFJN_fs.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/7391/162121388jsqzwZ_fs.jpg
http://img30.exs.cx/img30/2262/168216640ZTkqJE_fs.jpg

[israelblue]

ohhhhhhhh, I like Soldier Field

[Steely Dan]

most people here in town seem to hate it, but i think it's brilliant!

what a magnificent sports facility to have right next to downtown on our beautiful lakefront.

[Frog]

quite an interesting blend with the modern glassy structure and the classical style

[th0m]

The best stadium in the US, imo. I love everything about it. It's huge, yet feels nice (from the pictures, I'd love to go there), combines old and new perfectly imo, has a sweet asymmetrical architecture, the use of materials is class, not the concrete look you see all the time, and the cantilevered scoreboards are just jawdropping.

10/10

[eddyk]

The west grandstand lets it down if it stook with the style of the other side....I probably would of game it a 9!

[daveyboy44]

No offense , but this is one of the ugliest stadiums I have EVER seen. It is one thing for a stadium to have some unique and non-symnetrical features but what the??? It's as if the designers had two different ideas for the stadium , and instead of combining those two ideas.......they built two different stadiums . The old one was sooo much better IMO.

[MoreOrLess]

First time I saw pics of it I wasnt that keen on it but I'v warmed to it over time, espeically how the old "greek" features are incorperated.

[Zizu]

I like the asymmetrical structure too. And the combination of old and new is nice. 8/10

[KingShizzznit]

There are many more thing to this stadium than meets the eye. One won't be able to realize Soldier Field's value until they experience it from the inside. This stadium has the best sight lines, and is the most up to date stadium, in the NFL. Plus, there are no parking lots! Just lots and lots of trees and a gigantic sledding hill for the children. Underneath this stadium is a massive parking garage. Which makes the ability to respect the past and preserve it at the same time that much more impressive.

[i_am_hydrogen]

The addition to Soldier Field is a monument to architectural ineptitude. Just a few days ago, as I was exiting the Field Museum on my way to the parking structure, I was able to see closeup just how bad it looks. The extension of the seating--often said to resemble a flying saucer--and the old colonnade make for disastrous bedfellows. The U.S. government is considering the revocation of Soldier Field's status as a National Landmark as a result of its perversion.

Having said that, I agree with KingShizznit that the interior of the stadium is very attractive and innovative. The views of the field are impeccable and overall there is a feeling of coziness that many NFL stadiums are lacking.

[edsg25]

my spin on Soldier Field (from an undeniably biased and partisan home-town guy and Bear fan):

nothing in the NFL can compare with the assemetrical layout of this dramatic beauty.

the exterior: people criticize the architecture of Soldier Field's exterior. What a joke; the vast majority of NFL stadiums don't even have architetcure; their shells for what is inside, little more.

to appreciate Soldier Field, you must understand one key concept: nobody would ever have designed a structgure like this from scratch. The design is an attempt to link the classical history of the stadium with a statment that looks to the future.

Others think it was a marriage made in hell. I see a tour de force instead. I love it. This is not an attempt to create a awkward connection between old and new by having the new design mimic the original statement, creating something that would have looked tacked on. It is the contrast between ol and new that make this thing work.

Sure you can't see the collonades from the field, but they're still there, not torn down by a totally new structure. And you can walk through them when you want, something impossible in the old configuration.

Even issues of "scale" are not what some people say (IMHO). The fear that this structure overpowers the lakefront is absurd when you consider that immediately south of Soldier Field, McCormick Place sprawls on the lakefront and Stevenson Expressway ramps over Lk Sh Dr. Meanwhile, directly to the west, Museum Park's new towering structures are practically at the stadium's doorstep.

This location isn't Lincoln Park, where beach and park width buffer the lakefront from the city. Soldier Field does not overpower the lakefront here the way that it would have been in a location such as the Lincoln Park lakefront, east of the zoo.

[rantanamo]

my spin on Soldier Field (from an undeniably biased and partisan home-town guy and Bear fan):

nothing in the NFL can compare with the assemetrical layout of this dramatic beauty.

the exterior: people criticize the architecture of Soldier Field's exterior. What a joke; the vast majority of NFL stadiums don't even have architetcure; their shells for what is inside, little more.

to appreciate Soldier Field, you must understand one key concept: nobody would ever have designed a structgure like this from scratch. The design is an attempt to link the classical history of the stadium with a statment that looks to the future.

Others think it was a marriage made in hell. I see a tour de force instead. I love it. This is not an attempt to create a awkward connection between old and new by having the new design mimic the original statement, creating something that would have looked tacked on. It is the contrast between ol and new that make this thing work.


I think Soldier Field is the one real chance taker inside and out in the entire world. The NFL is a leader at this for bowl layouts, while New Arizona Cardinals, Quoduoung(sp?) and Allainz are the others that take chances on the exterior. Soldier combines both, while creating a super intimate atmosphere without even a roof or straight sideline seating on the side(thank goodness the NFL knows better). Inside and out, if I were choosing a world #1, this would be it. Even over Reliant. I had a great aerial from the north that really showed off the genious of the bowl design and how a lot of the bowl is in the ground on that side. As highly as it is ranked in people's mind, I think it is still vastly underrated because it doesn't have a roof or retractable roof.

[HoldenV8]

According to a recent reply e-mail I received from Soldier Field Management, the capacity is 63,000 and the record crowd for the new stadium was set on opening day 2003 when 61,500 showed up to watch Chicago take on Green Bay.

[wrabbit]

Super cool - 9/10

[dewback]

I am not sure about the exterior, but the interior looks pretty nifty (despite some unecessary non-symmetrical features).

[Zargyle]

Very cool- I like how they kept the old part and built on a modern part. They should do this with the LA Colliseum.

[Giorgio]

i like it! is it meant to have an Olympian Feel? Something from Ancient greek times?

[jimbojoe45]

As a season ticket holder to both old and new solider field. From a game standpoint the new stadium is amazing. I loved the old solider field ... it looked like a sea of people in a roman classical bowl. But the new stadium is far better game experience. Better bathroom... concessions...sight lines...and that place really gets roaring on third down ...

[Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm]

Is it meant to have an Olympian Feel? Something from Ancient greek times?

Yes, the doric columns and granite-textured cast stone were meant to give it an ancient Greek and Roman feel.

It really gives you a sense of how large the original Soldier Field was, that architects literally were able to build a brand new stadium inside the walls of the old stands! :)

I actually LOVE both the renovations of Soldier Field and Lambeau Field in Green Bay. With Lambeau, the interior bowl of the stadium was the only part worth preserving, while the exterior was the only part worth saving at Soldier.

The city of Chicago did a magnificent job with this stadium, including its surroundings. Before the renovation the stadium was surrounded by a barren parking lot. Now they've got an underground garage, and the lot's been replaced by park. Re-routing Lakeshore Dr. so it doesn't encircle the stadium was a great move too.

Bravo Chicago! :cheers:

[Perth4life]

fuck this stadium is awesome !!!! best in the us.

[rantanamo]

Soldier Field loses landmark status
By Noreen S. Ahmed-Ullah
Tribune staff reporter
Published April 22, 2006


Soldier Field's controversial renovation, which critics dubbed a "flying saucer" and "a fish bowl," has stripped the stadium of its national historic landmark designation.

The National Park Service said Friday that former Interior Secretary Gale Norton had signed the order removing the stadium from the list of historic landmarks. The order followed an advisory board's finding that the glass bowl-shaped stadium set inside the colonnades of the old Soldier Field had destroyed the stadium's historic character.

"For national landmarks, we look more for restoration," said David Barna, spokesman for the National Park Service. "This one crossed the line in terms of too much renovation."

The city has maintained that the $660 million Soldier Field makeover, promoted by Mayor Richard Daley, added modern amenities without hurting the stadium's classic architecture. Officials argued that the stadium received its designation in 1987 not only because of its architecture, but also because of its historic significance in major 20th Century events.

But many historic preservationists said the loss of the building's original architectural style merited removal of the historic designation.

"The `Independence Day' flying saucer that dropped on top of Soldier Field" destroyed the building's historic architecture, said David Bahlman, president of the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois.

Loss of the designation will make city officials across the nation think twice before major renovations of landmark sites, he said.

Officials at the Chicago Park District, which owns Soldier Field, were disappointed by the news. Parks spokeswoman Jessica Maxey-Faulkner said 90 percent of the stadium's architectural design was preserved.

Ben Wood, one of the lead architects on the renovation that was completed in 2003, blamed the media, especially Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin, saying a barrage of unfavorable commentary influenced the federal decision.


and some incredible new shots

http://arthill.smugmug.com/photos/27698430-L.jpg
http://arthill.smugmug.com/photos/27697374-L.jpg
http://www.studioghibli.net/travel/nocon_2005/graphics/NoCon_2005_23.jpg
http://www.growingchicago.com/images/mypicsII/chi2007.JPG

[th0m]

I'm interested, how did the renovation take place? And by that I really mean, where did the Bears play when Soldier Field was being torn up and rebuilt (since the entire seatingbowl as well as pressboxes etc, were rebuilt). I'm assuming they weren't able to do this in one off-season, if so that would be very very impressive. What nearby venue had the capacity to facilitate the Bears?

[Iain1974]

I think it look great but dated pre-renovation.

Post-renovation......I'm genuinely undecided.

[rantanamo]

The Bears played at the University of Illinois furing the renovation.

[SkyLerm]

Beautiful stadium :)

[Disraeli]

Its a nice looking stadium. The view from the luxary boxes must be good. It'd be nice to sit in one of them whilst drinking some beers. :cheers:

[Socrates]

Prefered the old one myself.

[Mo Rush]

awesome..love it..paul brown stadium is awesome too...

[Danger! 50,000 volts]

Its not a bad stadium, however there are much better NFL grounds in US.
I like the pic with the soccer field lines painted tho!
6.5/10

[spyguy]

http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/6641/sfweb17ig.jpg
http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/9914/sfweb65on.jpg
http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/940/sfweb70oc.jpg
http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/2901/sfweb55wj.jpg http://img462.imageshack.us/img462/3472/sfweb36hs.jpg
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/7516/505633176e7499ec004da.jpg
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/5843/36017996912ec73bd86cw.jpg
A gift from our good friend Mussolini, a second century Roman column plundered from "Porta Marina of Ostica Antica"
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/1557/87507455b1665aa570b6ga.jpg
http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/9908/vt36bu.jpg

[vivayo]

I'll would really doubt about the 90% architecture preservation claim, honestly althougt several aspects were saved, the stadium is really a new one, not one single seat has the same location,

about the new design I still cant decide if I like it or not, this stadium can loved or hated

[www.sercan.de]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/113/295211863_e6ffae38b5_b.jpg
bigger one
http://www.flickr.com/photos/82486389@N00/295211863/sizes/o/

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1159/1035031769_af66472200_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2196/1593448503_126b2c4b91_b.jpg

[Neda Say]

Great nest for the bears! However the devil is in the details. The location is amazing and the overall design is impressive but some little things are not perfect ; l'm not a fan of the tainted windows nor the appearing steel. Still the sightlines look great! Bear fans must be happy!

[rover3]

It's good for football but poor foresight in that they then have to spend $390 million on a temporary stadium if Chicago hosts 2016. Why could they not have designed this to allow for a T&F-Olympic configuration -- thereby having to forgo a temporary one that'll rip up the grounds in Washington Park?

[mgk920]

And to think, the Packers got their stadium renovations done for between 1/3 and 1/2 of the cost of what was spent on Soldier Field, done more tastefully and without missing a home game.

:runaway:

The first time that I drove by Soldier Field on Lake Shore Drive while the work was in progress a few years ago, it stuck me as taking that grand old edifice and dropping a huge funnel into it.

:ohno:

Mike

[Indiana Jones]

I hate this renovation. It seems so plasticy. It's small at 61,500, which is now the smallest stadium in the NFL. This makes no sense for such a large city with football tradition.

The old stadium held 68,000. This again affirms a bad trend of smaller stadiums with more expensive tickets.

Old Solider Field:

http://www.photography-plus.com/images/Chicago1/SoldierField.jpg

[nomarandlee]

Awesome new shots sercan.de , thanks for those.


It's good for football but poor foresight in that they then have to spend $390 million on a temporary stadium if Chicago hosts 2016. Why could they not have designed this to allow for a T&F-Olympic configuration -- thereby having to forgo a temporary one that'll rip up the grounds in Washington Park?

Your right, it was very bad forsight. Even with the new stadiums new great attributes it would have better to build in near the McCormick Place, just south of the stadium, or in the South Loop perhaps and made it just as innovative only with a retractable dome that could perhaps be retrofited for an Olympic size oval (that would have been an expensive burdensome task though no doubt though).

Knocking down the south/north ends of the old stadium to make a park or smaller more intimate field with an awesome vista would have looked awesome as well.


Indiana Jones I hate this renovation. It seems so plasticy. It's small at 61,500, which is now the smallest stadium in the NFL. This makes no sense for such a large city with football tradition.

That is a good point and even though the it is good looking from the inside I agree it is too small. The outside is at best now what I could say is intreasting.

[www.sercan.de]

i really love this stadium
every stand is different
But +80k would have been better for Chicago and Bears.

[Irish Blood English Heart]

Not knowing the old stadium, and being European I'm also not a great fan of open NFL stadiums, however this one is spectacular. I hope it forms part of any US World Cup bid, it really is a fascinating stadium.

[skobabe8]

And to think, the Packers got their stadium renovations done for between 1/3 and 1/2 of the cost of what was spent on Soldier Field, done more tastefully and without missing a home game.

:runaway:

The first time that I drove by Soldier Field on Lake Shore Drive while the work was in progress a few years ago, it stuck me as taking that grand old edifice and dropping a huge funnel into it.

:ohno:

Mike

Costs were higher because they completely rebuilt and reconfigured the entire surrounding parkland. The Soldier Field campus cannot be rivaled by any in the NFL. And I am NOT a Bears fan.

[mgk920]

Not knowing the old stadium, and being European I'm also not a great fan of open NFL stadiums, however this one is spectacular. I hope it forms part of any US World Cup bid, it really is a fascinating stadium.
I suspect that there would have been a bit of a public revolt had they put a 'lid' on Soldier Field. Less-than-ideal weather conditions (rain, wind-driven sleet, snow, negative double digits C cold, etc) are very much a part of the game in the NFL and 'purists' LOVE seeing games where it is a factor - and Chicago is very well known for them!

This past season, one of the league's two semi-final games (NFC championship) was played in -20C weather in Green Bay, WI. The stadium was full (72K) and it drew MASSIVE nationwide TV ratings. The previous weekend, the quarter-final game at Green Bay was played in a heavy snowstorm - with a similar local and nationwide fan interest. (Green Bay is about 400km north of Chicago and the two teams have a bitter rivalry going back nearly 80 years.)

:cheers1:

Mike

[Indiana Jones]

IMO this stadium highlights European vs. American tastes. It seems Americans are more divided on Soldier Field while our European friends rank this as one of their favorite NFL stadiums along with Reliant.

And we're not even getting to the roof issue. :lol:

[en1044]

IMO this stadium highlights European vs. American tastes. It seems Americans are more divided on Soldier Field while our European friends rank this as one of their favorite NFL stadiums along with Reliant.

And we're not even getting to the roof issue. :lol:

And its funny because the stadium is as American as it gets...more focus on the interior, less on the exterior...while in Europe it seems to be the opposite

[www.sercan.de]

i prefer the inside
the inside is the stadium
do not understand why so many new ones have this special outside :ohno:

[en1044]

i prefer the inside
the inside is the stadium
do not understand why so many new ones have this special outside :ohno:

Do you mean the outside of stadiums in Europe as opposed to the insides?

[www.sercan.de]

general
many new stadiums have this special "Allianzisch" outside
but inside is often the same

For me the inside (stands etc) are mor important than the cladding / outside

[en1044]

general
many new stadiums have this special "Allianzisch" outside
but inside is often the same

For me the inside (stands etc) are mor important than the cladding / outside

I agree, but i guess thats the price you play for having a roof, it really narrows the creative options for the seating bowl IMO

[www.sercan.de]

true
Therefore i hope that our stadium will be better with a possible new 3rd tier in some years :D

[en1044]

true
Therefore i hope that our stadium will be better with a possible new 3rd tier in some years :D

well best of luck to you

[www.sercan.de]

Thanks
But i am also quite happy with the "current" one
Stands are close to the pitch and are paralel to it
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm23/turkisi/stadyum/seyrantepe_stadi01.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm23/turkisi/stadyum/2005696513911430400_rs.jpg

and quite steep stands
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm23/turkisi/stadyum/asp32.jpg

[carlspannoosh]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/113/295211863_e6ffae38b5_b.jpg
bigger one
http://www.flickr.com/photos/82486389@N00/295211863/sizes/o/

The interior is extremely smart looking.No symmetry and yet it makes for a coherent looking stadium. Love the way the big upper tiers hang over the lower tiers.You have to hand it to the US for the way they instill a bit of visual flair into these designs.

On the downside, if this were my local football club stadium I wouldn't be happy with the design because it is too open for my preferred type of footy atmosphere but as an American Football venue it looks top drawer.

[mavn]

The interior is extremely smart looking.No symmetry and yet it makes for a coherent looking stadium. Love the way the big upper tiers hang over the lower tiers.You have to hand it to the US for the way they instill a bit of visual flair into these designs.

On the downside, if this were my local football club stadium I wouldn't be happy with the design because it is too open for my preferred type of footy atmosphere but as an American Football venue it looks top drawer.

You took the words right out of my mouth...

This is by far the most unique stadium in the world. I love it.

[www.sercan.de]

yes
i love the 3 tier main stand
but on the other site the eats stand with the big 2nd tier is also great
its like a mix of different stadiums

bernabeu = 3 tiers
san siro /azteca = 2 tiers and upper one is very big

dortmund 7 liverpool = 1 tier endzone

[Scoots71]

Does anyone have any pictures of Soldier Field from the USA vs. Honduras WC qualifier?

[gugasounds]

I like it.

[Lariabian]

It's great !!!!!!!

Regards.

[tritown]

Does anyone have any pictures of Soldier Field from the USA vs. Honduras WC qualifier?

I don't, but I wish. It looked great on television!:cheers:

[en1044]

bGK3qRYorGk

[JYDA]

nBMRNMVY7mI

[salaverryo]

On the downside, if this were my local football club stadium I wouldn't be happy with the design because it is too open for my preferred type of footy atmosphere but as an American Football venue it looks top drawer.

Your preferred type of "footy"? What is that, some sort of game you play with your girlfriend under the table?

[carlspannoosh]

Your preferred type of "footy"? What is that, some sort of game you play with your girlfriend under the table?
Footy is a shortening of the word football. It is a term used for several sports otherwise known as football. Nothing to do with your girlfriend.Hope that helps.

[nyrmetros]

Does anyone have any pictures of Soldier Field from the USA vs. Honduras WC qualifier?

ditto.

[nomarandlee]

Some more photos


photos of "old" Soldier Field.

Soldier Field 1964
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/Soldier_Field_1964.jpg
via kalracing.com


circa 1927
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/dd03.jpg
via nationalcowboymuseum.org


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/u-entertain.jpg
via www.museum.state.il.us/


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/Soldier4.jpg
via ultimatebearsfan.com

1933
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/2630835013_6f5c784295_b.jpg
via Flickr - Marquette University Archives


1956 - Soldier Field ski jump
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/SOLDIERS_FIELD_SKIJUMP_lrg.jpg
via gilcoscaffolding.com

[nomarandlee]

October 10, 1988
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/753px-Soldier_Field_Chicago_aerial_.jpg
(Wikimedia)


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/sample.jpg
via seatdata.com


Soldier Field, 1984
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/3260563144_5b9e1a4cae_b.jpg
Flickr - Mark 2400's


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/95340231_7f0a4fbf38_o.jpg
Flickr - jbruntzel

[nomarandlee]

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/823139554_fd48998ac3_o.jpg
(Flickr - mason.flickr's

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/2338588102_2a0d7dd706_b.jpg
Flickr - joseph a

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/2571068081_19d4682bba_b.jpg
Flickr - Ray Devlin

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/P1000369.jpg
photobucket - Jadeddreams87

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/CIMG0095.jpg
photobucket - summerdeforest

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/360949604_8e0634448e_o.jpg
Flickr - Cathy and Greg Rafanelli's

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/775176098_5f7db757df_b.jpg
Flickr - greg.walter9's

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/1415132555_8a07466747_b.jpg
Flickr - Fixie&Boxie's


Visting locker room
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r77/tootshibbard/Soldier%20Field/3b5c.jpg
photobucket - smoker68x

[ben77]

I love this stadium, i suppose the only slight down side is the capacity but the architects were working within the constraints of the previous footprint i assume? Its not a surprise that a stadium in Chicago really stands out from most other modern stadia in the US.

[Ganis]

But it lost its historic building status after the renovation.

[ryebreadraz]

There are few stadiums I dislike more than this one. It ruined the design of old Soldier Field and as a result, lost its historical landmark status. It looks awful now, like a spaceship landed on top of the old stadium and it's far too small. There's no reason that the smallest stadium in a US hosted World Cup would be in the city of Chicago. This stadium is a mega-fail.

[nyrmetros]

any pics from the WCQ between Honduras and USA ?

[ryebreadraz]

any pics from the WCQ between Honduras and USA ?

The US Soccer official site has a photo gallery:
http://ussoccer.com/sights/slideShow.jsp_887-0.html

[Scoots71]

http://images.ussoccer.com/Images/Gallery/887_332239_600_USMNTJT060609006.jpg

[bigbossman]

they could've gone for a more classy less contemporary exterior. It just looks stupid!!

[RMB2007]

I love this stadium, i suppose the only slight down side is the capacity but the architects were working within the constraints of the previous footprint i assume? Its not a surprise that a stadium in Chicago really stands out from most other modern stadia in the US.

I agree. I love this stadium, in fact, this is my favourite stadium in the US. Like you say, the only negative for me is also the capacity.

[hoosier]

Its not a surprise that a stadium in Chicago really stands out from most other modern stadia in the US.

None of Chicago's stadiums are that interesting or groundbreaking in design. The United Center, bland. U.S. Cellular Field, mediocre. Wrigley Field, only famous because of how old it is.

[Welshlad]

http://img30.exs.cx/img30/2262/168216640ZTkqJE_fs.jpg

What the hell is going on with the score here? please don't say they split the game into quarters.... also, thats an amazing crowd for two foriegn teams, but then I suppose the same thing happens in the UK with the AF games at Wembley.

[carlspannoosh]

^^ It could be a game being decided on penalties.Just a guess.

[Kobo]

I really love this stadium it's one of my favorites in the US certainly in my top 3. I appreciate the way they have made the interior non-symmetrical, and have incorporated both the original features of the stadium and added a 21st century design. Does anybody have any pictures of other designs that were put forward before they chose this design?

[Welshlad]

^^ It could be a game being decided on penalties.Just a guess.

Ah yes, I'm an idiot, that would make sense!

[nyrmetros]

http://images.ussoccer.com/Images/Gallery/887_332239_600_USMNTJT060609006.jpg

very nice. C'mon u Yanks!

[Ganis]

it is to compressed for my liking.

[parcdesprinces]

I remember the old Soldier field, I've been there and I miss it... Now it looks ridiculous, I mean it's a very strange and ugly mix of architectures.

Especially this stand :

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3650/3385094097_20bd34eccb.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3539/3385905850_e073d816af.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3641/3385094283_4550837fb6_o.jpg

[arlekin_m]

The old one was just perfect regarding proportions, and it had a bigger seating capactity (74,000 to more than 100,000, depending on configuration)... But I think the new one looks so cool against both the skyline backdrop, and the lake... 9/10.

[Luke80]

Preferred the old one tbh. Any stadium which reduces capacity is getting worse straight away in my book.

[rantanamo]

Preferred the old one tbh. Any stadium which reduces capacity is getting worse straight away in my book.

that's ridiculous. Stadium size reflects profit. Sometimes that means shrinking normal seat capacity to make room for luxury suites and club seating.

[Luke80]

Obviously that's what they did!

Personally I don't agree with that but I can see why they did it - I didn't say 'reducing capacity is bad. fact.'

[KingmanIII]

Obviously that's what they did!

Personally I don't agree with that but I can see why they did it - I didn't say 'reducing capacity is bad. fact.'
It wasn't a matter of capacity -- some of the sightlines were downright atrocious, especially in the end zones.

[Luke80]

That may be the case, but neither are perfect. A recent addition to the 'poor stadium views' thread shows that.

[carlspannoosh]

It seems the more unique the design the greater the probability of some kind of sightline issues, whether they be major eg blocked vision of the field/pitch or minor eg blocked views of the rest of the stadium. On the other side of the coin if you want perfect views from everywhere stadiums tend to end up looking the same ie simple bowls like the 30k cookie cutters that are all over Europe.

[langweishan]

Thanks for this site very helpful.

[BoulderGrad]

Had they built this stadium from scratch to look like this, I'd be saying it looks awesome. But seeing the old pictures of soldier field with its Lambeau/Rosebowl-esque classic style, I'm really scratching my head as to why they chose to renovate it in this way. Were they intentionally trying to avoid looking like lambeau because of the rivalry? Perhaps they could have ringed the more luxury boxes around the south end, and kept the roman comlumns theme of the other "guard towers"? Who knows. 9/10 for a new stadium, 5/10 for reverence for the former stadium, we'll say 7.5/10 average

[Squiggles]

I absolutely love this stadium. I shouldn't say this, since I live in Wisconsin and therefore SHOULD be a Packer fan, but this stadium is fantastic.

[123er123]

http://***************/ref.php?id=764

[nomarandlee]

Had they built this stadium from scratch to look like this, I'd be saying it looks awesome. But seeing the old pictures of soldier field with its Lambeau/Rosebowl-esque classic style, I'm really scratching my head as to why they chose to renovate it in this way. Were they intentionally trying to avoid looking like lambeau because of the rivalry? Perhaps they could have ringed the more luxury boxes around the south end, and kept the roman comlumns theme of the other "guard towers"? Who knows. 9/10 for a new stadium, 5/10 for reverence for the former stadium, we'll say 7.5/10 average

It has been many years and as a Bears fan I am still largely conflicted about it as you are. Part of me wants to love what is right about it and part of me laments what is wrong about it.

[123er123]

http://***************/ref.php?id=764
http://www.dong.co.il/ref.php?id=161

[SIC]

Had they built this stadium from scratch to look like this, I'd be saying it looks awesome. But seeing the old pictures of soldier field with its Lambeau/Rosebowl-esque classic style, I'm really scratching my head as to why they chose to renovate it in this way. Were they intentionally trying to avoid looking like lambeau because of the rivalry? Perhaps they could have ringed the more luxury boxes around the south end, and kept the roman comlumns theme of the other "guard towers"? Who knows. 9/10 for a new stadium, 5/10 for reverence for the former stadium, we'll say 7.5/10 average

They did it like this to fit in between the confines of the original structure and to create better sightlines. You have to be at the stadium to appreciate it, there honestly is not a better seat in the house.
Although my preferred spot is in the "media deck". Basically, it's the seats below the large upper tier, they're cantilevered over it, you're protected from the elements and you have a perfect vantage point of the field.

The stands are steep and close to the field and they each have a distinct look. They're all actually seperate stands, nothing cookie cutter about it. I love it. I went to the old soldier field and it blew.

[DeMaFrost]

There are few stadiums I dislike more than this one. It ruined the design of old Soldier Field and as a result, lost its historical landmark status. It looks awful now, like a spaceship landed on top of the old stadium and it's far too small. There's no reason that the smallest stadium in a US hosted World Cup would be in the city of Chicago. This stadium is a mega-fail.

I personally love the stadium but it is funny about the capacity. It's not even big enough to be the prospective Olympic Stadium. They have to build another stadium for the Olympics and Soldier Field will be used sparingly, mostly for soccer.

[rantanamo]

I personally love the stadium but it is funny about the capacity. It's not even big enough to be the prospective Olympic Stadium. They have to build another stadium for the Olympics and Soldier Field will be used sparingly, mostly for soccer.

Its built what its used for. Its not a "national" stadium, but an NFL franchise stadium and is built for maximum revenue within its market.

[SIC]

There are few stadiums I dislike more than this one. It ruined the design of old Soldier Field and as a result, lost its historical landmark status. It looks awful now, like a spaceship landed on top of the old stadium and it's far too small. There's no reason that the smallest stadium in a US hosted World Cup would be in the city of Chicago. This stadium is a mega-fail.

Would you have preferred they demolished it?

The pre-renovation had crappy sight-lines and the rest of the infrastructure was a dump. It was also just another cookie cutter greco-roman style stadium, hardly unique. People get blinded by nolstagia, sure it looked "classier" from the outside. But as an actual spectator, it sucked. It was a relic, a dump, and etc.

As for capacity, while it maybe the smallest stadium in a US bid, it's still large by World Cup standards (and global standards). South Africa has several stadiums with lower capacity and I think even proposed England bids would have a couple venues with less than 63k capacity.

It was renovated specifically for Football (all codes) and excels as one. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Luke80]

I think even proposed England bids would have a couple venues with less than 63k capacity.

The majority unfortunately.

[skobabe8]

The place before te renovations was a dump. I like it now, I just wish it wasn't so small.

The Olympics would be a gimmee if SF was large enough to host.

[nomarandlee]

^^ I never thought it was a "dump" like some seemed to and I went there dozens of times over the years. It had to have some more modern amentities for revenue purposes but I never felt especially deprived.

Would you have preferred they demolished it?

The pre-renovation had crappy sight-lines and the rest of the infrastructure was a dump. It was also just another cookie cutter greco-roman style stadium, hardly unique. People get blinded by nolstagia, sure it looked "classier" from the outside. But as an actual spectator, it sucked. It was a relic, a dump, and etc.

As for capacity, while it maybe the smallest stadium in a US bid, it's still large by World Cup standards (and global standards). South Africa has several stadiums with lower capacity and I think even proposed England bids would have a couple venues with less than 63k capacity.

It was renovated specifically for Football (all codes) and excels as one. Nothing more, nothing less.

Having it torn down is not a forgone conclusion at all. For a decade and a half there were various locations the Bears and city talked about relocating the Bears. The idea that Solider Field necessitated the Bears in order to save it long term is pretty speculative.

In terms of the capacity issue all the other plans the Bears had included varying amounts of more seats and in fact they compromised in settling for less seats because Hallas/McCaskey had a hard on keeping the Bears along the lakefront.

Though there are aspects I like about the new Soldier Field in retrospect I wish they gone for a retractable stadium as part of the McCormick Complex or part of a UC or US Cellular sports complex.

[koolio]

I can understand why Chicago residents who had an historical affinity with the old building might be disappointed but to be honest, I absolutely love the stadium. I think the modern facade contrasts quite nicely with the remnants of the old Soldier Field. The interior looks top notch as well ... I certainly prefer that interior to, say, that of the new Cowboys Stadium. The only disappointment that I feel is about the capacity ... should have been atleast 80,000.

[isaidso]

A wonderful looking stadium, but I did like the old stadium a great deal. Those luxury boxes really blemished it though.

[skobabe8]

I thought 'dump' because the majority of the bathrooms were port-o-potties. And the concessions were...well, not good.

[nyrmetros]

The capacity seems to small for the 3rd largest city in the country.

[coren]

I loved the old soldier field. She was a grand old lady and home to some unforgettable games but times move on and I for one think they did a great job of blending the old with the new. The fact they didn't flatten it full stop like so many old greats is a result. I can't wait to visit there next season.

9 out of 10 for me... it looses a mark for that capacity issue.

[schulzte]

8 of 10

For me, its what inside the stadium that counts. This is the best seating bowl and most intimate stadium in the NFL, with lots of cantilevered seating. That the architects were able to fit this modern stadium inside the footprint of the old stadium is really amazing. And while the 61,500 seats is a little small, old Soldier Field only held 66,000, and one can see how much larger it was. Does anyone have any really old pictures of Soldier Field before its first renovation, when it had a running track and had 100,000+ seats, before the Bears moved in?

Check out http://www.stadiumdrawings.blogspot.com

[nomarandlee]

^^There are a few photos on page four I posted.

[nomarandlee]

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/printers-row/2009/11/liam-ford-soldier-field-a-stadium-and-its-c.html

11/06/2009
Soldier Field revealed

Five things Liam Ford was surprised to learn while researching his recent book, “Soldier Field: A Stadium and Its City ”:


1. While they were building Soldier Field, the South Park Commission had trouble deciding whether to allow professional football there. The South Parks controlled Chicago’s lakefront parks from Grant Park south, and wanted the new Grant Park Stadium to serve as a venue to showcase the athleticism of the children of the South Side. In the summer of 1925, the commissioners voted to study whether to allow professional teams to play there. Eventually, they decided it would be all right — and bring some money in to support park programs.

2. The original Soldier Field designs called for a giant monument at the south end of the stadium, where the stadium curves to resemble a Greek theater. The memorial would have stood just above Gate 0, where the sign with the stadium’s name is today. Because of cost, the South Park Commissioners decided to forgo the monument. Although the colonnades were designed to recall a great memorial of the past, the Mausoleum of Mausolus, it was only after the original designs were abandoned that South Park Commissioners began referring to the colonnades as the memorial structure at the stadium.

3. Building Soldier Field understandably became a massive undertaking. Much of the site for the stadium was still under water when the park commissioners voted to construct it south of the Field Museum. While it was being built, the New York Times noted that it was the largest building ever to make use of “concrete stone,” that is, concrete made to look like cut stone, with 130,000 cubic feet of the stuff.

4. The Bears regularly played at Soldier Field for years. But, until they moved there from Wrigley Field in 1971, they appeared at the stadium usually only for exhibition or charity games, such as an annual Armed Forces benefit game or the College All-Star Game. The Bears almost didn’t move to Soldier Field, which could have doomed the arena. George Halas had a contract to move his players to Northwestern University’s Dyche Stadium, but the Big Ten conference nixed the idea — and the Chicago Park District quickly offered Soldier Field.

5. For nearly 30 years, from the late 1930 through the 1960s, the most popular professional sport at Soldier Field wasn’t football: it was car racing. The first races were held in the mid-1930s, and for decades thousands of people came to Soldier Field almost every weekend from May through August to see midget stock-car races, demolition derbies and stunt racing. Racing ended at the stadium in the mid-1960s, depriving the Park District of a large revenue source — and probably setting the stage for the Bears’ move there.

..

[nyrmetros]

pictures of car racing at Soldier Field?

[Jan Del Castillo]

9. Very good. Regards.

[Severiano]

It looks like the people in the huge top tier opposite the luxury boxes can just tumble over onto the field. Pretty cramped.