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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
SkyscraperCity Forum
139.4M posts
1.1M members
Since 2002
A truly global community dedicated to skyscrapers, cities, urban development, and the metropolitan environment. Join us to share news, views and fun about architecture, construction, transport, skylines, and much more!