NEW YORK CITY - Shea Stadium (60,372 | 1964 - 2008)

I know baseball purists hate the "sea of seats" that I lot of cookie cutters had going for them in the outfield but shea would have been epic had they enclosed the entire stadium. Probably 90k seats or so.

I have no idea about its suitability for modern day baseball but Shea Stadium looked awesome to me. It will always hold a place in history for the peak of Beatlemania too. Sad it is now no more.

Great photos gents!

surveyingsteve said:

I have no idea about its suitability for modern day baseball but Shea Stadium looked awesome to me. It will always hold a place in history for the peak of Beatlemania too. Sad it is now no more.

Click to expand...

Being 60 years young I have no problem with the now gone cookie cutter stadiums. They were functional for their day. And offered unobstructed views of the field unlike their vintage predecessors..and I liked the old MLB ballparks then too.

I visited Shea Stadium many times while spending summers in NYC with my mom. Took many a ride on the IRT #7 to Shea.

Shea was much cleaner than the Polo Grounds..And it did not smell like the magnificent but archaic Polo Grounds.

You did not want seats in the upper part of the upper deck at Shea..they seemed high enough to touch the clouds.

Hudson11 said:

New York 1998 by Eric Böhm, on Flickr

Click to expand...

Wednesday, July 29, 1998. Mets 7, Padres 6, attendance 23,694.

http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1998/B07290NYN1998.htm

sad to see this gone. I think the Mets could have spent the money to upgrade Shea like what the Angels did to the Halo...only better.

WesTexas said:

sad to see this gone. I think the Mets could have spent the money to upgrade Shea like what the Angels did to the Halo...only better.

Click to expand...

Doubtful. The only stadium with any similarity to Shea still in use is SkyDome.

But could a heavy duty renovation that fully updated the stadium and changed the outfield area have been possible and looked better than Citi Field?

WesTexas said:

But could a heavy duty renovation that fully updated the stadium and changed the outfield area have been possible and looked better than Citi Field?

Click to expand...

Bluntly, no. Shea was designed more for football than baseball. Anaheim was designed for baseball, not football. Shea was built of steel, and due to it's location near the ocean, was rusting away, so it would have required a Yankee Stadium style rebuild. Anaheim is mostly concrete, further from the ocean, and it's renovation was mostly removing the upper levels from the outfield.

To me the biggest problem with Citi is that it's so cluttered. Get rid of about half of the total crap, focus on the baseball, and you'll have a pretty good ballpark. Right now it looks like the Mets are are trying to imitate Coney Island.

will101 said:

Bluntly, no. Shea was designed more for football than baseball. Anaheim was designed for baseball, not football. Shea was built of steel, and due to it's location near the ocean, was rusting away, so it would have required a Yankee Stadium style rebuild. Anaheim is mostly concrete, further from the ocean, and it's renovation was mostly removing the upper levels from the outfield.

To me the biggest problem with Citi is that it's so cluttered. Get rid of about half of the total crap, focus on the baseball, and you'll have a pretty good ballpark. Right now it looks like the Mets are are trying to imitate Coney Island.

Click to expand...

it most certainly was not.. that place was god awful for football

Dexter Morgan said:

it most certainly was not.. that place was god awful for football

Click to expand...

Look at the construction photos I posted earlier in the thread.

The Mets were always the stadium's primary tenant and scheduling priority over the Jets.

Amazing stadium, too bad it doesn't excist anymore.

^^ What a great picture that is. kay: