BasesLoadedWalk

http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_5.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_6.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_7.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_8.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_9.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_10.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_11.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_12.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_13.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_14.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_15.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_16.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_17.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_18.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_19.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_20.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_21.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_22.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_23.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_24.jpg http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/Citi_080508_25.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach10.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach11.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach12.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach13.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach14.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach15.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach16.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach17.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach18.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach19.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach20.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach21.jpg http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1461/attachmentyz0.jpg http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/9102/attachmentpc8.jpg http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/2383/attachmentwp0.jpg http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/8828/attachmentcb9.jpg http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5365/attachmentpb6.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/5116/attachmentsi0.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4062/attachmentat9.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach22.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach23.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/27472010.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/jerseylover/YANKEE%20STADIUM%20UPDATED/CIMG0656.jpg http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/6766/nys1fw9.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach26.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach27.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach28.jpg

Cool article on what would be the signature item in the ballpark: http://www.startribune.com/local/west/2703...iD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU Some recent construction pics: http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03118.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03119.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03120.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03121.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03122.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/dsc03123.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach24.jpg http://i56.servimg.com/u/f56/12/06/09/51/attach25.jpg courtesy of Minnescraper and MOJO

I would like anyone to guess which one of these will be finished first... Is it this one... Or is it this one... You decide.

Two new article on the new stadiums in New York from the Sun-Sentinel: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/s...0,6612683.story http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/s...0,7638253.story You could also check out the links to the latest pics of Yankee and Citi: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/n...54.photogallery http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/n...98.photogallery http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/5126/attachmentlv1.jpg http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/3254/attachmentwm4.jpg http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/3816/attachmentmr4.jpg http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/7195/attachmentkh2.jpg Here are a some very good pics of the new Yankee Stadium model that was shown at the All-Star Fan Fest yesterday. Credit Gary Dunaier for these: http://www.flickr.com/photos/14504460@N02/...57606132821958/

What people have been speculating for some time now is being supported in two articles in the Sun-Sentinel: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/bro...0,2267636.story http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/bro...0,4000314.story

That team is showing GREAT promise right now. Anything to rally the community behind THEIR team. That includes St. Pete, Tampa, Sarasota and just about anywhere else in the state except South Florida. It would be nice to see Floridians rooting for their own teams on a consistant basis for a change.

From continued reading on the issue, I still think the Al Lang site would be the eventual spot IF the stadium is ever built. More realistic other spots (other than Tampa, which St. Pete won't allow without financial incentives) include the Trop parking lot and Toytown. Both sites theoretically would have enough space for a retractable roof. However, both locations are being looked at for redevelopment. Would a ballpark make sense in either one? Also, Toytown includes a covered-up old landfill. That would greatly restrict what could be built over there. It's 50/50 right now if they go to a new ballpark or stay at the Trop through the end of the lease.

Sad. I posted about this on the "new stadium" forum. This should serve as a warning to all the City and County commissioners in Miami-Dade. You do not want to be in the same position your counterparts in Seattle are in right now. They can get on their soapbox about how billionaire owners should build stadiums themselves and how they don't consider helping secure the future of sports teams as important as other issues, but just go talk to anyone in Seattle right now...Regardless of if you are a sports fan or not, you can't tell me that Seattle didn't just lose something important today. They lost part of their history and something that united that community. Don't let it happen here. Get the shovels in the ground and start building a baseball stadium Miami! As for the Sonics...shame on all of those involved in this. Shame on Howard Schultz. He knew what he was getting into when he sold his team to a group from OKC(a city angling for a team since the Hornets went back to New Orleans). Shame on the Seattle politicians that dragged their feet and stonewalled any and all plans brought before them. They were betting that the NBA was bluffing and only tried to come up with solutions when it was too late. Shame on Clay Bennett for lying to the fans of Seattle all along. And shame on David Stern for allowing this and letting his league leave a city that has supported you for 41 years. Leaving a big market like Seattle for Oklahoma City is asinine and likely wouldn't be happening but Clay Bennett happens to be a personal friend of Sterns. I'm sure that basketball fans in Oklahoma City are happy tonight....They get a pro team. This isn't their fault, but this can't possibly be how they wanted this to happen. There are no winners in this mess. First, I think it's a bit easier to move a basketball franchise than a baseball one. Not as much equipment to pack up in the former. Second, who said that the city of Seattle didn't do anything for the Sonics? Key Arena was renovated not long ago, including premium seating. Frankly, after shelling out major dough to build Safeco Field, Qwest Stadium, not to mention imploding the Kingd(o)ome(d), I can understand why they'd be reluctant to do another arena re-do. Nah, I think pro basketball would be a prime candidate for installing an open system of competition, with the possibility of promotion/relegation and multiple tiers. That way, there would be a major disincentive to move franchises when any city can enter a team in sporting competition.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-06-26-voa36.cfm Well, that particular ban was ineffective, anyway. We're talking about the District of Columbia, after all. :whistle

It's been assumed for a long, long time once stadium construction was underway. Now it's about to become reality... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/sports/f...ll/27seats.html http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/06/g...son_ticket.html http://www.nyg2010.com/ http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/06/giant...quire_pers.html

Triple-post. Rays reversed course... http://www.tbnweekly.com/content_articles/062508_fpg-01.txt Rays decide to hold off on stadium deal By SUZETTE PORTER Article published on Wednesday, June 25, 2008 ST. PETERSBURG ? Tampa Bay Rays announced Tuesday afternoon that that the team is no longer seeking a November referendum on a proposed $450 million waterfront stadium in St. Petersburg. Instead a coalition of community leaders will be formed to study ways to ensure support for a long-term commitment to the Tampa Bay Rays and Major League Baseball. The new group, which will be chaired by Progress Energy President Jeff Lyash, will study and report back to the community on a wide array of issues related to a new stadium. During a televised press conference, Rays President Rays Silverman said that the seven months of discussion on the new ballpark had shown that a ?project of this magnitude can?t be done alone? and needed to be a community process ? ?a unity of purpose.? The Rays ran into opposition as they pitched their plan to sell Tropicana Field and build a new 34,000 seat, retractable-roof ballpark. The Rays preliminary financing plan called for $150 million to come from the Rays; $70 million from the sale of Tropicana Field; $55 million in parking revenue; $100 million from the county; and $75 million from St. Petersburg. The county?s share would come from extending the fourth-cent bed tax that has been paying the debt service for Tropicana Field, which was a matter of concern for the Board of County Commissioners and Tourist Development Council. The county also was concerned about the proposed redevelopment of the Tropicana site happening at the same time a deal to develop the old Toytown landfill was in the works. Another major stumbling block was the requirement for voter approval to change the lease agreement for the waterfront ballpark. Commissioner Ronnie Duncan was out of town on Tuesday, but he did release a statement about the Rays? announcement. ?I applaud the Rays' management and ownership for their decision to seek other opportunities in our region and will work, as a county commissioner, to insure that their objectives are met in a manner that mitigate and address the objections of our community and environment,? Duncan said. Duncan spoke of the many benefits a major league baseball team brings to the county and the spirit of cooperation between the team and the community. ?The franchise has worked closely with the community and I know that they will continue to involve the public in this renewed initiative,? Duncan said. ?Their decision to work with this Pinellas County community speaks volumes for their credibility and their commitment to the quality of life that we hold so dear.? Silverman said the Rays still believed in the vision of the proposed plan; however, not enough community support was available to make a timeline for a November referendum. ?We?re passing the torch to the community and the new coalition,? Silverman said. Article published on Wednesday, June 25, 2008

The interview is already up at their video library. http://cbs4.com/video

Anyone for flag football? We have a big, empty field that we can use. :mischief

You guys are missing the whole point. Because of Florida's strict open government laws, all agreements that are entered into by local governments (or all government for that matter) must be adopted in a duly noticed public hearing by a vote of the governing body. Therefore, while the financial aspect of the deal has been approved, the next step is the operating agreements, of which the County and City are parties. The County and City CANNOT agree to the contract without a vote of the governing body at a duly noticed public hearing. That being said, a "NO" vote doesn't mean that the deal is dead, it only means that the agreement, as drafted, is unacceptable and must be revised to be acceptable to all the parties. The only way a "NO" vote would "KILL" the project would be if the matter is brought to a vote, it fails, and the parties then refuse to negotiate a deal -- something that will not happen. Also remember that many of the development approvals need to be completed as well. I know for a fact that the stadium will not need to undergo a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) review because they are using the vested rights of the old OB stadium. This process cut development time considerably (something that COULD NOT BE DONE at any other site in South Florida!). Everybody just has to relax and let the powers that be sort this out pursuant to the rules and regulations that are set forth for this kind of thing. Thanks for the clarification. What it says to me is that the politicians believe that they are in a position of relative leverage (although many of us did think that the Marlins had nowhere else to go) now that the County/City has "committed" to putting in funds for a stadium, or something similar to the Washington scenario whereby that city's government "obligated" MLB to commit to putting the Expos in Washington (even though they still overpaid) rather than risk that Portland or Charlotte win out in a bid. The key phrase you put down is "...and must be revised to be acceptable to all parties." That would be code for "We want a bigger say on how the facility is used" to pressure Loria to agree to give them a bigger cut of the revenues from all events at the stadium, including everything other than Marlins games. Remember that Loria really needs this stadium in order to get out of Huizenga-land and expand the payroll. So I would not be surprised if they're going to now squeeze him because of those facts.

Don't like to double-post but for those who are interested in following the debate out there on the waterfront stadium proposal, the audio for today's debate between two people on the opposite sides of the issue (From 620 WDAE): http://620wdae.com/pages/ron_ian.html

Two points: 1. That design has Olympic Stadium v2.0 (or as the locals said, "Stade Olympique") written all over it. Is it just me, or can anyone else imagine the salt air just wreaking havoc on the sail roof making it inoperable after several years, just like the "retractable roof" that was supposed to be "operable" in Montreal, but only worked once! Yes, kids, Montreal's Olympic Stadium was supposed to be the worlds first retractable roof stadium, but (a) money ran out before the 1976 games which left the inclined tower incomplete and (b) when they finally finished the tower and installed the kevlar roof, which was to be folded up into the tower like a reverse umbrella, the thing got stuck and failed miserably -- never to be opened again! I would think that technology has greatly advanced in stadium design since 1976. While the precedent may not be the best, vis-a-vis, Stade Olympique, it doesn't necessarily mean the idea isn't worth persuing. I'm not a stadium architect nor an engineer. Still, I would hope that if this is what they're going for that it would prove to work. In this day and age when ballparks are getting smaller it makes sense to not have to have a giant structure to support a metallic retractable roof. The Marlins are going to have a larger footprint to work with, hence a heavier roof. The Rays want that piece of land which is too small to support a larger ballpark in terms of size because the location looks more promising for ancillary development. At least that is what they're counting on and trying to convince voters of. My personal opinion is that they may get their referendum but might not win the vote because enough people there would vote against the stadium. 2. Attendance, in my opinion, will always lag with the Rays playing in St. Petersburg rather than in Tampa. If you guys think driving to Dolphin Stadium or the OB site from Broward is bad, try driving from Tampa, Temple Terrace, or Brandon to St. Petersburg and back on a weeknight! That stadium is built away from the center of population. It's the equivalent of building a Marlins stadium in either Palm Beach Gardens or Perrine. Here you might be right. What I would say, though, is that St. Pete was the city who built the Trop and was the city who persued various MLB clubs before the league brass felt it necessary to place a team there. If not for the Trop, I don't think St. Pete would be hosting pro baseball today. They simply leapfrogged Tampa on this one by taking that risk all those years ago.

Great to be see a committed group of people show up despite everything else that's happened with this organization. I would think Loria would remember the faces from the event for if/when the Marlins officially move in. Like they say about remembering your true friends when things get rough.

Plan in place for financing Rays new park http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...sp&c_id=mlb Rays present stadium proposal http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/myfox/pages/N...mp;pageId=3.2.1 Rays would cover cost runovers http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernme...ticle508828.ece Rays' offer promising (Editorial) http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article508727.ece

The spin from MLB.com: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...sp&c_id=mlb

He may not win but I would not bet against him.

"The Marlins also are open to fan input and suggestions. Samson encourages e-mails to his D.Samson@flamarlins.com address, offering ideas." Already fired off a few ideas of mine, which I think they'd accept. :thumbup Would that be firing David Samson? :mischief Well, I had so many suggestions that I thought the message would be too long if I added more. :mischief And, yeah, I don't think we should give that much credit to Triathlon Man. Without the league's intervention, I could safely say that we'd be in the same position as last year. The organization in of itself doesn't have enough clout to move the big players in Florida, as all those failed attempts at getting a new tax rebate showed.

Well, being that the lawsuit wants to overturn the whole package, meaning the number of massive projects waiting to be implemented, there's always that risk that it could be jeopardized. If the issue was just about the stadium then that alone would be judged on its merit. But as it is about the whole megadeal, there is that chance that one or two iffy items could cause the others to collapse. Braman has to be thinking that or he would not sue. Another possibility is if this is ruled illegal then the mega package would simply be broken up and then the individual items would be debated and voted on. IOW, there's a good chance that at least some of the items in the megadeal would become reality, regardless of the lawsuit. The real question is the cost, and as the airport has shown, a huge one.

Yeah, for instance the garages near Yankee Stadium are terrible. It takes forever to get out of there. Good thing a commuter rail station is finally being built in that area. Soon people from Westchester and Conn. can get to the games easier. But back to the topic. Doesn't anyone think that additional land might have to be acquired for stadium-related development? Even if the ballpark is to be small, the Marlins might want to have stuff built up in the surrounding area to make it a destination.

I wonder if those gates will go as well.

"The Marlins also are open to fan input and suggestions. Samson encourages e-mails to his D.Samson@flamarlins.com address, offering ideas." Already fired off a few ideas of mine, which I think they'd accept. :thumbup