I like Truist, way better than Turner. I still like Busch, and loved Great American Ball Park, but we had excellent seats for my only game there.
Best and worst ballparks in baseball
- Thread starter LightningStorm
- Start date
Big McLargehuge
Fragile Traveler
I haven't been to a ton of stadiums, but enough to know my #1 and dead last are unlikely to change.
PNC Park is impeccable for all of the reasons everyone knows it is. Perfect setting for a baseball game, just a shame the baseball on display is usually on par with what our friends in Indianapolis see.
The Oakland Coliseum doesn't need me to piss on it for anyone to understand how a hideous stadium in an awful location with busted sewage is unpleasant. Oakland, and specifically those fans, deserve better. In Oakland.
The only real complaints I have about Dodger Stadium are about how it was built and the absolute horror show that is trying to leave a stadium that large, built on the side of a mountain without any viable public transportation. When the game is going on it's an amazing place to watch a ballgame, especially with some of the views during sunset, but the hassle of getting in/out mean I don't take advantage of living ~10 minutes away nearly enough.
Petco Park is very nice, but at the same time it makes me a little sad that this is one of the better stadiums in the league. It's a good stadium in an amazing location, but my least part of the stadium is the design itself. Aside from incorporating the Western Metal Supply Co. building into it has a bit of a generic 2000s stadium feel. Location matters, though, as does weather. It's a stadium that hits above its weight class because of that. I was also really fond of their craft beer selection, though I'm sure that's something that is far better league-wide over the past decade.
Angel Stadium is nice. The atmosphere around the stadium leaves a lot to desire and the food is trash, but it's a perfectly good place to watch a game. At least getting in/out of those gigantic parking lot fields is easy compared to Chavez Ravine.
Wrigley is overrated. To be fair my experience was heavily degraded by obstructed views and way-too-drunk-for-1pm-on-a-Tuesday Cubs fans. You can do far, far worse...but when you expect a chapel and get a church...meh. It's still just outside the top ~10 or so for me as there's plenty of positives, I just don't find it this immaculate peak of design that hasn't been toppled since. Most new stadiums just kinda sucked for ~80 years and the ivy is a nice feature (doubly so when 2/3 of stadiums were multi-sport bowls with neon carpeting). Also to be fair I was there during renovations, so I'm assuming the bathrooms aren't just a hodgepodge of plywood and pools of piss anymore...
Three Rivers is long dead, but as the only ex-MLB stadium I've been to I'm throwing it in here. That set the standard of what a bad stadium is for me and I'm sure it'd be just as shitty as the Coliseum is today if the whole center field part of the bowl had been Frankensteined into it decades into its life and an additional couple decades of wear, tear, and cheap-ass ownership not investing in it. I'll never get over how Three Rivers Stadium was built in such a scenic location and from opening day there weren't any seats that let you see a damn thing outside of it. Oppressive, especially with the majority of those outfield seats being empty most of the time for baseball. Oakland had a nice view that was destroyed when those seats were added. Pittsburgh had a great view that was just hidden behind concrete from Day 1. That placed was bad for football and miserable for baseball. Undoubtedly also helped paint such an eternally rose-colored view of PNC Park by providing such a harsh contrast.
I've had bad luck being in cities at the same time as their baseball teams. Oakland is the one where things aligned perfectly, and I mean perfectly, so I've had nothing align since then. The A's were hosting the Pirates (!) at the same time as I took my dad on a Pacific Coast Highway trip. Never looked at the schedule ahead of time, just a perfect coincidence. That was a nice change of pace because seemingly every time I decide to go to a random ballgame the Arizona Diamondbacks are seemingly always the visiting team...I've seen them play in 5/7 of the stadiums mentioned and I only average about 1 game a year.
PNC Park is impeccable for all of the reasons everyone knows it is. Perfect setting for a baseball game, just a shame the baseball on display is usually on par with what our friends in Indianapolis see.
The Oakland Coliseum doesn't need me to piss on it for anyone to understand how a hideous stadium in an awful location with busted sewage is unpleasant. Oakland, and specifically those fans, deserve better. In Oakland.
The only real complaints I have about Dodger Stadium are about how it was built and the absolute horror show that is trying to leave a stadium that large, built on the side of a mountain without any viable public transportation. When the game is going on it's an amazing place to watch a ballgame, especially with some of the views during sunset, but the hassle of getting in/out mean I don't take advantage of living ~10 minutes away nearly enough.
Petco Park is very nice, but at the same time it makes me a little sad that this is one of the better stadiums in the league. It's a good stadium in an amazing location, but my least part of the stadium is the design itself. Aside from incorporating the Western Metal Supply Co. building into it has a bit of a generic 2000s stadium feel. Location matters, though, as does weather. It's a stadium that hits above its weight class because of that. I was also really fond of their craft beer selection, though I'm sure that's something that is far better league-wide over the past decade.
Angel Stadium is nice. The atmosphere around the stadium leaves a lot to desire and the food is trash, but it's a perfectly good place to watch a game. At least getting in/out of those gigantic parking lot fields is easy compared to Chavez Ravine.
Wrigley is overrated. To be fair my experience was heavily degraded by obstructed views and way-too-drunk-for-1pm-on-a-Tuesday Cubs fans. You can do far, far worse...but when you expect a chapel and get a church...meh. It's still just outside the top ~10 or so for me as there's plenty of positives, I just don't find it this immaculate peak of design that hasn't been toppled since. Most new stadiums just kinda sucked for ~80 years and the ivy is a nice feature (doubly so when 2/3 of stadiums were multi-sport bowls with neon carpeting). Also to be fair I was there during renovations, so I'm assuming the bathrooms aren't just a hodgepodge of plywood and pools of piss anymore...
Three Rivers is long dead, but as the only ex-MLB stadium I've been to I'm throwing it in here. That set the standard of what a bad stadium is for me and I'm sure it'd be just as shitty as the Coliseum is today if the whole center field part of the bowl had been Frankensteined into it decades into its life and an additional couple decades of wear, tear, and cheap-ass ownership not investing in it. I'll never get over how Three Rivers Stadium was built in such a scenic location and from opening day there weren't any seats that let you see a damn thing outside of it. Oppressive, especially with the majority of those outfield seats being empty most of the time for baseball. Oakland had a nice view that was destroyed when those seats were added. Pittsburgh had a great view that was just hidden behind concrete from Day 1. That placed was bad for football and miserable for baseball. Undoubtedly also helped paint such an eternally rose-colored view of PNC Park by providing such a harsh contrast.
I've had bad luck being in cities at the same time as their baseball teams. Oakland is the one where things aligned perfectly, and I mean perfectly, so I've had nothing align since then. The A's were hosting the Pirates (!) at the same time as I took my dad on a Pacific Coast Highway trip. Never looked at the schedule ahead of time, just a perfect coincidence. That was a nice change of pace because seemingly every time I decide to go to a random ballgame the Arizona Diamondbacks are seemingly always the visiting team...I've seen them play in 5/7 of the stadiums mentioned and I only average about 1 game a year.
Last edited:
Cubs2024WSChamps
Tate MacRae follows me on Tiktok
- Apr 29, 2015
- 7,905
- 2,461
Wrigley Field is a dump.
The stench of urine thruout the place has been masked by what amounts to be a bunch of car air freshners hanging just outside of eye view. There's visible cockroaches thruout the place to go along with the rats that come out at night.
As somebody who actually lives in Wrigleyville, I can attest to hot summer days the entire area stinks of Wrigley. The only positive is how close you are to the field and pretty much every unobstructed seat is a good view.
The stench of urine thruout the place has been masked by what amounts to be a bunch of car air freshners hanging just outside of eye view. There's visible cockroaches thruout the place to go along with the rats that come out at night.
As somebody who actually lives in Wrigleyville, I can attest to hot summer days the entire area stinks of Wrigley. The only positive is how close you are to the field and pretty much every unobstructed seat is a good view.
John Price
Bet
- Sep 19, 2008
- 374,003
- 24,898
Petco and PNC look nice and everyone always says very nice, very good things.
Should make it out someday
Should make it out someday
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
I would go to Angel Stadium 10 out of 10 times over Dodger Stadium for this simple reason. It's the most pain-free stadium experience I know of. And that to me honestly is worth a ton.
John Price
Bet
- Sep 19, 2008
- 374,003
- 24,898
dodger stadium is historic but has always been a f***in' mess up there in the hills lol
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
I mean even Nats Park is kind of a mess. And I imagine most urban parks have the same issues. If you drive, parking is either a fortune or a million miles away. If you use transit, enjoy staring at some sweaty person's armpit (it is a summer schedule after all) on a packed train.
Ballparks have to be centrally located as you are asking fans to attend 9-12 games of a homestand with maybe 1 off day. That’s a big commitment and you need it to be easy to get in and out, even if the weather holds and there is still some light out when the game ends.
HisIceness
This is Hurricanes Hockey
I've been to two current stadiums, Cleveland and Baltimore. Both are pretty good I suppose.
Turner Field was okay. One year I went they had a Lexus-only parking lot, that pissed a lot of people off IIRC.
Turner Field was okay. One year I went they had a Lexus-only parking lot, that pissed a lot of people off IIRC.
Say Hey Kid
War, it's just a shot away
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
How many people would actually attend an entire homestand? I'd wager the vast majority of people in a ballpark at any given time attend no more than a dozen games all season.
Imagine most with season tickets are sharing them with another family or a group of people. 81 homes games is an insane number to be attended over 6 months. I can’t imagine doing Friday to Sunday and spending 8 - 9 hours of rhe weekend at the ballpark.
AtlantaWhaler
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
- Jul 3, 2009
- 19,710
- 2,931
ehhhh.....I think we can keep it open.
Love the nostalgia, but easy argument for updating. As noted by another poster, they can start with the urine smell....
Unholy Diver
Registered User
KevFu
Registered User
It's really tough to rate them as one category, because really they're all different things. Here's where I've been:
HISTORIC:
1. BOS Fenway
2. CHC Wrigley (pre-reno)
3. LAD Dodger
4. LAA Anaheim
5. NYY Yankee II (the last one)
Fenway FEELS timeless when you walk in. Like, if men were in shirts/ties/hats and puffing cigars, you wouldn't be surprised. You're like "wait, what year is it?" Wrigley has a little of that, but I went to Wrigley pre-renovation, and it's probably amazing now compared to what it was then, when they had netting up to catch falling concrete chunks and stuff.
Dodger Stadium is gorgeous, but you can see how it's from a bygone era. Great job of keeping it nice (compared to Anaheim). I just don't know how you compare a place built 70 to 100 years ago to a modern park.
Anaheim is definitely showing its age, they've done a reasonably good job in returning it to a ballpark from a stadium, but you can see how old it is on the concourses.
Yankee Stadium II gets a massive pass from people despite it being just as much of a dump as Anaheim or Shea were, only because its' YANKEE STADIUM (Babe Ruth played there! Yeah, not really, he played before the 70s renovation). If the same ballpark housed the Pirates for 80 years, people would be saying "bring on the wrecking ball" and not trying to replicate it across the street. It had all the same problems as the next class of stadiums; but no one waxed poetic about the cutters.
CUTTERS/DUMPS
1. NYM Shea
2. STL Busch (the last one)
4. CIN Riverfront
5. OAK Coliseum
6. PHI Veterans
All these places were pretty bad, but Shea was the closest thing to trying to be a BASEBALL stadium. The Cards did a decent job of it, but the other three, not at all. They were all dumps by the time I visited, but Shea had charming elements like the Apple, the skyline on the scoreboard. The fact that four of the five got the wrecking ball and the A's are still in the Coliseum is insane.
BALLPARKS:
1. BAL Camden Yards
2. SD Petco
3. MIL Miller
4. HOU Minute Maid
5. ARZ Chase
6. CIN Great American
7. SFG AT&T
8. CLE Progressive
Camden is always going to be special for bringing BALLPARKS back. So much so that a place like Petco, which is nice, you're like "why did you do THIS in the RF corner for no reason, other than to be weird and different there?" Miller and Houston are both really good at being charming parks despite being indoors.
San Francisco is incredibly overrated. I think Candlestick and the Coliseum were so bad that people raved about the new place like it was one of the best in baseball, when it's incredibly cramped, with lots of poor choices and terrible dimensions. It's going to age very badly.
Arizona I think is drastically underrated. It lacks charm but when you live in Phoenix, AC is far more important than charm. When the roof works and they open it up before the anthem for a game in May, it's fantastic. And it's probably the best concourse of any place I've been. It gets bonus points for being accessible from where I lived via the lightrail, and having bars right at the lightrail stop before getting on the train to go home. The park itself isn't as nice as the overall experience if that makes sense.
Cincinnati is pretty good, but there's really nothing that stands out about it. Cleveland is kind of the same. Nice place, but the sunken field makes the action seem so far away compared to other stadiums.
HISTORIC:
1. BOS Fenway
2. CHC Wrigley (pre-reno)
3. LAD Dodger
4. LAA Anaheim
5. NYY Yankee II (the last one)
Fenway FEELS timeless when you walk in. Like, if men were in shirts/ties/hats and puffing cigars, you wouldn't be surprised. You're like "wait, what year is it?" Wrigley has a little of that, but I went to Wrigley pre-renovation, and it's probably amazing now compared to what it was then, when they had netting up to catch falling concrete chunks and stuff.
Dodger Stadium is gorgeous, but you can see how it's from a bygone era. Great job of keeping it nice (compared to Anaheim). I just don't know how you compare a place built 70 to 100 years ago to a modern park.
Anaheim is definitely showing its age, they've done a reasonably good job in returning it to a ballpark from a stadium, but you can see how old it is on the concourses.
Yankee Stadium II gets a massive pass from people despite it being just as much of a dump as Anaheim or Shea were, only because its' YANKEE STADIUM (Babe Ruth played there! Yeah, not really, he played before the 70s renovation). If the same ballpark housed the Pirates for 80 years, people would be saying "bring on the wrecking ball" and not trying to replicate it across the street. It had all the same problems as the next class of stadiums; but no one waxed poetic about the cutters.
CUTTERS/DUMPS
1. NYM Shea
2. STL Busch (the last one)
4. CIN Riverfront
5. OAK Coliseum
6. PHI Veterans
All these places were pretty bad, but Shea was the closest thing to trying to be a BASEBALL stadium. The Cards did a decent job of it, but the other three, not at all. They were all dumps by the time I visited, but Shea had charming elements like the Apple, the skyline on the scoreboard. The fact that four of the five got the wrecking ball and the A's are still in the Coliseum is insane.
BALLPARKS:
1. BAL Camden Yards
2. SD Petco
3. MIL Miller
4. HOU Minute Maid
5. ARZ Chase
6. CIN Great American
7. SFG AT&T
8. CLE Progressive
Camden is always going to be special for bringing BALLPARKS back. So much so that a place like Petco, which is nice, you're like "why did you do THIS in the RF corner for no reason, other than to be weird and different there?" Miller and Houston are both really good at being charming parks despite being indoors.
San Francisco is incredibly overrated. I think Candlestick and the Coliseum were so bad that people raved about the new place like it was one of the best in baseball, when it's incredibly cramped, with lots of poor choices and terrible dimensions. It's going to age very badly.
Arizona I think is drastically underrated. It lacks charm but when you live in Phoenix, AC is far more important than charm. When the roof works and they open it up before the anthem for a game in May, it's fantastic. And it's probably the best concourse of any place I've been. It gets bonus points for being accessible from where I lived via the lightrail, and having bars right at the lightrail stop before getting on the train to go home. The park itself isn't as nice as the overall experience if that makes sense.
Cincinnati is pretty good, but there's really nothing that stands out about it. Cleveland is kind of the same. Nice place, but the sunken field makes the action seem so far away compared to other stadiums.
I had a great view at Fenway (may have been luck of the draw), I was just at Wrigley and I feel like 40% of the stadium is obstructed view. Guarenteed Rate is one of the weirder stadiums I've ever been to, outside is like lawlessness (only stadium I've ever been to where I've seen unlicensed liquor sales outside the stadium), to the strictest in stadium security I've ever seen, felt like the nickname "The Cell" had multiple meanings.
As for Rogers Center, I haven't been since the renos, but it's a soulless giant concrete building. Although, I will say for positives, I can't think of another stadium I've been to that has a better location. Progressive/Jacob has a convenient location for tourists, but like a lot of American downtown stadiums it's designed around revitalizing the downtown, so while the stadium is great, the desirable areas around it are limited.
I haven't been to the new Rangers stadium, but I went to the old one a couple years back. I would say outside of Orchard Park for the Bills, it was in by far the least convenient area to get to. I loved Citi Field, and it's accessible by train, just quite a commute from lower Manhatten. Fenway is probably my favorite of ones I've been to, but that may have been luck of the draw on seats. Wrigley and Guarenteed Rate are both fairly simple to get to from River North/Gold Coast by train.
While I appreciate the architecture of stadiums, since I'm visiting most of these places, I def factor in overall convenience getting to them or location relative to downtown/tourist neighborhoods. I didn't go in (I was there in February), but by major American city standards, the location of Pac Bell looked will situated.
- Jun 23, 2020
- 5,386
- 7,618
I do find getting to the San Francisco park pretty easy - whether by car or train. The Coliseum in Oakland is pretty easy too, even if I live where taking BART is kind of pointless.
There is only one correct answer and that is PNC Park. I haven't been to every single one but there is hard to beat.
frisco
Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
There are very few really crappy parks. Anything built in 1990 and outwards are all pretty good at least. Of the ones I've been to:
1) Dodger Stadium Los Angeles
2) PNC Pittsburgh
3) Great American Ballpark Cincinnati (underrated)
4) Oracle Park San Francisco
5) Coors Field Denver
6) Miller Park Milwaukee
7) Wrigley Field Chicago
8) Target Field Minnesota
9) Kaufmann Stadium Kansas City
10) Guaranteed Rate Field Chicago
11) Busch Stadium St.Louis
12) Nationals Park Washington
13) Rogers Centre Toronto
14) Kingdome Seattle (closed)
15) Metrodome Minnesota (closed)
16) Mile High Stadium Denver (closed)
My Best-Carey
1) Dodger Stadium Los Angeles
2) PNC Pittsburgh
3) Great American Ballpark Cincinnati (underrated)
4) Oracle Park San Francisco
5) Coors Field Denver
6) Miller Park Milwaukee
7) Wrigley Field Chicago
8) Target Field Minnesota
9) Kaufmann Stadium Kansas City
10) Guaranteed Rate Field Chicago
11) Busch Stadium St.Louis
12) Nationals Park Washington
13) Rogers Centre Toronto
14) Kingdome Seattle (closed)
15) Metrodome Minnesota (closed)
16) Mile High Stadium Denver (closed)
My Best-Carey
SJSharksfan39
Registered User
KevFu
Registered User
That's a good question. I think that there's a massive difference between the "old era" of stadiums becoming out-dated and these new "since Camden Yards" era of stadiums.
In theory, you can play baseball in any of these stadiums forever: Fenway and Wrigley show that; it's just a case of how much money you're leaving on the table.
Renovations are possible (as Wrigley shows) to leave less on the table; but there's always a limiting agent. Much like Wrigley, the Giants ballpark is limited by the space.
Its' charm is how it's nestled in between the Bay and the street; but that also prevents renovations that increase revenue opportunities:
The latest trend is "social areas" where people can buy expensive food/drink and stand around with a view of the field and take/post social media. Some places -- Cleveland for example -- are removing seats and putting in more areas like that. San Francisco can only do that in LF, not RF.
They also can't sell a lot of RF signage.
One of the main things you're looking at with your revenue generation in a stadium is increasing points of sale. The main concourse in SF is incredibly cramped and crowded. It's really difficult if not impossible to increase points of sale on that concourse.
And while I'm talking about the Giants stadium... I just want to mention how disappointed I was with HOW they moved the bullpens off the field.
The CF garden is kind of cool (And a social place!) but they put a bullpen in front of it and a fence in front of that. When you were in the ballpark and looked at CF, you couldn't help but notice how that area in CF beyond the fence LOOKED LIKE THE POLO GROUNDS.
It would have been amazing to simply take the fence out and leave that space "in play" for games, like the Polo Grounds. You could have had "on-field" bullpens out there (like how they were in the LCF/RCF "corners" in the Polo Grounds).
KevFu
Registered User
Cincinnati is really a difficult one to place... It's probably the MLB stadium I'm been to the most, actually (either there or SF, I've kind of lost count).
It's nice, there's nothing wrong or bad about it. But there's nothing that really stands out about it either.
Unholy Diver
Registered User
I'll break them into a few categories
Older parks
Fenway
Wrigley
Angel stadium
Modern
Camden Yards
PNC
Busch Stadium
Jacob's Field
Safeco
Nationals Park
Defunct
Yankee Stadium
Metrodome
Busch Stadium
Riverfront Stadium
Three Rivers Stadium
Older parks
Fenway
Wrigley
Angel stadium
Modern
Camden Yards
PNC
Busch Stadium
Jacob's Field
Safeco
Nationals Park
Defunct
Yankee Stadium
Metrodome
Busch Stadium
Riverfront Stadium
Three Rivers Stadium
frisco
Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
I like the backdrop with the Ohio River. Similar to PNC and Oracle in that regard. Maybe I'm a sucker for parks with visible water around.
My Best-Carey
KevFu
Registered User
I have nothing bad to say about Cincinnati's place at all. It's a lovely park. I think the main thing is that other parks elicit emotion. There's a romance about baseball stadiums that fans have.
And Cincinnati just doesn't give off much of that at all. I don't know what it is. It feels like a nice, new park. And that's it. It doesn't have one thing that draws your focus (other than the LF scoreboard, maybe). I don't know if it's because the seats are red so everything just seems to be equally weighted visually? I can't put my finger on it.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
F Brayden Yager - Moose Jaw Warriors, WHL (2023, 14th, PIT)- Latest: Gurglesons
-
