Chicagoland, Kansas and Texas=the Vet, Three Rivers and Riverfront

[rabbit]

Good read by Jeff Olson on the past, present and future of race tracks in the U.S.
http://www.speedtv.com/commentary/12679/
:thumbup:

[Andrew Longman]

"In 10 years, the 1.5-mile formula will have gone the way of Three Rivers Stadium and the Vet. It will be gauche and dull. We will demand something different. "

It's taken less than ten years.

Also, that's not a grain elevator. I think he's referring to the cement factory.

But his points are still valid.

I'll dearly miss Nazareth. I've had many great days there. Sunday was not one of them though. I went to Cape May with my wife instead.

[Steve99]

What is that guy going to do when he catches the racoon? :confused:

[Joe in LA]

They make nice hats. :)

[RobGuru]

... dork on a Segway.

Now, who could he have meant there?

:laugh:

[cart7]

After seeing the crowd at Naz, they should have let the raccoon stay to increase the head count.

[4wheeldrifter]

What is that guy going to do when he catches the racoon? :confused:

Was wondering the same thing. Probably visit the emergency room? :confused:

[Racewriter]

Jeff has a point, but it's not quite the one he thinks. First of all, the "doughnut" stadiums weren't torn down because of the playing fields, they were torn down because their seating wasn't particularly good for either sport, they didn't have enough revenue streams (hence the modern "mallpark"), and they had gotten extremely run down. The only baseball-only stadium built during the period, Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City, is still considered one of the finest in the big leagues and will be remodeled for better revenue flow (if the nutty downtown-park advocates don't get their way).

Similarly, the 1.5s were built because of seating and revenue stream issues. A track like Nazareth has bad sightlines and bad revenue capabilities. The new ballparks have their manufactured 'quirks' in the field, but great sightlines. And frankly, now that there are a bunch of them, they're getting to be as "cookie cutter" as the 1.5's. One baseball writer says that the only way to tell them apart is by finding out which old ballplayer lent his name to the barbecue stand.

Secondly, this is about the third time that Nazareth has 'died.' I'm sure ISC would sell it at an attractive price to someone who would use it as an extended short-track, which is what it was built for in the first place. It would be a great venue for Modifieds, Northern Tour, ACT, etc.

[cart7]

Jeff has a point, but it's not quite the one he thinks. First of all, the "doughnut" stadiums weren't torn down because of the playing fields, they were torn down because their seating wasn't particularly good for either sport, they didn't have enough revenue streams (hence the modern "mallpark"), and they had gotten extremely run down. The only baseball-only stadium built during the period, Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City, is still considered one of the finest in the big leagues and will be remodeled for better revenue flow (if the nutty downtown-park advocates don't get their way).

Similarly, the 1.5s were built because of seating and revenue stream issues. A track like Nazareth has bad sightlines and bad revenue capabilities. The new ballparks have their manufactured 'quirks' in the field, but great sightlines. And frankly, now that there are a bunch of them, they're getting to be as "cookie cutter" as the 1.5's. One baseball writer says that the only way to tell them apart is by finding out which old ballplayer lent his name to the barbecue stand.

Secondly, this is about the third time that Nazareth has 'died.' I'm sure ISC would sell it at an attractive price to someone who would use it as an extended short-track, which is what it was built for in the first place. It would be a great venue for Modifieds, Northern Tour, ACT, etc.


You're BB park is a beaut RW. I love the waterfall out in centerfield. It's a shame they want to tear it down though I understand from my cousin who lives in KC that they want to rebuild Downtown and try and bring some folks back into the city and revitalize it.

As for St. Louis's Busch stadium, it's in outstanding shape and very appealing. Yep, some of the seats down the baselines sit way too far back from the field and the nosebleed seats are horrible for BB viewing, that said, the Cardinal organization claims (rightfully so) they can't economically build the luxury suites in the old stadium that bring in the revenue that allow them to field a competitive team. I guess I see they're point but I still think it's ludicrous to tear down a stadium that hasn't quite reached 1/2 way to it's engineered life span.