KCRag Forum

bahua wrote: So, then you don't rescind your comparison of Kaufman and Fenway?

I already stated my opinion on that. 

I really dont think you can compare Fenway and Kaufman. I think most people in the world like Fenway much better. I personaly like The K better.

JJack_44 wrote: I really dont think you can compare Fenway and Kaufman. I think most people in the world like Fenway much better. I personaly like The K better.

ESPN.com did compare Fenway to Kauffman and Kauffman scored higher. Its score tied with Wrigley.

There is nothing really wrong with Kauffman, but I couldn't imagine a more desolate and depressing location-- maybe 143rd and Quivira in 18 years? Tosspot's pic of the sports complex says it all in such a brutal and uncomprising way...there is no argument after see that design abortion.

trailerkid wrote: Tosspot's pic of the sports complex says it all in such a brutal and uncomprising way...there is no argument after see that design abortion.

Especially after seeing the situation at almost every other ballpark, and knowing we're stuck with this.

The last time I checked, we werent the only city to F up the location.  Look at seattle, they did theirs in the equivelent of our west bottoms.  LMAO.  And look, no development, only bars.  Maybe someone should remove that picture from the above pictures and quit comparing the K to crap like that.  Just my .02

im2kull wrote: The last time I checked, we werent the only city to F up the location.  Look at seattle, they did theirs in the equivelent of our west bottoms.  LMAO.  And look, no development, only bars.  Maybe someone should remove that picture from the above pictures and quit comparing the K to crap like that.  Just my .02

Have you been to Seattle and seen their stadium?  I have and while I didn't attend a game I can say with out a doubt that there's a lot of life around it.  I don't think that's a strong argument...

im2kull wrote: And look, no development, only bars.

Um, what? Bars are development.

michael, do us all a favor and move to a town where a baseball stadium is "thriving"

KC would definitely be one of those, but I don't think that's what Michael's talking about. I think he's referring life in the surrounding area. With the exception of Comiskey Park, I'd say that just about all of them are in vital urban environments.

That said, what is the point of this conversation? KC has already shot itself in the leg. Now, all we can hope for is damage control. Urban baseball, unfortunately, has been basically ruled out for this generation. I accept that with deepest regret, and all I can really do is ignore the public theft of our city's future unfolding in front of us. At times like this, it's best to just to forget about it and visit a place that makes you think of other things. I'm going to get some barbecue.

Michael® wrote: TSC's cultural, entertainment and retail center, Taco Bell, is easily visible and accessible from anywhere near the complex.

There is also a Denny's.  

Kard, I just got back into LA from a ballgame in SD.  I was in SD three years ago, the summer before Petco opened.  Now after petco....holly shit.  The development that has occurred and continues to occur around that park is just incredible.  I know this does not happen everywhere, I would even say, this might be the posterchild stadium when it comes to actually spurring development, but still, it's amazing how fast high density development is totally surrounding the stadium.

It was great watching the Cards get beat!!!!!! Can't do that in KC and in StL it's no fun compared another city's park.  It was an awesome game, big crowd.  Competitive major league baseball.  I forgot what that's like.

There's nothing wrong with the K, only the team that's on the field day in and day out.  A new stadium would not fix that.  Not every city has a downtown ballpark, but is still triving......look at Dallas as an example.  Their baseball stadium (built I believe in the mid-90's) is in Arlington....not exactly downtown. With the Sprint Center, PAC, and P&L District, downtown KC will do just fine...believe me.  With the way the Royals are playing, a new downtown ballpark wouldn't attract any more visitors and thus would just be a drain on the city and taxpayers.....just my humble opinion.

it would draw a bigger crowd for a whole season just to see the new stadium... but it would go back to normal since the royals are doing, well, sup-par?

KC_JAYHAWK wrote: There's nothing wrong with the K, only the team that's on the field day in and day out.  A new stadium would not fix that.  Not every city has a downtown ballpark, but is still triving......look at Dallas as an example.  Their baseball stadium (built I believe in the mid-90's) is in Arlington....not exactly downtown. With the Sprint Center, PAC, and P&L District, downtown KC will do just fine...believe me.  With the way the Royals are playing, a new downtown ballpark wouldn't attract any more visitors and thus would just be a drain on the city and taxpayers.....just my humble opinion.

Dallas???
Arlington really isn't a bad spot for their park considering it's right in the middle of two cities that are both bigger than KC.  Maybe if we moved the entire St. Louis region 200 miles west to about where Odessa is, then you might have a point for Kauffman being in a good spot.

KC_JAYHAWK wrote: There's nothing wrong with the K, only the team that's on the field day in and day out.  A new stadium would not fix that.  Not every city has a downtown ballpark, but is still triving......look at Dallas as an example.  Their baseball stadium (built I believe in the mid-90's) is in Arlington....not exactly downtown. With the Sprint Center, PAC, and P&L District, downtown KC will do just fine...believe me.  With the way the Royals are playing, a new downtown ballpark wouldn't attract any more visitors and thus would just be a drain on the city and taxpayers.....just my humble opinion.

Yea, ok, but....

I totally agree with you Grid. The thing is, I think we pretty much know where everybody stands on this whole issue. I seriously doubt that kcdcchef is going to wake up tomorrow morning, grab his coffee, go to his kcskyscrapers.com fix, and suddenly have a moment of inflection that says ... "You know ... maybe I'm wrong."

All we're doing now is picking at a wound that just needs to scab over. And yes, it hurts my heart every time I get to imagining what was possible, how we could have done it, and what would have come of it, and what we did instead. But we can't go back. We either have to decide to a) live with it, or b) move. And believe me, I love it here, and I thought of it. But we've been through worse. And it's made even worse by the fact that our team sucks to a historical level. But we've got what we've got, and barring an ownership change that is willing to make a big financial contribution to go a different direction, this is it for now. Let's talk about the stuff we all like and encourage more of it.

I'm ok with Kauffman, what can you do?  Like I said before, I don't think KC would have built a downtown stadium and we probably would have lost the royals over it.

Anyway...

Wow, that is totally cool how the incorporated an old building as part of the stadium. Baltimore did that too. Stay classy San Diego!

That 1st Pic up top is freaking sweet. The building in the Left field is awesome.