I wasn't sure if this thread went here or in "Other Sports" but considering it's about the building and not actual baseball players or games, I went with the hangout. Some of these tweets are pretty darn funny. https://sports.yahoo.com/the-new-ra...-twitter-is-having-a-field-day-191148426.html
Dallas gonna Dallas. (spare me the Arlington bs...that has Dallas written all over it. F YOU RANGERS!)
https://www.chron.com/sports/astros...-Rangers-Globe-Life-Field-ballpark-204370.php https://www.chron.com/sports/astros...-Rangers-Globe-Life-Field-ballpark-204370.php
Lol. They had a perfectly good stadium that is only about 25 years old, and Arlington taxpayers voted to subsidize another one to a super rich team owner. They got screwed on the Cowboys Stadium deal by Jerry, and I'm sure they are getting the same with this thing--whatever it is.
That had the sweetest deal ever on their old place. The city actually did a deal when it was built that it was deeded over to the team after a certain number of years.
Previous head dumbasses thought it was smart to build an open air stadium for a sport that runs through Summer in Texas. LOL.
I guess a prerequisite for being a douchebag is not knowing what an utter douchebag you are. Good job knocking it out of the park, again, Dallas.
They should have explored all possible options to build a roof on the existing structure... much like they were able to do for the Wimbledon or US. Open stadiums. The ballpark in Arlington still looks great... in fact, you drive by both places and you feel like the BIA is the newer stadium.
I've always like visiting that park when I visited friends and the Astros played them. It had a good feel inside the stadium. Im sure they did explore all possibilities and it just wasn't feasible unless they put supporting pillars in the middle and throughout the field.
I liked the old Ballpark a lot - very classic design and feel to it but those 2pm Sunday games in August were brutal. They did explore adding a roof to it, but it would cost almost as much to retro-fit the stadium with a roof as it costs to build a new stadium.
Like I said previously, architects have been able to build retractable roofs on existing structures. Its very costly given all the design adjustments they have to make, and they likely didn't want to go through the hassle in this situation. Most importantly, they probably didn't have a feasible way to incorporate A/C ducts throughout the existing structure. The end result here is disappointing from an aesthetic standpoint. As of Camden Yards, new ballparks were typically going for a timeless approach... moving away from the utilitarian cookie-cutter design. Unfortunately now we may be seeing construction going back towards form/function vs. aesthetics... with the possibility that these newer parks get outdated quicker and result in more tax-payer spending to update/refurbish/renew.
Not sure why AC is even that relevant. I love AC and Houston wouldn't be the giant it is if we didn't have it, but if you're going to an outdoor park in the Summer, you're going to bake and sweat. If the product is good, the tickets will sell out anyway. What's next, Kentucky Derby being air conditioned? How would the snooty ladies justify their hats?
