.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} >


[March 14th] -- After seventeen months of frustration and uncertainty, the future of the Washington Nationals has finally arrived.

So, what do you think?

I've been staring at these drawings for several minutes now, and my initial reaction is that it's a very nice stadium, that it doesn't look like Camden Yards, and that it's, well, nice.

But is it great? I don't know. I hope so. Said the officials who unveiled the drawings this morning, " The stadium designers had three goals with the ballpark. The first was to create an addition to the city's "monumental core" that would anchor the skyline to the south of the federal mall. Architects were working with a 20-acre plot whose southern nexis was sharply angled by South Capitol Street and Potomac Avenue. In this picture, you can see clearly how the design team used of the space -- creating a hard-edged facade along South Capitol Street that ends in a sharp, knife-edge at the intersection. This linear form is cut through by the curve of the stadium bowl. The idea was to create a visual element of lines and curves that is unique and will allow the ballpark to be identified immediately on a postcard as "D.C.'s ballpark," architects said. The use of glass and pre-cast concrete (limestone was eliminated to save money) make the ballpark look modern and breaks from the popular red-brick throwback stadiums. A final note -- the sign that says Nationals in blue will be substituted for in reality by the name of a corporate sponsor -- such as FedEx Field for the Redskins."

"The limestone was was eliminated to save money" says the report.

I think that might be the underlying theme within the new stadium, that many of the "special effects" that were planned into the facility have been stripped away due to the financial infighting between all the sides.

Concrete replaces limestone, plastic replaces wood, and so on. Certainly, it will be a fine baseball facility. But will Washingtonians go to Nationals' games because of the facility? If the answer is no, then they might as well have refurbished RFK and called it good.

Until I see some better images, my initial reaction is that it's more like the new Comisky Park with outside walls than anything else. Though I'll wait for more information before making any final judgment, I will say that I like it.

But I was hoping that I'd love it.

LET BYGONES BE BYGONES: More good news: The Nats have come to an agreement with Bygone Sports [read: buckets of money are changing hands] for the use of the team name and all merchandising rights. Tony Taveres said that he doesn't know the particulars, but he thought it was all about money. The Bygone website is down as of this afternoon.

So, we've got a lease, a stadium and a name. Anyone for an owner??

When I first saw the stadium I was like"OMG...that is ugly!"

But as I have stared at it for the last couple of hours, it is staring to grow on me. I wanted something like that little water front drawing we all saw a few months back...but this looks cool..definetly something new. It is also good to hear about the name rights....dang...I had just bought the rights to the Washington Greys...
One more thing; is it just me or dose it look like a messed up Wrigley
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?