Toronto Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous

Players want to play with better views. You don’t need to reach just because you want a view. Are you telling me good players would rather live and play in Cleveland aka the mistake by the lake because of the grand city view versus live in Toronto. That’s insane and insecure. Sure there are players who want to play on grass because of injury reasons. But I have never ever heard anyone say anything about a view. Most players go where they are paid the most in a non salary cap league.

Could someone explain to me how fake versus real grass affects a pitchers decision where to play. In the worst case scenario which I don’t subscribe to couldn’t we stack a team with quality pitchers.

In the National League pitchers are also batters. In the American League, not so much but the pitchers do sometimes field the ball depending on where it is landing.

As for Cleveland, the stadium is open air, features real grass and opened in 1994. Also in Cleveland they have more theatrics to their games with concerts and the like pre and post game relating to the nearby Rock and Roll hall of fame. The atmosphere in US Ballparks is more vibrant, alot more vibrant than it is here in Toronto.

In comparison, Toronto has the atmosphere of a cricket match compared to the US stadiums.
 
Damn it this stadium looks terrible on tv. I’m changing the channel. Maybe baseballs ever lengthening of games is what is hurting overall ratings or the fact that the game is just so slow paced in a society which is faster and faster paced or the fact that espn, which has more and more influence from YouTube and the internet, heavily covers basketball and football but rarely mentions baseball at all.

Actually, the games are noticeably shorter. I was at the game last Saturday and surprised how quickly it wrapped up.
 
These are all kind of pointless abstract arguments. I think we know the deal with SkyDome: It was built as a multi-purpose facility and so it has noticeable shortfalls when it comes to baseball, particularly in the face of how stadium architecture immediately went into another direction. Apparently it has some behind-the-scenes issues but despite its deficiencies, it's not decrepit and it's not a dump. It's in a perfect location and the concessions have gradually been getting better and better (a craft beer corner is WAY overdue but let's not forget: this building opended with McDonald's doing all the concessions!).
For all the romance of Wrigley and Fenway, I'm pretty sure the player faciltiies are rather better here, especially with the upgrades made over the past few years under Shapiro.

It looks perfectly fine on TV (though much better with the roof open), which is more than can be said for Tropicana Field, which just looks like a ghastly place to play or watch a game. In short, given when and how it was built, it's not so bad at all but the bar has been raised, so it falls short in comparison to other places. You know what - all of us used to be cooler than we are now and young people are cooler than us. That's how it goes.The planned renos will probably do as much as you can within what's permissible, especially if they are gutting the lower bowl, re-orienting the seats etc.

Cleveland has a nicer atmosphere? Maybe. Camden Yards sets a higher standard of what a stadium should be? Probably. But our stadium will look better on TV come October, because neither of those two will be on TV at all. That counts for something too. For all this talk about grass and whatnot, they've signed major, A-class free agents in the past few years and maybe George Springer and Kevin Gausman really like grass, but they like a shot at a championship even more.
 
Honey the blue jays offered me 20 million a year. The Indians 18 million. But you know honey I love the atmosphere here and you can spend all our money at the indoor mall under the ritz.

People take hometown discounts all the time or refuse to leave somewhere they are settled in. It is more common than you think.
 
Holy man - there's some insanely dumb arguments on the last few pages

yeah, it's ridiculous and tiring.

Getting back to topic...something that appears to have been missed over the last week is a new restaurant and sports bar coming to the stadium.


clipped from above:

"The Blue Jays and theScore Bet also plan to create a branded, premium, 365-days-a-year, flagship sports bar and restaurant at the retractable-roof stadium in Toronto's downtown core."​


I would imagine this would replace the "John Street Terrace" in the outfield, accessible next to gate 1? I noticed the windows to that area are covered now so could be work going on. It would seem to make the most sense, logistically, for where this could go in the stadium.
 
yeah, it's ridiculous and tiring.

Getting back to topic...something that appears to have been missed over the last week is a new restaurant and sports bar coming to the stadium.


clipped from above:

"The Blue Jays and theScore Bet also plan to create a branded, premium, 365-days-a-year, flagship sports bar and restaurant at the retractable-roof stadium in Toronto's downtown core."​


I would imagine this would replace the "John Street Terrace" in the outfield, accessible next to gate 1? I noticed the windows to that area are covered now so could be work going on. It would seem to make the most sense, logistically, for where this could go in the stadium.

I wonder how this would affect the Sportsnet Bar and Grill.
 
I wonder how this would affect the Sportsnet Bar and Grill.

I can't imagine it would hurt it too much. Sportsnet Grill is busy enough on game days and serves as a hotel restaurant during other dayparts. It is also positioned a bit more 'family friendly' in its design and menu vs what they are touting as a "premium" bar and restaurant with sports betting focus.

It wasn't too long ago that the stadium had the hotel restaurant (now Sportsnet Grill) + Sightlines Restaurant (now a big screen) + Windows Restaurant (now Westjet Flightdeck).

Prior to the pandemic, there was enough demand to operate Sightlines & Sportsnet Grill, despite the fact Sightlines was showing its age and did not have a compelling menu.

If done properly with an effective layout, great menu, and exciting atmosphere, I would imagine the new space will do very well and could help animate that back pathway between gates 1 & the hotel. If anything it likely would impact The Pint Public House, if it does end up going into the old Hard Rock space.
 
These are all kind of pointless abstract arguments. I think we know the deal with SkyDome: It was built as a multi-purpose facility and so it has noticeable shortfalls when it comes to baseball, particularly in the face of how stadium architecture immediately went into another direction. Apparently it has some behind-the-scenes issues but despite its deficiencies, it's not decrepit and it's not a dump. It's in a perfect location and the concessions have gradually been getting better and better (a craft beer corner is WAY overdue but let's not forget: this building opended with McDonald's doing all the concessions!).
For all the romance of Wrigley and Fenway, I'm pretty sure the player faciltiies are rather better here, especially with the upgrades made over the past few years under Shapiro.

It looks perfectly fine on TV (though much better with the roof open), which is more than can be said for Tropicana Field, which just looks like a ghastly place to play or watch a game. In short, given when and how it was built, it's not so bad at all but the bar has been raised, so it falls short in comparison to other places. You know what - all of us used to be cooler than we are now and young people are cooler than us. That's how it goes.The planned renos will probably do as much as you can within what's permissible, especially if they are gutting the lower bowl, re-orienting the seats etc.

Cleveland has a nicer atmosphere? Maybe. Camden Yards sets a higher standard of what a stadium should be? Probably. But our stadium will look better on TV come October, because neither of those two will be on TV at all. That counts for something too. For all this talk about grass and whatnot, they've signed major, A-class free agents in the past few years and maybe George Springer and Kevin Gausman really like grass, but they like a shot at a championship even more.

Stadiums aren't people, so this a terrible comparison...lol. Stadiums can be rebuilt and effect the product your trying to sell, otherwise the president of the company wouldn't be pushing for it.

You want to be known as s good baseball city? You need to have it all. Not just a winning team. Oakland and Tampa put wining products on the field all the time and nobody wants to go there, fans or players.

So people can use the "it's still a serviceable stadium and a winning team will put asses in seats" argument all they want, but it's a about being a first class organization in every aspect, and a stadium is part of the that.
 
So people can use the "it's still a serviceable stadium and a winning team will put asses in seats" argument all they want, but it's a about being a first class organization in every aspect, and a stadium is part of the that.
Putting aside other arguments against getting grid of the Skydome, a new park doesn't guarantee anything"first class." There are a lot of new parks in baseball that stink. Globe Life Field is solidly OK, Truist park is possibly the worst location in baseball, Marlins Park is worse than Skydome, New Yankee is also worse in my opinion. The quality of new parks has been spotty in the last decade. Rogers Centre is a middle of the road stadium with the best location in baseball. Solid improvements to the lower bowl could have a huge impact. It'll never be Camden, or Oracle, but it's equally far from the trop or Oakland. The calculus, as far as the negative impact the stadium has on the team, is not all that clear cut.
 
Stadiums aren't people, so this a terrible comparison...lol. Stadiums can be rebuilt and effect the product your trying to sell, otherwise the president of the company wouldn't be pushing for it.

You want to be known as s good baseball city? You need to have it all. Not just a winning team. Oakland and Tampa put wining products on the field all the time and nobody wants to go there, fans or players.

So people can use the "it's still a serviceable stadium and a winning team will put asses in seats" argument all they want, but it's a about being a first class organization in every aspect, and a stadium is part of the that.

Stadiums aren't people, OK - so let's talk about mixing metaphors. Who is YOU that wants to be known as a good baseball city?
Is it the fans? The ownership group? The "organization"? The players?

You think a player would pass up a World Series win to avoid playing in Tampa or here? You think Tampa goes to the World Series and anyone involved feels worse because of their butt-ugly joke of a stadium?

If anyone - here or in the ownership group - thought Rogers Centre was perfect, they wouldn't have hired Shapiro, in large part, to fix it up. We're a good baseball city right now. Power Rankings all have the Blue Jays in the top 3 teams in the league. They would not be any higher if the stadium was better. Shapiro's job is to make it better to, yes, attract players but also more importantly to generate revenue. That partially comes from making it a better "fan experience" for us, in all sorts of ways but let's be clear - more money is the main reason a new stadium will one day come..

I'm old enough to remember when the dome was built for exactly this reason and this baseball city literally set an attendance record that may never be broken. We then won 2 World Series, as I recall.
The stadium has aged, no question. There are limits to what can be renovated without a rebuild, no question.

In the meantime, it'll be packed to the rafters come playoff time and as long as this team is built like this, top-tier free agents will keep signing here, irrespective of the fact some seats point to the outfield and there is only one 1 Craft Beer Corner. Those are my thoughts on where the Blue Jays currently rank as an organization and how while the stadium might not be their biggest draw, it's not quite the albatross some think.
 
While the Jays were in a rain delay yesterday, I watched a bit of the Rangers game from Globe Life Field. It did not look much better than the dome. The field looked worse (full of seams) which Rogers Centre has done away with. It just had that hollow feel that happens with a closed roof. This is a brand new $1 billion stadium.

If you look at the photos on the previous page, the field at Rogers Centre looks spectacular. Reminds of the mock ups people made of it having a real grass field. Synthetic fields are on the rise in every sport played on grass. The technology is only going to improve. That issue is on the verge of becoming dead. The hollowed out deadness issue goes away when the roof is open. And you know, the roof is only closed when you wouldn't want to be playing outside anyways. If you don't like the atmosphere when it is closed, remember that you'd either be shivering your nuts off or be getting rained on. Also, a full capacity dome with the roof closed is actually one of the most intense atmospheres in the MLB. Arguably the most intense. I've seen that echoed on Reddit from people in other baseball cities. Think the Bautista bat flip moment.
 
While the Jays were in a rain delay yesterday, I watched a bit of the Rangers game from Globe Life Field. It did not look much better than the dome. The field looked worse (full of seams) which Rogers Centre has done away with. It just had that hollow feel that happens with a closed roof. This is a brand new $1 billion stadium.

If you look at the photos on the previous page, the field at Rogers Centre looks spectacular. Reminds of the mock ups people made of it having a real grass field. Synthetic fields are on the rise in every sport played on grass. The technology is only going to improve. That issue is on the verge of becoming dead. The hollowed out deadness issue goes away when the roof is open. And you know, the roof is only closed when you wouldn't want to be playing outside anyways. If you don't like the atmosphere when it is closed, remember that you'd either be shivering your nuts off or be getting rained on. Also, a full capacity dome with the roof closed is actually one of the most intense atmospheres in the MLB. Arguably the most intense. I've seen that echoed on Reddit from people in other baseball cities. Think the Bautista bat flip moment.


Not a good comparison, as nobody seems to know what the Rangers were thinking on this. They completely botched it. The same can be said for Miami, but not quite as bad.
 
Putting aside other arguments against getting grid of the Skydome, a new park doesn't guarantee anything"first class." There are a lot of new parks in baseball that stink. Globe Life Field is solidly OK, Truist park is possibly the worst location in baseball, Marlins Park is worse than Skydome, New Yankee is also worse in my opinion. The quality of new parks has been spotty in the last decade. Rogers Centre is a middle of the road stadium with the best location in baseball. Solid improvements to the lower bowl could have a huge impact. It'll never be Camden, or Oracle, but it's equally far from the trop or Oakland. The calculus, as far as the negative impact the stadium has on the team, is not all that clear cut.
I find many new stadium seem to be badly built.
 

Back
Top