G.L.17
Senior Member
I think the main selling feature here would be to be "right in the action".
Otherwise, anyone sitting in the sunken areas would have to strain their necks following any fly ball hit throughout the game.
Rogers Centre Renovations | ?m | ?s | Toronto Blue Jays | Populous
- Thread starter buildup
- Start date
Otherwise, anyone sitting in the sunken areas would have to strain their necks following any fly ball hit throughout the game.
UrbanOzz
Active Member
i sat in the action once and it was incredible being right on turf level. it was far greater than row 1 seats i sat at elsewhere. it was super impressive hearing the pitch hit the catchers mitt, or the crack of the bat, or saying a couple of words back and forth with the player on the on-deck circle. i don't know how that changes or better or worse when it's sunken though. i guess i'll try to snag a pair of in-the-action seats this year if they're going away as i'll probably never have access to a premium box there. You can get them for a reasonable (not that reasonable, but all things considering) price before the summer months on like a monday night vs the rays or someone. that's what i did last time.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Like owning a massive SUV, it's less about the practicality than ability to show off a status symbol.
Given that most fans watch the game on TV, I don't know why you'd do something that looks like crap the whole time but then I don't work in an MLB front office so what do I know?
In Cleveland, for example, those sunken dugouts are off to either side of home and this is how the backstop looks on TV.
Literally, no fans in view.
Compare that to Rogers Centre.
And don't get me wrong - Cleveland is a nice stadium but ugly is ugly. You want to see other human beings reacting and such, right?
(And before they did the In the Action seats at SkyDome there was a camera bay in that little alcove where the attendants prep the food for the lucky ticketholders up there. It looked ugly too.
Not the ideal angle but here is how it looked back in 1993...
Last edited:
sixrings
Senior Member
They’re deliberately making it look terrible on your 8k UHD 85 inch oled so you buy 70k seats. Shameful.
egotrippin
Senior Member
Totally, I get the close to the action element, that makes perfect sense. It was the sunken element I can't quite see the benefit of; seems like you're in a bit of a dungeon. Maybe it's like an emulation of the dugout? That might be the angle.
ChesterCopperpot
Senior Member
definitely looks a lot darker - and looks great
C-mac
Active Member
I actually think I liked the royal blue better. It matched the blue on the uniforms.
T.E.C.II
Active Member
I prefer this shade. With the royal blue, I felt seats really stood out in a bad way. The darker shade looks more refined, somehow, more elegant.
And there is dark blue in the logo, so it does work. I think it will look great on screen.
And there is dark blue in the logo, so it does work. I think it will look great on screen.
Translude15
Frank the Tank
Jago88
New Member
Wow, I love it! Looks so much better
bgobgo
Active Member
If a ball hits the portion circled in red below, is it a home run? If it is not a home run, (I.e part of the wall) do we know if there is plexiglass inside those gaps?
Translude15
Frank the Tank
That's part of the wall so a ball has to clear that section to be considered a HR. I'd imagine the openings will be covered with mesh/fencing like in every other ballpark.
marcus_a_j
Senior Member
Home Opener in a little over 6 weeks away. Looks like they are making good progress.
UrbanOzz
Active Member
while i was watching the games this weekend, i realized that they completely renovated Dunedin just a couple years ago and part of it was to match the exact field dimensions of the Skydome.....ooops.
Toronto Planning