Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanite
I mean my grandpa loved his new Chevy when he got it, but that doesn't change the fact that it was obviously out of date and he needed something new when things like power steering and safety features became standard.
For the Skydome I'd argue that it's the opposite. When it opened it was a cool, kind of gimicky draw to sit there and watch the dome open, but it was always a sub-par fan experience for both football and baseball. Once the excitement of being new and unique wears off then all that's left is the warts that start to wear on you more and more every year. Those warts become more apparent as you watch your team play on other fields with pristine grass and better viewing experiences. People still like the dome for the nostalgia, and it always shined because of it's atmosphere, but you can still go back and watch highlights of the Jay's World Series wins and it's painfully clear that it's not designed for baseball.
|
I don't think the Chevy comparison is apt.
It's like a 1990s Honda Civic versus a late model one. Both are completely acceptable transportation. They both are reasonably reliable, reasonably safe cars. The modern Civic is much more 'in vogue' with modern tastes and has more nice features (heated seats, anyone?) but isn't so fundamentally better as spend mid-$20k if you have a well-maintained 1990s one in the driveway.
The Skydome doesn't lack anything those old multipurpose stadiums missed. Prime location? Check. Paid for? Check. Money-making luxury suites? Check. Good transit connections? Done. Weather protection? The Dome is a much nicer place to be during April and October (not that the Jays usually make it that far).
The worst problems it has are:
1. It's oversized, but I think that's more a larger problem of baseball pricing itself out, or becoming less relevant, or just having a consistently sucky team.
2. The other one is the aesthetic isn't 'classic baseball'. That's the rub though - sucky teams in weak markets just don't draw very well regardless of how nice the stadium is. The new stadium may cause a brief blip in attendance, but it's hard to sustain that if the team isn't good and the market just isn't
that into baseball.
I suspect this is mostly a long-game PR thing from Rogers. They might not replace the stadium for another 20 years. I suspect they are just trying to test the fertility of the ground for a new stadium. If it doesn't go anywhere, you've just slowly worn away the idea that Skydome is fine. The slow erosion of that idea is part of the PR play.
They know what they need to do to fill the place. Spend gads of money on the on-field product to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox (and hope those teams suck). Does that make money long-term? Don't know. Ask Rogers' accountants. Maybe they seem content to make money by running the Jays into the ground. I think there will have to be a point where they have to spend money to make money.
It's a weird spot to be in for Rogers. A team that hurts for attendance can 'justify' a smaller venue but generally spending public money on a team that isn't loved at the time is harder.
However, making the team successful would likely fill Skydome, making it harder to justify a smaller venue in one way, but more likely to justify it in another.
Prev
Linear Mode
