During the first week of play at Citi Field last season, the San Diego Padres complained to Major League baseball that it was almost impossible to see the field from the visitors’ bullpen.

The visitors’ pen was behind the Mets bullpen. The Mets pen was at field level right up against the glass paneled outfield fence. In addition, the Mets added two while tarpaulins above the pen to protect the pitchers from the elements. The visiting pitchers were protected by the bridge that is right over their bullpen. The bridge and tarpaulins made visiting pitchers feel as if they were in a cave.  

Nothing could be done about the problem during the season except to install TV screens to see the action.  However, this off season, the Mets have already gutted the entire bullpen including the higher tier.

The bullpens will be revamped so that the visitor and home bullpens are side by side giving both clubs the ability to see out to the entire playing field. Pitchers will now throw toward the playing field instead of parallel. On bad weather days, both club’s pitchers will be protected from the elements by sitting under the bridge making the white tarpaulins unnecessary. This will give fans over the bridge and surrounding area a bird’s eye view into the bullpens.

Also of note, a friend of mine, a devout Yankees fan, traveled to Citizen’s Bank Park to see game three of the World Series. He sat in the upper level in right field. Remember the home run A-Rod hit that was first challenged? If you recall, it hit the camera above the railing. Well, my friend could not see that play. In fact, as the right fielder moved back on the ball, any ball for that matter, he disappeared from view. Sound familiar?

I had written about this phenomenon early in the season when many Mets fans complained in regards to not seeing parts of the outfield from the higher outfield grandstand seats. I even included illustrations supporting the notion that this was not uncommon in many new parks with lots of outfield seating. I recall a fan complaining on talk radio saying that the Phillies ballpark had no such obstructions. Apparently he was wrong.

Give the Mets credit for listening to the complaints and taking action. Mid way through the season, the Mets installed a video board in the right field corner for anyone in the left filed grand stand to see. Plus, when balls are put into play, the action on the three video screens including the new one in right field is live. By contrast, Citizen’s Bank Park showed hardly any action on their video board according to my friend.

Most Mets who complained were simply not use to the idea that in the outfield, some areas of the playing field are out of view. This is also true in Yankee Stadium. Earlier in the season, I sat in the right field stands in the second level. Every time Nick Swisher went back on the ball, he disappeared.

At the Mets season finale, I sat in the left field corner in the Promenade boxes. I could not see the left field corner. However, my view of the diamond and the majority of the outfield was still spectacular. Plus I did not have to pay a king’s ransom for the tickets. The equivalent seat at Shea Stadium would have had me pushed much further back from the majority of the action. It’s a tradeoff I am willing to accept considering I am closer to the action and the seats are fairly affordable.

I guess the point I am trying to make here is while our team may need some overhauling to get to where it needs to be, our ballpark is second to none.

Yesterday it was reported that the Mets will not alter the dimensions at Citi Field for the 2010 season.  However, in a report in Friday’s New York Post, the Mets deny that and stated they will wait till after the season to decide.

That’s good news to me because in my opinion, the Mets should change the dimensions to some degree. The Model Zone should go away. I am all for the quirky dimensions and homage to the ballparks of years gone by, but even Ebbets Field had no such bizarre cutout. More importantly, the ballpark wall dimensions should have been constructed to the strength of the Mets hitters.  

The Yankees built the new Yankee Stadium’s wall to match the older ballpark now being torn down.  In doing so, they insured that their left handed power would not suddenly become neutralized by not being able to reach the fences. Although the new Yankee Stadium has shown to give up more homers than ever, it was the right approach to build the park to the team’s strength.

The Mets, by contrast, have done the opposite. They took the power away from their hitters. I do applaud the Mets for wanting to create a pitcher friendly park, one that is fair unlike Philadelphia’s Citizen’s Bank Park. However, a better balance could have been struck.

The face of the franchise is David Wright. Wright, not unlike former Met Mike Piazza, has great power going the other way. But the Model Zone has stripped Wright of this advantage. Wright’s home run numbers are way down although he has hit more at Citi Field than he has on the road. But who knows if the psychology of hitting at Citi Field has altered David’s approach on the road too.

There has been much talk of the Mets developing a team that is faster and plays small ball better and not rely on the homerun. That’s fine but as Earl Weaver, the great former Orioles manager, use to say, there is nothing like a three run homerun.  This is especially true late in the game trailing by a couple of runs. Without the threat of a homerun to get back in the game, a non power team must rely on a series of hits, walks, etc. to get it done.

I don’t think the Mets should radically alter the field dimensions of Citi Field but I do think they should do two things. One: get rid of the indented cut out called the Model Zone and two: lower the left field fence to something more reasonable, say ten feet. The result would still be a pitchers park but a bit fairer to the hitter.

Here’s another thing to consider. Good luck trying to attract a free agent power hitter to Citi Field. If you were in the lucky position of signing with the Yankees or Mets and you were a power hitter, what team would you pick? It’s likely not the Mets because no hitter wants to see his power numbers go down. There is always that next contract to think about.

Note: You know it’s a bad year when – former ace left handed pitcher Jerry Koosman was sentenced to six months in jail for tax evasion. How sad.

Collapse in Brooklyn?

After two seasons of losing a playoff spot on the last day, the Mets won’t face that prospect this year. However, the Brooklyn Cyclones, the Mets short season class A affiliate might. The Cyclones led the McNamara Division all summer until a couple of days ago when the Staten Island Yankees, of all teams, went ahead of them in the standings. The Yankees have won 13 in a row while the Cylones have been struggling. At the very least Brooklyn should win the wild card.

There have been a lot of complaints about the upper level at Citi Field known as the Promenade. While Shea Stadium's upper deck raised complaints of being too high and too far away with a rake causing some fans to experience vertigo, the Promenade at Citi Field has the opposite problem.

The third deck at the Mets new home is too close to the field and its rake is too comfortable. For those of you who have not visited Citi Field, you may ask why is this a problem? It's an issue because the closeness of the Promenade to the field, a great idea on paper, has caused there to be many seats with obstructed views. Most notable obstructions are the staircase railings and Plexi-Glass that blocks views of the infield. Another issue, and perhaps not so obvious, is that the geometry, a term Mets Vice President of Operations David Howard likes to use, causes certain sections to miss portions of the outfield. These site line issues come from a front office who sold us on the idea that Citi Field would have unprecedented site lines, the best in baseball. 

Many, and perhaps most, of the seats at Citi Field have unprecedented site lines and maybe some of the best in baseball. I can tell you that is not true of all seats at Citi Field, especially in the Promenade. Oriole Park at Camden Yards, the ballpark that kicked off the retro stadium design craze in 1992 has a superior upper level in regards to views from the seats.  So does Progressive Field (formally Jacobs Field in Cleveland) and AT&T Park in San Francisco.

The Mets brass wanted a cozy ballpark. That they got but with some modifications during the design phase of Citi Field, they could have hit a home run. Instead, they hit a ground rule double but unfortunately many fans could not see it.

In a recent interview with WFAN's Mike Francesa, David Howard admitted that some of the fans complaints stemmed from not having outfield seats in Shea Stadium. In other words, the experience was something new for Mets fans. To some degree, he is correct. Coors Field's upper level in right field, and Rangers Ballpark's Tiger Stadium inspired seats in right field do not allow fans to see the entire outfield for the same reason as Citi Field. The rake of the stands is gradual and the vertical proximity to the outfield fence is very close. It's impossible to see the fence, warning track, and part of the grass because the grand stand is too close and not swept back enough. Even the New Yankee Stadium has some of these problems not to mention the blocked views from the bleachers. 

Sitting in the right field seats on the middle deck of the new Yankee Stadium earlier this month, I noticed Nick Swisher disappeared every time he went back for a fly ball. The same is true of the Pepsi Porch in Citi Field. However, at least the Mets have advertised that those seats hang over the field. Buyer, beware. If you think you will have an unprecedented view of the entire field while sitting in a deck that hangs over the field, I don't know what to tell you. Well, the same is true when sitting in the Left Field Landing as well as the Promenade in left field. Even though these seats are not over the field, they are close enough so the outfielders disappear when they travel back on a ball.

Okay, not a problem unique to Citi Field. Neither is the corners that get lost as you sit further down the third and first base line when seated in the Promenade. This is also true at Citizen's Bank Park, NYS, Petco Park, Busch Stadium III, The Great American Ballpark, Nationals Park, and others. But should these other parks have dictated the site lines at Citi Field?

A point of view from some architects is hard to argue with. Old ballparks, that retro parks attempt to emulate, had weird and quirky site lines because the structure had to fit into the foot print of an urban location. How do you justify building quirkiness into a ballpark where there was loads of room for construction such as the parking lot of Shea Stadium. Now, in fairness, I like the non symmetrical style of Citi Field vs. the cookie cutter blue print of a Shea Stadium. And although Shea never filled in the outfield with seats, it was virtually the same design as the Astrodome, Three Rivers Stadium, Riverfront Stadium, and Busch Stadium II. They were all big, sterile, and very far away from the action. But I do believe a compromise could have been reached that would have created better sight lines but still maintained the coziness desired.

So how could Citi Field have been made better? For one, they should not have created the sideways staircases to access the Promenade reserved seats. The first computer generated video and photos illustrated Citi Field's Promenade with the portal style access tunnels leading to the promenade reserved (I have the video from the first press conference in April of '06 to prove it). The final design left the portals (six of them) behind home plate but replaced the rest with the staircases with the Plexi Glass railings. I would like to know why the Mets changed this.

David Howard claims there are no obstructed seats at Citi Field. If you believe him, then stop over to Metspolice.com and see the videos and photos from these seats. In one case, the entire infield is blocked by a staircase landing. Not only do you have to look through the Plexi-Glass, you also have to deal with fans going up and down the stairs. Who ever was responsible for this design change was not thinking about the paying customer.

Also, when the issue was first raised by fans touring the park for season tickets, the Mets made a statement that seats near these obstructions would not be sold as part of ticket plans and would only be sold when no others were available. Why would the Mets make this concession if they truly felt there were no obstructed seats?

Moving the upper level back perhaps ten to fifteen feet would have eliminated many site line issues. Well, obviously that can't happen now. What's done is done. But the Mets can do some things to attempt to correct these problems. If the Mets could re-invent the staircases on the promenade level, a lot of seats would have better views. But how could they do so?

One way might be to replace the existing stairs with an L shaped staircase. Move the first steps out closer to the back of the promenade box seats then have three or four steps up to a landing, and then turn the stairs to go straight up to the Promenade reserved seats. In this way the landing would be lower and less likely to block fans' views. I'm sure this is not a perfect solution but it could improve views for fans seated in those areas. A more expensive solution would be to go back to the original design. But this is likely improbable and a very expensive project. It would require cutting through pre-cast concrete risers filled with rebar. Unfortunately the design that was created is the one we will likely have to live with.

There is another solution however. Admit the design was flawed and charge accordingly. Do like the Yankees did with those ridiculous bleacher seats in center field that block half of the playing field. Charge customers five bucks for any seat that is obstructed by the staircase landings. Also, lower the prices of outfield seats, at least in Promenade reserved, where one or two outfielders disappear. A value price gives fans with not a lot of money access to the ballpark. You don't have to sit there the whole game or not even at all. One of the great things about Citi Field is there are plenty of places to stand and watch the game. But there is no way I'm paying 100 dollars or more for me and my family to look through smudged and scratched Plexi-Glass. I would rather watch the game in the comfort of my living room in crystal clear high definition. But if my family of four could sit in those obstructed seats for 20 dollars total, I might consider it.

Admitting there are problem site lines is a good way of showing fans the Mets care. New Yorkers are not stupid. David Howard and company can preach till they're blue in the face claiming there are no site line issues. That's because many of them likely have not sat in these seats. Charge accordingly. Admit the short comings of certain seats, and the Mets public relations with the fan base would improve.

So as I said earlier, buyer, beware. Don't purchase your tickets without first knowing what you are getting into. Go to www.seats3d.com to get a very accurate computer representation of the view you will get from your seats. Be careful, though. Each view is from the center of a section. Pan left and right to gain a perspective of where your seats actually are. The seats are numbered in each row. Seat 1 is always closest to home plate. Aisle seats are great if you want to get out of your seat a lot. But if you prefer to sit the entire game, get something closer to the middle so fans going up and down the aisles do not become a distraction.

While I might sound like I am bashing Citi Field, I am simply pointing out some of its flaws. I like the park very much. I like it better than Yankee Stadium because it is more intimate and appeals to my middle class tastes. Plus the food for the average consumer is superior. I am disappointed however, that the design of the upper level did not live up to the hype. Yes, the Promenade is way closer to the field, as the Mets claimed, when compared to Shea. But Shea, with all its criticisms, provided views of the entire playing field (except the corners in the extreme reaches of left and right field).

In the last SNY special on Citi Field, Jeff Wilpon told Kevin Burkhardt that Citi Field is a work in progress. He said there are things and ideas they would like to incorporate over time. Hopefully, the obstructed views in the Promenade are one of them.

Apparently the problem with the Mets and Yankees this season has to do with architects, marketing, and sales management. Whew, now I feel better. I thought maybe it had to do with the players on the field.

Two of New York’s preeminent sports talk radio hosts claimed, yesterday, that the new buildings the New York teams play in are part of the problem.  First Evan Roberts, of the mid-day show on WFAN complained that the atmosphere at Citi Field stinks. There is no enthusiasm, no life.  Mike Francesa, who airs in the afternoons, never at a lost for an opinion, complained that the new Yankee Stadium lacks the excitement and party atmosphere as the old one. The point made by both hosts is the fans in these “expensive” seats are not true Yankee and Mets fans and are not there cheering on their heroes.

Hmm, and here I thought the problem with the Mets was related to poor starting pitching and not being able to hit with runners in scoring position. The Yankees middle relievers, masquerading as major league ballplayers is also misleading.  I really need to study up on baseball.

This is a classic case of the cart being before the horse. What if either the Mets or Yankees had gotten off to a start like the Los Angeles Dodgers? In case you are not aware, the Dodgers have won every game at Dodger Stadium this season. Last night they set a major league record of 13 straight home wins to start a season. But I digress. The point is the excitement in the ballpark is generated by the team on the field. It doesn’t come from the concrete and steel sitting under the fans.

In fairness, the two new ballparks in New York have, to some degree, contributed to the problem of fans being into the game by creating buildings that have lots of distractions. On TV, a lot of seats, not just the absurdly high priced ones, appear empty because fans are walking the concourses checking out various eating options, getting different views of the field, or simply hanging out. However, had either team played with the promise we all expected, I think the seats would be filled more to capacity. However, I would be totally naive to assume that the expensive seats do not prohibit the rabid fan from being close to the field. But I really have difficulty believing this is why the Mets or Yankees have struggled this season.

Francesa, the subjective Yankee fan, spent most of his four and a half hour show yesterday raising his blood pressure over the two game sweep  by the Red Sox. In part of his diatribe, Mike bashed Yankee management for destroying the home field advantage the Yankees enjoyed for so many seasons. Gee Mike, do you think the malaise witnessed at Yankee Stadium has anything to do with the fact that the Yankees are doing their best impression of the Mets by not getting a big knock when necessary or the fact the bullpen can’t hold a lead if their life depended on it?

I admit I could be wrong. Both fan bases, at least the louder mouthed ones, have not given unconditional endorsements of their team’s new homes. Part of that is being unfamiliar with the new buildings and the perception that it is too expensive to get in*. But with the new edifices came unrealistic expectations. I know that is the case for me. I really thought the Mets would get off to a great start this season. I have been very negative about the team since they have not. It didn’t help Mets fans either, still reeling from two seasons of getting eliminated on the last day, that their new park could have been called Generic Field for lack of Mets history. Mets fans got off on the wrong foot before the season began.

The fact is both teams possess the talent to get to the World Series. They also have enough shortcomings to end short of that goal. But the idea that the new stadiums have anything to do with how these teams are playing is silly. How did the new Yankee stadium cause the Yankees to lose three in a row at Fenway Park? The Mets were swept earlier last month at Busch Stadium. I guess that was because of the angry fans sitting in Citi Field. While some may argue the Mets have not hit home runs in Citi Field, the opposition has. That is also true in Yankee Stadium. The short porch in right field has helped the opponents hit lots of home runs too.  

Watching the 1-0 win by the Mets last night, it seemed to me, at least on TV, that the crowd was into the game. With Johan Santana striking out ten batters in an exciting close game, and the Mets winning all of a sudden, I don’t think fans care so much about the seat prices, sight lines, and amenities of the new ballpark.

*Can’t afford a seat to Citi Field or Yankee Stadium? Go to StubHub on game day. You could have gone to last night’s Mets-Phillies game for as little as $10.00. The Yankees-Rays game could have cost you less. As game time draws closer, owners of tickets reduce the prices to unload them. Obviously, the cheapest seats do not have the best sight lines, but they get you into the parks where you can walk all over the place and if you don’t mind standing, you can get a great view of the game.  Last week I stood just to the left of behind home plate on the field level at Yankee Stadium. Thirty feet in front of me were tickets costing hundreds of dollars. Makes no sense, does it.

The complaining I heard about Citi Field on WFAN today was deafening. My goodness, to listen to some of these people, you would think the Mets built a complete dump.

I honestly think there are some Mets fans that will never be happy. Maybe they are unhappy because the Mets so often disappoint or maybe some Mets fans gravitate toward a team like the Mets because they are unhappy to begin with.

This all proves one thing. Some people are happy with everything. Many people are indifferent. And some people will never be pleased no matter what you do for them. That's the sad fact of life. Many of the things complained about will get better with time. It will likely take the better part of the season to work out all the kinks.  

I was at Citi Field for the Saturday game with the Red Sox. I walked all around that park on every level and I just don't get what these people are complaining about. I think their complaints say more about them than it does about the Mets new ballpark.  

Here are some of the major complaints I heard on Mike Francesa's radio program.

It was hard to get out of the place after the game. Yeah, so what else is new? It's always hard to get out of a packed stadium after an event. Ever try getting out of Giants Stadium after a game? Shea was no picnic getting out of the upper deck either. Now in fairness, it took me a while to get out too but that's because I am simply not as familiar with this new place like I was with Shea. Neither is anyone else. In time we'll know what to do when the game ends.

The concourses were too crowded. This will change once people explore the place and the novelty wears off. Right now people want to walk around the concourses and take the ballpark in. That was true on the game that I went to. In fact, I was one of those people crowding up the halls.

Here's a good one. There isn't enough Mets stuff around the park. Did these people get confused and think they were at Wrigley Field or Citizen's Bank Park? I don't quite understand this mentality. It's says "Let's Go Mets" on top of the scoreboard. There are banners hanging outside with famous Mets players on them plus the championship banners hanging inside. And perhaps most importantly, the players on the field were the Mets! In time, I'm sure there will be more Mets stuff hung up. Now I am the first one to say the Mets do not do enough to celebrate their history. But in this case, I think some fans are being a bit silly and very unfair. And that includes Evan Roberts and Joe (who will never be happy) Benigno from WFAN.

The park pays to much attention to the Dodgers. This is simply not true. The Jackie Robinson Rotunda is a tremendous place. It honors Jackie the Man and what he endured for the advancement of Civil Rights. It doesn't focus on Jackie the Dodger. Personally, I am proud the Mets dedicated part of their new ballpark to this great American hero. To me, that's way more important than some additional orange and blue banners hanging there. And like it or not, the Mets have an obligation to educate the public on the history of National League baseball in this city. They inherited that birthright when the Dodgers and Giants left New York in 1957. If that did not happen, there would be no Mets. Remember, royal blue from the Dodgers, burnt orange from the Giants.

Here's another one I love. The place just doesn't feel like the Mets home. How does any new place feel like home? That takes time. Did you ever move to a new house? Did it feel like home the moment you moved in? People, give the place some time. 

Many people are complaining about the outfield wall. I kind of agree. I do think the Mets went a bit overboard with the quirky height changes and angles. On the other hand they did something smart that they should have done in Philadelphia. The Mets have enough room to move the fences in if the field truly plays too big. Personally I think that could happen at some point (not during the season though, rules do not allow that). The Phillies have no such possibility because the structure they built is too small.

Now before you start berating me over the sight line issue in the outfield (because obviously that cannot be changed) here me out.

I wrote about this a couple of times already. Seats in the outfield have sight line issues in every new ballpark. This is not something unique to Citi Field. One caller in particular said that the entire field can be seen at Citizen's Bank Park from any seat. That is not true. The Phillies park has the same sight line issues in the right and left field corner. You lose the left and right fielder depending on how far up in the upper levels you are seated. Yankee Stadium also has seats where outfielders disappear. I sat in the upper level boxes down the first base line where you cannot see the right field corner. Also in the middle tier in right field Nick Swisher went back on a fly ball and caught it unbeknonst to us as he disappered from view.

VP of Business Operations David Howard, on Mike Francesa's show, articulately explained the Mets reasoning for accepting partially blocked views in the outfield. When you design outfield seats that are multi tiered, some of the outfield area in front of the stands will not be visible the higher you go. This is because of two things: height and rake. The rake is the angle, or pitch, of the seating deck. For fans to see the entire field, either the rake must be extreme which would cause many fans to experience vertigo or the stands must be pushed back significantly in order for the outfield fence to be seen. Pushing the stands back would have greatly increased the footprint of Citi Field creating a different problem, fans would be two far away from the action. This was something, according to Howard, the Mets were unwilling to do. That decision would have destroyed the intimate feel they wanted.

A good example of the alternative approach is Commerica Park in Detroit. By comparison to Citi Field, it is huge and many fans there hate it! That's because the Detroit design team chose to move the upper level way back. Detroit has a fan base that loved Tiger Stadium's upper level in right field that hung over the field and was the inspiration for Citi Field's Pepsi Porch. As far as outfield seats go, there is no perfect solution.

HOK's ballparks have all been designed with intimacey in mind. Here is a sampling of other major league ballparks as illustrated by these images from 3D Seat Viewer.

Above is Busch Stadium III in St. Louis. The view from the left field corner in the upper level is similar to the Promenade in Citi Field. You will not see the left fielder if a ball is hit deep to left. These seats, like at Citi, are priced accordingly.

Here's another view from right field in St. Louis...

The 3D seat viewer does not move down far enough but again, you can tell by the railing in the foreground that in the right field upper level, the view of the corner and most of the right field wall is blocked.

Here's a view from Petco Park...

Now this view would piss me off. However, if I did not take a tour of the ballpark before picking my season tickets, then shame on me. Another view from Petco from right field...

Like Busch Stadium, the right field corner and most of the right field wall are hidden from up here. The Nationals new park in Washington also has limited sight seating in the outfield. Here's a view from the upper level in left...

Unless you are in the first or second row, you are missing action below and up against the wall. Here's another shot...

A common theme, the left field corner is hidden. Below is a view from the new outfield pavilion at Kaufman Stadium in Kansas City. This involved a 250 million dollar renovation.

Citi Field has nothing as bad as this. Here's one final picture. This is from the new Target Field that will open up next year in Minneapolis.

The 3D viewer will not pan farther down but you can still see how the railing and height give an indication that left field is not entirely visible. So David Howard is correct. All of these ballparks were designed by HOK. Howard maintains they knew there would be some sight line issues in the outfield and decided that was okay based on all the data HOK presented to them from the many other parks they designed. In other words, they preferred the trade off of seats closer to the infield to create the intimacy they were looking for as opposed to building a humongous stadium pushing fans further away from the action.

Other stadiums with outfield seating obstructing part of the field include Miller Park, Coors Field, Minute Maid Park and probably some others. And if you take a close look at the design for the new Marlins ballpark, you can even see potential problems there.

Now just to show you I am not on the Mets payroll, I think the Mets could have done a better job of informing fans that outfield seating does not allow a 100 percent view of the field. Perhaps on the tours, they did. My suggestion is if you don't like your seats, see if the Mets will move you. Howard hinted that was a possibility.

All in all, I think these complaining fans must calm down a little and give themselves time to adjust to the new ballpark. It almost sounds like some of these fans would prefer to have Shea Stadium back. Maybe I'm an idiot but I liked sitting in left field and the Pepsi Porch as I moved around the ballpark on April 4th. Even though I could not see the entire outfield, I loved feeling like I was close to the action. I think many of these fans bought these seats without first going to Citi Field. The Mets had offered many tours for prospective customers. And by the way, many of these seats range from $11 to $27 so they are a decent value if getting into the park is a financial challenge. And once you are in, you are free to walk around the entire place and get different views of the game. I did that and I had great seats when I went.

I really am curious to how many people had a bad experience. The fact that Francesa claims that 70% of the calls were negative proves nothing since most people without a gripe are not motivated to call in. I also have a feeling had the Mets won on Monday, the complaints would not have been so bad.

See for yourself --- 3d Seat Viewer

Here is a slide show of pictures I took last Saturday at Citi Field's first professional day game.