My Take on the Whole Baseball Stadium Issue

We have to try new things in this town.

There seem to be a couple of different camps on the whole baseball team/stadium issue. On one hand, you have the folks who don't believe a minor league baseball team in Springfield could ever survive. These are the folks who use the argument, "Well, we've never been able to do it before, we certainly won't be able to do it now."

On the other hand, you have the folks who have never really known a baseball team in this town. I can vaguely remember going to see the Cardinals team here when I was a kid, but I remember little more than just really enjoying baseball. There's a whole generation of people who are willing to see things change in Springfield. Willing to see things grow here. Willing to see things change.

I think there's a generation of people here who have seen things come and go, and their philosophy is that nothing will ever change in Springfield. Certainly nothing is ever going to change if we don't make it change. Well there is a younger generation in Springfield who might like to see things change. I count myself as one of them. We may still be in the dream stages on projects like this, but I think there's so much more that can be done to rejuvenate Springfield. It's just a matter of time.

We've read the evidence. In this particular article, I'd like to highlight the following quote:

There will always be some city willing to build a new ballpark for a nomadic team.

Are we that city? Or would we rather sit by and let every other similar-sized city in America make a try? Seriously, the argument that we need to use Lanphier stadium falls apart when you realize that the reason teams abandoned Springfield in the first place (10 years ago) was that the stadium was outdated.

A new stadium strategically located downtown would be a boon for businesses downtown. The new stadium, if tied correctly to the Abraham Lincoln sites could appeal especially to regional tourists who might want to come to Springfield but not just for the Lincoln stuff. I can imagine families making a weekend of it. They come on Saturday morning, take in the Lincoln Museum and maybe Lincoln's Home, have a nice dinner downtown, and take in a baseball game. The next day, they could take a gander at Lincoln's Tomb or enjoy a nice picnic lunch at Lincoln's New Salem before returning home.

If the stadium were built correctly, it could have an in-house restaurant or bar, and it could be located adjacent to property that would allow bars and restaurants to grow and flourish. We need to build a community around the ballpark, not just build a ballpark. In my opinion, just plopping down a baseball stadium out where a cornfield sits today is a bad idea, and it's bad karma. We've got plenty of dead space in the city. Let's breathe some life back into it.

If I may analogize for a moment, let's think about Wrigley Field. There's a community built around the park. It's a city park. Even Busch Stadium is located closely enough to bars and restaurants downtown that people have a place to go before and after games. If you took either of those parks and dropped them out in the suburban reaches around the city you'd simply have parks that everyone has to drive to and from. Drive to the game, watch the game, drive home. It's one of the biggest problems I have with Turner Field in Atlanta. That's a cool stadium, but it's located so far away from anything else in Atlanta that all you can do is drive to the game, watch the game, and then drag your butt home. I like the option of grabbing a bite to eat after a game and letting the crowd dissipate a bit.

I just don't see any good reason why we would have to build a park on the west end of town. If we're going to build it somewhere outside of the city, I'd rather see it go up somewhere scenic (along the river toward Sherman, or somewhere within view of the lake) than in a corn field that's eventually going to be eaten up with houses and strip malls. Let's get real. We can't keep catering to the rush of people spreading west.

I'm not sure the argument "build it where the traffic is" is a valid argument either. That's like saying if I want an omelet I have to make a run to the chicken coop (sort of). Put the stadium where it's best to put a stadium and people will come to it. People used to drive to the north end to watch Cardinals games. Every day in Chicago people drive from the suburbs to take in games at Wrigley. Are people on the west side of town really so selfish that they would refuse to go to a game anywhere but on the other side of a strip mall from their neighborhood? It's not like the areas on the west side are particularly walker friendly. You can't walk to a game out there, even if it's "just down the street." If you're going to spend the time and energy getting in your car and driving to a game, why not drive downtown?