Honouring Our Veterans: A Look at Fallen and Falling Stadiums

Somewhere along the line, we lost track of history.

We lost the importance of a name, the significance of events, and the definition that is provided to a franchise through a simple building.

I mean, what exactly defines a team any more? A star player that is committed to a franchise has become about as rare as those of us who still own record players thanks to the upswing in technology.

What about the uniforms?  Even a logo that’s over 40 years old is susceptible to be “updated” and “given a fresh perspective” these days. The classic color-schemes of your favorite team are being dumped in favor of the flashy, the eye-catching, and the inventive, while the jerseys themselves are under continual modifications.

So where’s the consistency found while we run along this roulette-wheel that has become professional sports.

Well, I guess you have to ask the question: What’s in a name? Or more importantly, what’s happening to the stadium.

In an effort to create a “new and responsive” paradise, things have to become more “fan-friendly”. Basically what this means, is a glorified, money-grabbing “out with the old, in with the new” scenario.

How else do you explain “New” Yankee Stadium?

Is there anything wrong with the “House that Ruth Built”? Were the might Yankees running out of funds to pay the rent? Or were the timeless qualities of the “old” Yankee Stadium just not prim and proper enough for the posteriors of New York’s elite?

What’s wrong with a few simple modifications, like what happened to Fenway Park a few years ago?

Or is being too much like the Red Sox a scary proposition to Hank Steinbrenner?

If you’re scared of the big bad Red Sox, then compare yourselves to the Chicago Bears’ Soldier Field, or Lambeau Field—home of the Packers.

And then there are rumors of the final event at Yankee Stadium being an NHL game. Two questions:

1) Can someone please explain to me the necessity of a “final event”? Is there some kind of expiration date on the bleacher’s there that makes them unsafe to be sat upon?

2) If there has to be a last event, why should it be a hockey game? I know I go against seemingly every Canadian hockey writer when I say this, but Yankee Stadium may as well be a temple. When was the last time a temple got downgraded to a glorified, publicized outhouse? 

But then we have to ask the question about what happens to these stadiums once their replacements open and shut them down.

Well, they’re either torn down, or they’re destroyed to the point that you don’t even recognize them for what they formally were.

The “IceHouse” here in London, Ontario was the home of the London Knights until 2001. Then it was bought, and turned into a motocross complex. Classy right?

Well, now the arena where Johnny Cash proposed to June Carter has turned into a Velodrome—a bicycle track.

Granted the Ice House was aging and decrepit, but as some would say: “Becoming a Velodrome is a fate worse than death”. Afterall, I’d rather drive by an empty lot and say “that’s where the Ice House used to be”, than call it “the building formerly known as the Ice House”.

It didn’t work for Prince, and it doesn’t work for me.

But then we look at Maple Leaf Gardens, the arena where the Leafs last won the Stanley Cup. After it’s closure, the owners refused to sell the arena to anyone who would use it as just that: an arena.

They said they didn’t want to deal with the competition.

And now? Well, they’re working on turning it into a grocery store. And guess how well that’s going for them.

The same thing happened with the Montreal forum—it was gutted and they turned it into an entertainment centre—and it became the Pepsi Forum. Although the heritage of Les Canadiens is still recognized, it has to be hard to see a corporate stamp on what was once the “most storied building in hockey history”.

But then again, isn’t this just proof that we’re all becoming enslaved to the almighty dollar?

What about the attempts to sell the Chicago Cubs, Wrigley Field, and the naming rights to Wrigley? Isn’t that simply more proof that no one is above selling out their assets, be them historical or not?

There’s a movement up to try to hold onto the name of Wrigley field—determined to keep that little shred of history sacred—frankly I hope they win their fight. I could barely stand it when they changed “Skydome” to “Rogers Centre”. Imagine how Cubs fans must feel.

It’s not like I’m the first person to ever write something like this (Hell, it’s not even the first time I’ve done it), andI fully understand that things fall apart as they age, and that at some point, either due to the expansion of a city or the state that a facility is in, a new stadium might become a necessity.

But where’s the dignity in a grocery store? Where’s the pride in being called the “Bazooka Joe Novelty and Joke Shop” Centre? Why are we letting the people with all of the money control everything we care about.

“Because they have all the money, they can afford to do whatever they want, whether the average person likes it or not.”

Sorry, I forgot about that.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?