Messing with History: Why Get Rid of the House That Ruth Built?

Michael MedearisCorrespondent IApril 18, 2008

"The House That Ruth Built" is in its final season, as well as Shea Stadium.

And there's talk about Wrigley having a name change. 

With all this going on, it got me thinking, "why would we want to change so many great places that this game was built around?"

Yankee Stadium is one of the most historic places in all of baseball, there have been numerous historical events to take place there.

The Maris and Mantle race in 1961, to many championships, and too many pennants to even count, and not to mention it's "the house that Ruth built." 

How can we tear down something that the best player in the game created?  That's like taking away a legacy. 

The Yankees already pull in enough money, what do they need a new stadium for? And what are the going to call it, the house that Steinbrenner built?

Shea Stadium, where many great calls have been seen, is also in its final season. 

Then there's Wrigley Field, and its talk about a new name.  Wrigley has been around for years, and I'm sorry Cubs fans ,but a new name is not gonna change the past for the team (that's required for me to say as a Cardinals fan). 

Wrigley is a historic name, why does it need to be changed? What's wrong with the name it has?  

Why are we trying to change things that are just fine the way they are? What happened to the saying "don't mess with a good thing"? We should especially not mess with HISTORY!

But for Yankee fans and Mets fans, they are going to see an era come to an end, as far as Wrigley goes, it's a waiting game, as possibly another era will come to an end as well. 

These parks have all seen many great historical events, and are a historical site for baseball fans everywhere.  

I encourage you, if you haven't been to these stadiums, to do so before it's too late!