Re: [Mpls] New Ball Park Debate

[Brobson34]

I don't know how I feel about a new stadium. I do think the latest proposal
is pretty good, and a great tribute to those who have held the line on
previous, more onerous, baseball stadium proposals. Are the tax-free loan and
the inevitable infrastructure costs worth putting out the kind of outdoor
environment that is the one thing about the game the previous poster can have
resurrected? I'm on the fence. I think it is ironic that a suddenly good
Twins team is drawing 36K-plus to the Dome on a weeknight. Obviously good
baseball, as opposed to the problems with indoor ball, is what keeps many
fans away.
I too grew up in the days of Banks, Williams and Musiel, and just want to
caution folks from looking at the game through rose-colored glasses. Baseball
has not been recently corrupted, as anyone aware of the infamous Black Sox
scandal of 1919 knows. And in the late 50s and early 60s, when Ernie wanted
to "play two" and Williams was in his prime, the Yankees still were winning
all the championships, mostly by taking advantage of the cash-poor and
administratively inept Kansas City franchise for unfair deals--KC was almost
a Yankees farm club back then.
Finally, the Twins have a deal where you can not only get four tickets, but
food, drink and parking, all for under $100. So let's not lapse into false
rhetoric when comparing these supposedly terrible times with the good old
days.

Britt Robson
Lyndale