Quote:
Originally Posted by Supreme Olajuwon
I think one of the reasons the Sox have held onto Fenway (and this applies to Wrigley too) for so long is because it was their link to the greatness of their past teams. People were afraid that if they got rid of the stadium, the team would lose its identity and they'd become their own isolated team with no real connection to the franchise's past greatness like in Detroit. As long as they still had Fenway, they could still hold on to the franchise's legacy.
But now, the Red Sox don't need that link, because they're currently their own great team. They could build a new stadium and keep their identity as a franchise because the great team would be making the move with them.
|
you might think that, but you'd be wrong.
it's all about money and location.
This park has a great location, near multiple public transportations, walking distance from nearby cities, and such and there isn't a huge chunk of land left to put a big park and then have to run access to it.
Gillette is a great stadium but the traffic is horrible and the only non-driving option is taking the Amtrak Train.
I believe there is still some space down the waterfront to do it, or places they could take by eminent domain w/o too much of a fight, but that's also changing because they're build new restaurants down there for multi-millions so it would cost more or be a bigger fight to do it.
Had McCourt/O'Donnel gotten the team they would have put a new park there because McCourt owns most that land.
I suspect they'll get through the 100yr anniversary (expect the All-star game to be here) and then have plans for a new park somewhere.