Coming from a Jewish family myself with much less financial means (my Dad drove a delivery truck and cab) I know how much most Jewish families place on education.

As far as the personal comments others attribute to Jeff, my only experience is a story a collegue of mine told me. Before coming here, she worked for a financial institute and said that father and son were both in the offices one day for whatever reason I forgot. She did tell me that after she left, her boss said to her something on the lines of at least one of them being a total idiot.

FOR YEARS JEFF’S FINGERPRINTS CAN BE TRACED TO NUMEROUS MET EMBARASSING REVELATIONS SUCH AS THE “SECRET VET GROUP ATTENDED BY FRANCO, LIETER, GLAVINE & OTHERS THAT SURREPTICOUSLY INFLUENCED CERTAIN DECISION AS THE ROOTS WERE TRACED TO REGULARL;Y HELD FAMILY BBQ GET TOGETHERS @ JEFF’S. ANOTHER JEFF GEM WAS HIS PERSONALLY HIRING RICK PETERSON TO SERVE HIM AS C.O.O IN THE CAPACITY OF FRANCHISE PITCHING CONSULTANT DUBBED “PITCHING GURU aka PITCHING CZAR BY THE PRESS AT THE TIME FROM WHENCE PETERSON WENT ON A JEFFREY SPONSORED CAMPAIGN OF TALENT EVALUATION THAT BASCLY DECIMATED THE MEDIOCORE/LONGSHOT PITCHING INVENTORY COLLECTED OVER YEARS BY PHILLIPS AS POTENTIAL TRADE COMMODITIES
LASTLY AS THE REPORTED INSTIGATOR BEHIND CONVINCING DAD TO “TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HIS PERSONAL RELATIUONSHIP WITH BERNIE MADOFF BY INVESTING HEAVILY WITH HIM..
CAN’T SAY NELSON DOUBLEDAY DIDN’T WARN EVERYONE THE DAY STERLING ANOUNCED JEFF AS NYM COO(OR AS I PREFER) “C.UH.OH!”
I FEINTLY RECALL WORDS LIKE SNOTTY AROGANT, & SOB BEING MENTIONED.

I gather by the “Pride Of Palm Beach Community College” you are referring to the junior Wilpon who thus went to a junior college? That confused me because under his executive proile in Bloomberg Business Week it reads:

“There is no Education data available.”

I kid you not.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=111710792&privcapId=12486682&previousCapId=111854334&previousTitle=Brooklyn%20Cyclones

As far as the design, my first reaction was – after allowing myself to take a brief rest after having to walk a flight of stairs to get to the leftfield promenade and hen havng to further take a long walk down a corridor to reach our section – that I actually liked the old time look and atmosphere it created. I was quite impressed despite being upset about the added leg work required to get to our seats.

Then I saw what I thought was the foul line and felt that those complainining about left field being cut off must have been way over-exaggerating. That was, until I discovered what I thought I was seeing – the foul line – was actually the suspension line to hold up the netting behind home plate. I then saw where the view of the foul line became lost and was aghast that I was missing everything from the the left of the “shea” ball on the left field fence that would be parallel with the average depth played by the left-fielder.

There was no excuse for that.other than incosideration or indifference. Not having the facade of the upper deck stands begin to angle in at the point it does wold have only eliminated a few rows of seats in the back but would have caused those in the dining room to stretch their necks a bit more to see the game.

The scope of what they wanted to do and even the model that was there itself was so comprehensive and intricate you could tell it took years on the drawing board.

This was back when the yankees were going to move to Manhattan and Wilpon and Steinbrenner were trying to get the City to pay a lot of money to rebuild thier venues.

Big Dreams, Big Ideas, Enthusiastic (maybe over enthused) designs.

I bet those designs had taken everything right down the the millimeter length of sightlines.

But it would have cost a gazillion dollars and the city said NO Think Smaller!

The Yankees and Mets got some money to rebuild but they had to design something that would fit into the spaces that were available where they were. Which consisted of a park and a parking lot!

The Space and the money involved required both teams to pretty much go with a plan B design. A design that had to be done as quick as possible without all the research and design touches that you might normally do merely because you had to get it done before the City changed it’s mind and decided they didn’t even want to spend what they said they would!

So yes they probably compromised, Both on what the best design was, What space they had and how to use it and even on the time available to get a final plan done!

So they missed some details….

As I said to you before Shea was no great sea of Vision either!
Anyone 10 rows back in a covered section had no idea where a fly ball was going.

So really this is nothing all that new to Met fans!

They just liked Shea and don’t like new in many cases.

Could they have done a better job?
Sure! You can ALWAYS do a better job!
Just 9 times out of 10 no one bothers to or doesn’t have the money or resources they need to do something properly!

Though I spent most of my years managing the office for the Vice President for Administration along with being the coordinator of capital projects at the University I work for, the past few years, due to internal re-organization, I have been with our Engineering Department, continuing and expanding my responsibilities in the capital area. But being in that department I’ve been able to get a little bit of insight into the points you made about architecture, design and construction. See that software being used all the time and how they are so able to project what our new structures indeed actually looked like inside.

In fact, it was always my contention that perhaps the biggest problem facing Citi Field was the limited square footage the Mets had to build it in. At the same time, with less space devoted to the stores and restaurants (which is the only reason why it was built to begin with) there would have been more space for additional elevator banks, not just having all current ones go all the way to the top, accessibility, egress and an upper deck corridor that would not give one claustrophobia.

And even within those confines, I’m sure there would have been a way to have designed a structure more fan friendly for those who can only swing tickets in the cheap (?) seats.

There is even software available that will help you determine issues with crowd flow and egress in your design these days! You would be surprised what they can do with a 3D Architectural drawing these days. The problem is many of them have no clue how to use them and still work on a drafting table, ruler and protractor! And you won’t get a good handle on sightlines if thats how you design it.

There is the issue of Budget and trying to squeeze the entire complex into the parking lot of a stadium that is being used to play baseball!

There are a 100 reasons for everything you point to being the way they are and only one of them was Jeff possibly saying SCREW THEM I want a Golf game!

In this case, we don’t know what really happened. For all we know the Wilpons wanted the restaurant even further in and then compromised to the plea of the architect.

In this case, my good friend, we really can’t say for sure, though I think I can say with good confidence that consideration to the fans sitting in the inexpensive seats was certainly of little concern to the owners.

But what I would like to know is why the escalator in left stops at the lower promenade. What space limitations could have caused such a problem which could not have been resolved? There was no excuse for that and that is what makes me suspect the architect might have been speaking to a brick wall – only because it seems so unprofessional. As you said, you know for sure something might screw up a shot but what can you do if the producer says he or she doesn’t care?

Just don’t know but considering who wanted the stupid gimmicks put into place to create (as Jeff put it) “excitement” that made a mockery of the game, I wouldn’t put being stubbornly unreasonable past them.

All I know is, they were the bosses and if one architectural firm wouldn’t go along with their demands, they could have found another one that could. Just like that plumber who would eventually have to install that sink in an area against his better judgement.

Metsie, Jessep, Fonzie – Follow Vinny, MNJ and USMF’s examples.

Everyone else, my apologies.

Funny how you were the first name he mentioned. Enjoy your dream.

But it’s still the Architect’s job to point out those issues to his client!

Even if an owner said put a giant refrigerator in front of this section of seast the architect is supposed to tell him well that would block the view and show him a better place for it!

Just you might tell your plumber where you want your sink but if he says to do that I have to run pipes accross your floor it’s his responsibility to tell the client the downside of his request!

I get the same thing from producers all the time…I want a camera here or a monitor there.
And I have to say I put it there it screws up your shot, and only if he says I don’t care just do it will it happen.

I don’t think it was ever brought up by the Architect!
They were too concerned with looks not functionality!

Another friend of mine here in the office who is our facilities manager raised a point which I think might be the answer. I explained the dynamics of the line of site issue with him, including my thoughts about the restaurant and asked where he thought the area of responsibility for allowing this to happen fell to – the owner or the architect, His immediate response it probably wasn’t a major concern to either party. Meaning, they knew it and didn’t think of it as such a big deal.

For all we know, the Wilpons could have even anticipated how angry it would make some fans but assumed in time the flap would settle down since it’s a matter of either sitting there (if no other seats are available) or staying at home.

Does make sense more than it just being an oversight. Also, it does seem part of the Wilpon mentality thinking they could get away with anything as far as the fans were concerned.

What do ya think?

Imean if you needed heart surgery should the surgeon do what you insist when he is the expert in what needs to be done?

They picked the wrong guy obviously and just were not smart enough to know he might not have the skills to design a proper stadium. The model looked good and the drawings looked like good drawings but unless you actually went that extra mile to focus on what was most important you simply trust the expert knows what he is doing and go with it!

Thats all that happened Joey.

Yes they had some things they wanted to see. Had some things they insisted on having but none of those were must have bad sightlines or screw the fans up the storefronts….

It all comes down to this…
The only negligence on the part of the Wilpons is who they picked to design the stadium.
All they were concerned with is that it harkened back to Ebbets and looked good inside and outside, something that was a major knock on Shea!

And they saw the drawings, saw the model said it looks good and when it was finally built and they could see the perspective from the actual seats it was way too late to fix it!

A colleague of mine who is a licensed architect and AIA member attended a conference held at Citi Field in April of 2009. I asked him what he thought of it and his reply was “it is a great convention center”.

Hypothetical question but what can an architect do when an owner insists on a certain design that is architectually sound but, of course, goes against the functionality, in this case, the sight lines? Seeing that the park is representative of a class system (with so many restricted entrances and only certain escalators going to the very top level) it would not surprise me that the restaurant having a better view of the field took preference. And again, I was advised by someone with the Empire State Development Corporation, an agency which helped fund the construction of the park, that MLB must approve the final design of all new stadiums. That is why I can’t conceive of this being something that was just overlooked.

Dave Howard even went on FAN as fans began complaining about this and said we were just not used to sitting in outfield seats (like the dirt behind third base wasn’t the outfield at Shea?) and that the problem is similar in many of the new parks (which we know is BS).

He just didn’t look or care to look down to that level!

MY guess is they used some guy who is old school and does it with paper and models!
And if he did it all in CAD then they didn’t take the step to render and see what the sightlines for the seats were and just did the restaurants.

In any case I certainly can’t blame Jeff for the design I blame the architect for not knowing how to properly design a public event stadium!

Carnegie Hall was built in the age before computer assits was possible yet the acoustics are perfect there because the Architect knew what was most important in the design phase and met those goals.

This architect focused on the asthetics more than the function from the best I can tell!

My own feeling is that MLB went ahead and approved the design with the knowledge of the line of sight problem and that in order to accomodate the way the restaurant was to be angled inward the architect had no other choice. Populous is not a fly by night organization as one could see by the portfolio below:

Populous, formerly known as HOK Sport, is an architectural firm specializing in the design of sports facilities and convention centers, as well as planning of major special events.

The firm enjoys a dominant role in the design of sporting stadiums and arenas, including such globally prominent facilities as the new Yankee Stadium in New York, Wembley Stadium in London, Stadium Australia in Sydney, Wimbledon Centre Court, Minneapolis’ Target Field, San Francisco’s AT&T Park, Chicago’s United Center arena, Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati, Pittsburgh’s Heinz Field, Houston’s Reliant Stadium, Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium, the renovation of Chicago’s Wrigley Field, University of Phoenix Stadium, the renovation of Soccer City Stadium in Johannesburg for the 2010 World Cup, London’s 2012 Olympic Stadium, Miami’s Sun Life Stadium, Ascot Racecourse, New York’s Citi Field, Benfica’s Estádio da Luz in Lisbon, the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff and the O2 Arenas in London, Berlin, and Dublin.

I can’t believe a group such as this, which designed the new Yankee Stadium plus the new parks in Cincinnati, Houston, Pittsburgh and San Francisco, which people will notice the difference in the way the facade of the upper decks do not suddenly angle more toward the infield along the foul lines. Nope, this was an instance upon the Mets to accommodate the dynamics of the restaurant they wanted below those seats.

I am betting that this architect didn’t do what needs to be done in any event and stadium design.

These days they build 3D models in a computer and use a seating camera in that model to determine the sightlines of every section of seats.

I don’t think that happened at all and once they realized the problem it was way to late to fix.

yes Jeff gets some blame for not being smart enough to insist on seeing that rendering but the Architect failed to even let jeff know such a thing was possible and should be used to approve the final design!

Hi Metsie,

I remember before Citi Field opened how Jeff was the one promoting the new park, hyping the “excitemen” the new field dimensions, angles and walls would create, the ammenties, etc.

Do you think he was the one responsible for insisting on those monstrosities?

I also know that MLB has a set of rules for the construction of new parks to conform to. Think he got permission to waive some sort of line of sight rule for those of us in the upper prominade along the left field side so to design a better restaurant underneath? It sounds like a Jeff Wilpon moment but I can’t imagine Fred and Saul allowing him to have such authority on such a project. Certainly, MLB should be held accountable for approving such a major blight on the paying customer.
___________________________________________________________________________MY RESPONSE…
FRED CLEARLY EXPLAINED THAT JEFF KNEW WHAT HE(FRED) WANTED AND HE W(JEFF) WAS FGIVEN THE PROJECT(CITIFIELD) TO BRING IN.

CLEWARLY JEFF HAD OWNERSHIP OF THE DESIGN & FRED CLEARLY STATED HE’S HAD THE CONSRUCTION BLUEPRINTS FROM THE ORIG CONSTRUCTION OF EBBETS FILED & INTENDED TO USE THEM ENTIRELY TO BUILD A REPLICATION INSTEAD JEFF, CHOSE TO TAKE 5 YRS TO STUDY EVERY NEWLY OPENED & EXISTING LANDMARKED STADIUM IN MLB PRIOR TO FINALIZING “HIS” DESIGN
HOWEVER, IMO, ONLY JEFF COULD TAKE 5 YRS OF STUDY TO CREATE SOMETHING REQUIRING CHANGES EVERY YR SINCE GRAND OPENING IN 2009
2010: METIFICATION, HALL OF FMAE ADDED
2011: DIMENSIONAL ALTERATIONS.
PERHAPS THE OLD MAN SHOULD’VE DONE IT HIS WAY WITH THE OLD DRAWINGS(SPECS) CREATING A BRAND NEW OBSOLETE BALLPARK LIKE FORD REINTRODUCING THE EDSEL.

He is the front man on those things only to build up the facade that he is running the team so if and when the Wilpons do ever have to sell the team (Probably never) he can put it on his Resume and say I did this!

They put him in a position where he doesn’t have to make decisions just be a sort of telephone between the GM and fred (and maybe he’s not even doing THAT anymore) and given a salary to live on where if he had to go out into the real world to earn a living he wouldn’t be able to….

Jeff is just a silver spoon put into the family business in a position he can do the least amount of damage!

“BACK TO THE METS, I FEAR THAT DEPTH OF FULL WORKING GRASSROOTS INFORMATION IS LACKING AMONG THE 3 PROFESSIONALS (ALDERSON,DiPODESTA RICCIARDI) TASKED WITH RIGHTING THE LISTING SHIP ANCHORED IN FLUSHING BAY THERE IS A DEFINITE REQUIREMENT FOR ACTIVISTS CONJUNCTING WITH THE THEORISTS PRESENTLY HOLDING THE STRINGS & PUSHING THE BUTTONS.”

I love the way you hit the hammer on the nail.