Field of Schemes
sports stadium news and analysis


This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.

April 26, 2010

Meadowlands stadium slammed for pillars, grey decor

More reviews are coming in on the New York Giants' and Jets' $1.6 billion new stadium, and glowing they ain't:

  • The New York Post reports that the end zone sections have numerous seats obstructed by pillars, with one Jets season-ticket holder calling this "a joke" and a stadium architect noting that pillars were very unusual in modern stadiums. (Though obstructed views are less so.) The stadium's designer insisted that the columns were necessary to bring the upper deck closer to the field, which is certainly a legitimate goal, and that the obstructed seats were never intended to be sold. Why the teams bothered to put in seats there in the first place, though, is unclear.
  • A Giants season ticket holder who got to walk through the place this weekend calls it "UNIMPRESSIVE" (caps in original), griping: "Everything is grey. The outside is grey, the floors are grey, the escalators are grey, the paint everywhere is grey, the signs are grey, the bathrooms are grey, the barriers are grey and every seat is grey." His other complaints, in declining order of seriousness (my judgment): The upper deck is farther from the field, the escalators are poorly placed, and it was windy.

If you want to check the place out for yourself without waiting for football season, you'd better like Bon Jovi or the Eagles. Or maybe next Friday's Mexico-Ecuador soccer game is a better bet, if you don't mind the Bon Jovi-sized prices.


Per the Mexico-Ecuador soccer game, $27 for the cheapest seats doesn't seem "Bon-Jovi sized" by ticket standards, especially for an international game (the ticketmaster fees are another story).

I suppose you could argue that, since pretty much all countries' domestic leagues are still in season on May 7 (including the playoffs in Mexico), both teams might send their second and third stringers. If that was the case, maybe the prices are a little high.

Posted by Sasha on April 26, 2010 09:44 AM

Given that you can get Red Bulls tickets for $20, it seems high to me. I know, MLS isn't nearly the same level of play, but at least you can see the field from there — the only seats under $47 (plus fees) for the Mexico-Ecuador game are in the far-away upper deck that's drawing complaints.

Also, just looked, and those $27 seats are $38.70 with Ticketbastard fees. Unbelievable.

Posted by Neil on April 26, 2010 09:52 AM

Lots of gray, eh? I remember when New Comiskey Park was really gray & bright blue. It wasn't pleasant. But honestly, what does the GSTH really expect in a shared venue? It's not like you can dominate it with Giants blue & red or Jets green, tho you could but it would look strange.

Posted by Mark on April 26, 2010 12:49 PM

the neutral color scheme makes sense for a building with 2 occupants. the franchises said that on game days their colors will be present.
it's more of a fan ego issue, rather than a real problem.
as far a the pay-more sit further away situation?
welcome to 21st century pro sports...

Posted by paul w. on April 26, 2010 01:45 PM

While the neutral color scheme makes sense with the stadium hosting two teams, it's also the most boring and drab stadium I think I've ever seen. For 1.6 billion I was expecting something like Jerry's World. Instead the NY teams got something that on the surface couldn't look more generic.

Posted by Dan on April 26, 2010 04:05 PM

This marriage between the jets and giants will end up in a divorce. Just wonder which team will leave and come back to ny.

Posted by dan on April 27, 2010 12:57 AM

The Jets and Giants had to pore through every last pocket (actually, the fans', but that's just semantics) in order to pay for that stadium. While they may be filthy rich they're not THAT rich.

In other words, the financial commitment has already been made and it makes no sense for either one of them to break away before the life cycle of the new facility is completed.

Posted by Transic on April 27, 2010 02:47 AM

... Just wondering, not from NY, but for those who say the Jets will leave for their own facility in Queens/LI, how will this happen?

They've invested big money in the stadium, they've also taken on $150M of NFL loans (as have the Giants) to get it built. I'm not aware of any escape clause for one team or the other... does one exist, and if so, does it include walking away from all that capital investment? What of the loans? It seems likely they would be repayable whether the Jets are tenants or not...

Perhaps I'm wrong on that, but it seems unlikely the Jets could financially extricate themselves from the new Meadowlands stadium until the facility (and loans/bond) is paid off.

One of them should be in NY proper. But whatever. If it has to be a shared facility, I'm sure fans can live with it. Imagine the cost of that much real estate in N Queens, or even the Bronx... unimaginable, isn't it?

Posted by John Bladen on April 27, 2010 08:17 PM

Once NJ cleared that land for what would be the old Giants Stadium, the land already became available for any future stadium in the Tri-State area. While the location isn't ideal (none really are), it's still better than finding a new location where the franchise would subject themselves to political, financial and legal headaches.

I am a realist. There is no need to be so partisan that every team has to be in the city. As a matter of fact, I'm glad NJ agreed to take the Giants and Jets back then. I get to watch the games on TV, with only the traffic coming back into the city after a game the major inconvenience. Also, since I can't afford tickets for the NFL, I couldn't care less that they play in New Jersey. Let 'em have them.

Now proper football is a whole different matter...

Posted by Transic on April 28, 2010 07:10 PM

Latest News Items