What's Old is New, What's New is Old

Yesterday college football fans were treated to two games played at historic baseball stadiums.  Notre Dame took on Army at the new Yankee Stadium while Northwestern faced off with Illinois at Wrigley Field.  Historically, Wrigley hosted the Bears for fifty and old Yankee Stadium was the purview of the New York Football Giants until the 70s.  As football grew in popularity teams either moved into their own venues or, in many cases, multipurpose arenas were constructed that could function for both football and baseball.  These stadiums, built mostly in the 70s, were derided as "cookie-cutter" for each one from Cincinnati to Pittsburgh seemed cut from the same model.  Gone were the individual idiosyncrasies of the old ballparks that were carved out of the city street grid.  These new monoliths were usually located out in the suburbs where land was cheap and parking was plentiful.  Starting with Camden Yards in Baltimore in '91, the old, downtown ballpark has been in Renaissance.  Teams built their new stadiums in gentrifying downtown areas replete with asymmetrical fences and better sight lines compared to the cavernous multi-use parks they were replacing.   Football teams typically stayed in the old 70s era parks (as they were always better for football anyway) or, as they replaced them, built new, football-only facilities (sometimes within view of the baseball park such as in Baltimore).

Now, as stadiums go, nothing holds a candle to baseball.  I believe this is due to the phenomenon, first formalized by geographer Jay Appleton of "prospect" and "refuge."  In a nutshell, the theory is that, as humans, we enjoy situations where we satisfy our inborn desires for "prospect" or opportunity and "refuge" or safety.  This was due to, in his theory, that we are descendants from predecessors who survived at the forest's edge on the savanna.  We had cover behind us (refuge) and a view to the horizon so we could see other areas or refuge, prey, or approaching enemies.  More specifically it includes the following:

• broad, unoccluded vistas
• visible places for easy refuge (a copse of trees, caves)
• water
• plants
• a smattering of prey species

And therefore:

• we are at the edge, such that our back is protected (rather than the middle where we are most exposed)
• we are covered, rather than open to the sky

All of these items are generally provided by baseball parks.  Most are open at some portion beyond the outfield giving fans views of the city skyline beyond (places of refuge).  Even the new concourses beyond the outfield, with smattering of activities and places to eat are enjoyable to view from one's seats.  Football stadiums, on the other hand, focus all of their attention on the field.  Some have open ends but more are simply circular bowls.  Some might say that the field is where the action is but, as humans, we often look about and enjoy a smattering of different things happening at once.  The same idea also applies to both basketball and hockey as they are completely indoors and generally have little to distract one from the action on the court/ice.

So what is my point?  I suppose it's that we've suddenly seen a rash of both hockey and football games being played at baseball parks.  Now hockey doesn't have that tradition but it does have the tradition of being played outside on frozen ponds and lakes.  On one hand, you can attribute the motivation for staging these events to a publicity stunt and to generate some buzz with something new (which is, of course old).  Perhaps it will fade out as a trendy fad or maybe, just maybe, fans enjoy simply being in a baseball venue so much that we'll see more and more of this.  I suppose it's too much to ask that the Giants to move back to Yankee Stadium but one can dream can't they?