Just last week the lawsuit that was holding up the plans for stadium in the City of Industry was settled, and the stadium is now looking like more of a reality (the real question now is: do they keep the name “Jaguars” or do they change it when they move to LA?).  But as an LA-area football fan and therefore their target audience for this new stadium, I humbly have a suggestion:  keep it simple.  I don’t want an International Airport of a stadium, I don’t want another Wonder-of-the-World, I just want a place with some subtle style, where comfort meets class, and (brace yourself) where I can enjoy a game.  I feel like a nerd for preaching moderation, but we’ve tried everything else so why not give it a chance?

Recently an ESPN.com poll asked: Would you rather see a game at an old stadium (Fenway, Wrigley, Lambeau) or a new complex (Cowboys Stadium, Yankees Stadium)?  Two-thirds of the country said Old. 

Try to ignore the inherent bias in the question- calling one a “stadium” and the other a “complex” already implies which one sports fans should want to go to- although it is probably off-set by Jerry Jones voting a thousand times for “new.”  Also keep in mind the underlying misconception that  “new” is more expensive despite the fact that Fenway and Wrigley are 1 and 2 respectively in terms of highest MLB ticket prices (yes, the Yankees are 3^rd on that list but they are perceived to be higher than that.)  But despite all that, the real reason sports fans voted overwhelmingly for the “old” is because we inherently need the past.  Adrian Peterson is special because of LaDainian Tomlinson, Walter Payton, and Jim Brown.  Sports require the history, and the classic stadiums only reinforce that history.  But there needs to be a crucial distinction made: the past, the context, the records that we cherish are not inexorably tied to these old stadiums.  Jackie Robinson’s legacy didn’t die when Ebbets got torn down, and first base is still 90 feet away at the new Yankee Stadium.  And that’s important, because we should be embracing the effort to modernize our sports, or at least our stadiums. 

Like the crazies from Hoarders, there are people that value saving the past more than modernizing.  They start groups like the “Save Fenway” Movement.  These people would rather live in a museum than a stadium, they’d rather see history than see a game.  To put it another way, they’d rather keep Fenway just the way it is so that people around the country can plan their road trip and see it once, instead of caring about the people that go there 81 times a year. 

Don’t mistake this for another lovefest over the new Cowboy Stadium.  You saw it a few Sundays ago (I once saw a TV thiiiisssss big!), you heard all the hype (he went to the Roman Coliseum to get ideas!!), and if you were one of the 100,000 people in attendance (a new record!!!) you know that it was a mad house more than a fun experience.  My point is this: while Fenway needs to have a bulldozer taken to it, the last thing we need is the compensation exercise (who needs extenze when you’ve got $1.3 billion) that over-done stadiums have become.  What we need is something in-between, something that has plenty of legroom, good sightlines, and if it’s nice-to-look-at then all-the-better but we don’t need billion dollar monstrosities any more than we need 100 year old monstrosities. 

I have never been to Wrigley or Lambeau but I have been to Fenway.  I was 16.  My knees and back still haven’t recovered.  You see, the thing they don’t tell you when you set out to make your pilgrimage: those old stadiums suck.  You know why everyone in the Wrigley outfield is so happy?  Because they’re drunk.  Know why they’re drunk?  Because it’s their only escape from being uncomfortable, from having no shade and from not having nearly enough room.  Bill Simmons is quite possibly the only person in the media that is willing to point out that Fenway was built for people that were 5’4”, getting a normal size person in there is impossible (note:  I said normal-size, not “Wisconsin-size”, I don’t care how big your seats are, they can never be big enough for Brewer fans.)  I’m not naïve, I understand that cramming people into the stadium is good for business, but modern stadiums find a way to do it with slightly more concern for comfort. 

I’m also not stupid and I understand the historical aspect of it.  I was watching an Arsenal game in a soccer bar when someone mentioned that they had been to Highbury (a stadium built the year after Fenway, that thankfully was put out of its misery just a few years ago.)  None of us American Arsenal fans had even been to the new stadium but just this guy using the “H” word and we were ready to elect him our leader, we nearly sat on the floor cross-legged hoping he’d tell us stories.  Of course while Highbury was too old, the new stadium was too bland- with no history, no identity, it took the team years before they realized they had to “Arsenalize” it with murals and personal touches.  Just like teams, stadiums need identities but they need to be authentic otherwise it just feels hollow.  Remembering a stadium because of the size of its TV is like remembering a woman because of her breast implants. 

Of course there is a magic about stadiums with history, Yogi Berra was right- there are ghosts in those old places.  And the nostalgia only gets greater as the years go bye; when I meet someone that saw Ebbets Field I can’t help but look at them like they have been to Atlantis.  But ultimately that’s all the magic is: nostalgia; like a first date that was terribly awkward, and not particularly enjoyable, that gets re-written when the relationship takes off. 

I know what it’s like to spend time at the same stadium each year (this is now my 6^th year of being a Charger season ticket holder.)  And there’s comfort in the familiarity.  I have my seats, same ones every year, and there is a big appeal to that.  There’s certainly an appeal for the history- Dan Fouts played there, so did Junior Seau.  Tony Gwynn made that stadium his own, and it has seen soccer games and concerts and Bowl games galore.  And if they announce tomorrow that after this season, the entire thing’s going to be torn down, I will mourn…for about 3 seconds, and then I will be excited beyond belief.  There’s no guarantee that a new stadium will be better than the old one, but there is a guarantee that the longer a stadium stays, the worse it will get. 

And that seems to be the only options that people consider: over-the-top or over-the-hill.  Cowboys Stadium or Fenway.  But, and this may surprise you, there are more than just those two options.  I realize the inherent uphill battle I’m proposing, Los Angeles as a leading advocate of understated class?  However, just choosing the City of Industry was a step in the right direction- halfway between Downtown LA and Fontucky, just the location itself seems to be the first compromise.  Here’s hoping they continue to choose that middle road between glamour and comfort. 

In fact, I can’t help but wonder what the ESPN.com poll results would have been if a Happy Medium (Camden Yards, At&t Park) was an option.