The 2021 Cleveland Baseball Organization

[Huber.]

I would guess the cost of the roof would be right around what they will spend in total renovations. 400-500 million. Unfortunately it looks like they're using that money to take out even more seats.

 

[33Y0]

Hard pass on a dome whether it's retractable or not. We don't need one. There's little benefit that would come from it. It's not as if we'd see an incredible attendance bump as a result... most fans don't give a shit.

 

[Sebastian]

Milwaukee and Seattle both have retractable roofs and both are supposed to be great parks... So you can design a great one with a retractable roof, but it's hard to add one when the structure is designed to be open air...

Having lived in both places, I have had the privilege of going to both parks many times.

And I must say I do not support a retractable roof.

Both parks are rather cavernous as a result of the roof, and it detracts from the atmosphere of a ballpark.

The Jake and Target Field are parks that are well regarded precisely because they offer that old-school ambiance.

Moreover, a retractable roof is not really needed in most places.

Which was always interesting me considering that during the summer, it rains maybe once or twice in Seattle. From May through September it is pretty dry. And the Mariners never make it to October, so what's the point?

 

[sportscoach]

Having lived in both places, I have had the privilege of going to both parks many times.

And I must say I do not support a retractable roof.

Both parks are rather cavernous as a result of the roof, and it detracts from the atmosphere of a ballpark.

The Jake and Target Field are parks that are well regarded precisely because they offer that old-school ambiance.

Moreover, a retractable roof is not really needed in most places.

Which was always interesting me considering that during the summer, it rains maybe once or twice in Seattle. From May through September it is pretty dry. And the Mariners never make it to October, so what's the point?

The biggest question mark with that is the fact we have a high probability of missing games early in the year cause of snow and weather, hence why Milwaukee (who is more north of us), has the retractable roof... My dad really likes that stadium btw...

So it's one of those, can we design something that can allow to cover without taking away from the feel you seem to want from ball parks?

 

[CDAV45]

Hard pass on a dome whether it's retractable or not. We don't need one. There's little benefit that would come from it. It's not as if we'd see an incredible attendance bump as a result... most fans don't give a shit.

I don't know how anyone could argue for or against what you say here. Has there been a thorough study to suggest that "most fans don't give a shit"? I know I haven't been asked and I give a shit. Regardless, the money it would require more than likely does not make a retractable roof justifiable. Then again, the changes to the park they are currently suggesting aren't justifiable either. What gives?

 

[33Y0]

I don't know how anyone could argue for or against what you say here. Has there been a thorough study to suggest that "most fans don't give a shit"? I know I haven't been asked and I give a shit. Regardless, the money it would require more than likely does not make a retractable roof justifiable. Then again, the changes to the park they are currently suggesting aren't justifiable either. What gives?

Because here’s the thing… there’s very few Cleveland fans who say, ya know what, I’ll start suddenly going to more Indians games because they have a roof. Let’s be honest with Indians attendance… it boils down to a few things. 1) It’s a Browns town and that won’t change. 2) The perceived notion that the Dolans are “cheap” crowd and we don’t even see a huge attendance boost when we are good. 3) Local TV ratings are up. Fans in our region are tuning in more than they’re showing up. The actual reasons behind this could vary from prices to attend a game to distance to the ballpark to anything in between.

With those things in mind, why in the world would the Dolans and the city of Cleveland spend the millions of dollars it would take to put a roof on when the ends don’t justify the means?

 

[Urban]

Because here’s the thing… there’s very few Cleveland fans who say, ya know what, I’ll start suddenly going to more Indians games because they have a roof. Let’s be honest with Indians attendance… it boils down to a few things. 1) It’s a Browns town and that won’t change. 2) The perceived notion that the Dolans are “cheap” crowd and we don’t even see a huge attendance boost when we are good. 3) Local TV ratings are up. Fans in our region are tuning in more than they’re showing up. The actual reasons behind this could vary from prices to attend a game to distance to the ballpark to anything in between.

With those things in mind, why in the world would the Dolans and the city of Cleveland spend the millions of dollars it would take to put a roof on when the ends don’t justify the means?

Aren't the Dolans, city, and county about to pay $435m in stadium renovations? Do the ends justify the means there?

 

[33Y0]

Aren't the Dolans, city, and county about to pay $435m in stadium renovations? Do the ends justify the means there?

Two thirds of that money is being paid by the tax payers, not Dolan. That’s roughly $255 million of that $435 million.

Adding an unnecessary roof will certainly almost double that cost. The taxpayers almost certainly would veto that. They gave the Cavs hell about their renovations. And see my post above, how would a roof effect attendance? Hint: it probably wouldn’t.

 

[Huber.]

Two thirds of that money is being paid by the tax payers, not Dolan. That’s roughly $255 million of that $435 million.

Adding an unnecessary roof will certainly almost double that cost. The taxpayers almost certainly would veto that. They gave the Cavs hell about their renovations. And see my post above, how would a roof effect attendance? Hint: it probably wouldn’t.

So why not leave the ballpark how it is (minus the shipping containers) and use the money for something that actually adds functionality?

 

[Urban]

Two thirds of that money is being paid by the tax payers, not Dolan. That’s roughly $255 million of that $435 million.

Adding an unnecessary roof will certainly almost double that cost. The taxpayers almost certainly would veto that. They gave the Cavs hell about their renovations. And see my post above, how would a roof effect attendance? Hint: it probably wouldn’t.

Pretty sure the Indians renovations are twice as expensive as the Cavs and the city/county/state is kicking in a higher percentage. 50% Cavs, 65% Indians

What I'm trying to get at:

The end goal of the renovations is to ultimately improve fan experience and thus attendance, right? Wouldn't that be the same goal as a retractable roof?

 

[33Y0]

So why not leave the ballpark how it is (minus the shipping containers) and use the money for something that actually adds functionality?

Well because for starters… the Indians needed the money to switch from Indians to Guardians. Also, there are areas of the ballpark that do need the renovations that didn’t get them during the last renovation. Every ballpark needs renovations periodically. The Twins have no issues without a dome…

 

[33Y0]

Pretty sure the Indians renovations are twice as expensive as the Cavs and the city/county/state is kicking in a higher percentage. 50% Cavs, 65% Indians

What I'm trying to get at:

The end goal of the renovations is to ultimately improve fan experience and thus attendance, right? Wouldn't that be the same goal as a retractable roof?

But where’s the proof that a roof would increase attendance? Fans don’t show up when we’re good and making the playoffs. You think they’re going to suddenly come out because we have a roof????

 

[Urban]

But where’s the proof that a roof would increase attendance? Fans don’t show up when we’re good and making the playoffs. You think they’re going to suddenly come out because we have a roof????

In 2019 the Indians averaged 17.6k fans for games played in April and May. They averaged 24.4k from June-September

I'm not naïve enough to think the Indians April and May attendance can match peak-July attendance but yes, I'm pretty damn sure the Indians would draw better on April 11 if fans knew they could leave their winter jackets, winter hats, and blankets at home.


Just don't understand why you're so adamantly against spending money on a roof "because fans don't already come out" but seemingly have no problem with the $436 million stadium renovations that the billion dollar owners are paying 35% off

Keeping in mind the renovations they did 7 years ago was privately funded

Are fans going to suddenly start coming out because right field looks nicer? Your answer is no, so what's the point?

 

[sportscoach]

In 2019 the Indians averaged 17.6k fans for games played in April and May. They averaged 24.4k from June-September

I'm not naïve enough to think the Indians April and May attendance can match peak-July attendance but yes, I'm pretty damn sure the Indians would draw better on April 11 if fans knew they could leave their winter jackets, winter hats, and blankets at home.


Just don't understand why you're so adamantly against spending money on a roof "because fans don't already come out" but seemingly have no problem with the $436 million stadium renovations that the billion dollar owners are paying 35% off

Keeping in mind the renovations they did 7 years ago was privately funded

Are fans going to suddenly start coming out because right field looks nicer? Your answer is no, so what's the point?

The biggest issue about getting a retractable roof is the cost... It would almost the same cost to get one as it would to get a brand new stadium...

I also agree with the fact, even with the roof, I don't think it will significantly increase attendance...

 

[33Y0]

In 2019 the Indians averaged 17.6k fans for games played in April and May. They averaged 24.4k from June-September

I'm not naïve enough to think the Indians April and May attendance can match peak-July attendance but yes, I'm pretty damn sure the Indians would draw better on April 11 if fans knew they could leave their winter jackets, winter hats, and blankets at home.


Just don't understand why you're so adamantly against spending money on a roof "because fans don't already come out" but seemingly have no problem with the $436 million stadium renovations that the billion dollar owners are paying 35% off

Keeping in mind the renovations they did 7 years ago was privately funded

Are fans going to suddenly start coming out because right field looks nicer? Your answer is no, so what's the point?

I mean, keep in mind, June through September kids are also out of school... so parents have more leverage to go to games or bring their kids to games. And because the cost of a roof would double the cost of renovations, it's literally that simple. Every single smart ball club does renovations on their stadiums to keep it in tact. But for the cost that you'd pay for just a roof, you would literally be paying for a whole new stadium, that's what you don't understand. The renovations they are proposing now are a mix between necessary (name changes) and keeping the stadium modern. A roof is a luxury, not a need. Keeping the stadium in shape is necessary.