Has The Novelty Of Citi Field Already Worn Off?

Question for y’all:
Is the new stadium (Citi Field) a draw?
Are you still excited about going to see the new place, or is it just where the Mets play now.
I’m not saying the place is bad or that I want Shea back, but I think the novelty is already gone.
Is the idea of the new stadium enough to get you to buy tickets?
I know for me, I’m no longer excited by the building.   Nice place to see a game, but not so nice that I don’t hope someone doesn’t buy me Monday and Tuesday tickets off stubhub.
What’s the consensus out there?

9 Replies to “Has The Novelty Of Citi Field Already Worn Off?”

  1. The novelty has worn off. I've been there 6 times this year. I think the novelty wore off after my 3rd visit because I had been around the park a few times and have seen everything it has to offer. Great place to watch a game but I won't be back this year, unless the Mets start playing better.

  2. Sure seems like it's worn off, and a lot has to do with the team, and this nightmare of a season.

  3. I never cared about the new stadium because I knew the team would disappoint. I am boycotting the Mets until the Wilpons sell. Hopefully it will be 1979 so fast they won't know what hit them.

  4. While there's no novelty anymore, that doesn't mean that Citi Field isn't a draw relative to Shea.

    I like to go to games with my young kids. As someone who sometimes has to change diapers at a ballgame, Citi Field not only wins hands down over Shea, but over the new Yankee Stadium. (Citi has far more prevalent "family" restrooms.) For my older son, who's freshly out of diapers and needs to make frequent bathroom trips, I can usually get from our seats to the bathroom and back without missing more than a pitch or two, which never could have happened at Shea.

    When the novelty is gone for all the fans, we're left with a much nicer ballpark than we had previously. After sampling the new Yankee Stadium, I also find Citi to be a better experience for those fans who don't want to shell out for the high end seats, which is most of us.

  5. the novelty of the stadium wore off the day you and other bloggers started reporting the obstructed view seats and lack of a Mets feel. that was somewhere between the Red Sox exhibition games and the first home weekend of the regular season.

    if they fixed all that, then maybe it will have the novelty to ware off.

  6. it's definitely worn off. i was dazzled at first by the shiny new look of the place. but after closer investigation, i saw a lot of things that bummed me out.

    first of all, the obstructed views on the promenade are disastrous. i was in row one of section 510 and couldn't see first base and part of right field.

    the rotunda also bothered me. it's kind of sparse, and everywhere you look you see DODGERS, DODGERS, DODGERS, JACKIE ROBINSON. nowhere is there any blue and orange or any odes to actual mets players (no mention of tom seaver? come on…what team is this?). there no pennants hanging anywhere (we won two world series, people, can we at least acknowledge and celebrate that in our freaking stadium?).

    another telling observation: walking into the mets team store, you're immediately greeted by…wait for it…racks of DODGERS MERCHANDISE!

    it's a comfy stadium and all and the food and beer options are miles above shea but wilpon's dodger boner really needs to stay away from the mets.

  7. The novelty has worn off. I've been there 4 times this year. The novelty wore off this afternoon at the day game with the Rockies, because while I enjoy the vastly improved food and beer options, the 15,000 fewer seats is really a bummer. Every game I have attended I have felt cramped, there is no longer any room in the upper deck to stretch your legs. I miss being able to take the subway to most games and just buy a cheap seat and watch a game. I almost find myself routing for the Mets to stink so I can buy a cheap seat to a game. Great place to watch a game but I won't be back this year, or next as this stadium was built for tourists, not New York baseball fans.

  8. I've been twice. I went to the second game of the year against SD and a May game vs. Atlanta. After you get to check out the food area the novelty wears off. Definitely better than Shea but it really depends where you are sitting. I had upper deck 3rd row behind the plate seats. Great view. I loved it. I also had last row of upper deck in LF. HORRIBLE. I couldn't see anything in front of the LF wall nor down the warning track through center field. I couldn't see the out of town scoreboard and barely the video board. I ended up moving a few innings in to a handicap seat no one was using by 3rd base.

    Things to improve on. The outfield wall needs to change color. Black looks really bad. I would rather see green and at worst light blue. Obviously more Mets stuff. I thought the leg room wasn't great in the upper level considering it is a new park. Also they should open some restaurants for the "regular" fans. The club behind home plate in the upper deck is for the club level. The other twenty or thirty rows get nothing. The regular fans should have 1 restaurant they can sit in especially when the weather is cold or wet.

    At this point I wouldn't go to see the park. If the Mets are doing well I will love going but I am not spending $18 to park and then a lot more inside just to see what it looks like.

  9. You people are retarded.. Who cares about all this menial crap you are talking about, don't like your view? Get a better ticket. The amount of "obstructed views" in the stadium are so small compared to the actuals numbers of seats. How about being able to go and watch the game at any level without being harassed? Sit out on the bridge and watch the game… There's always a couple idiots in the bunch anywhere you go. Nice for pointing yourselves out for the rest of us… Debbie Downers… 🙂

Comments are closed.