though after looking closer I found it funny that both Cubs and Sox fans noted the increased violence in the park when those teams play.

Chris DeLuca’s article. Miller Park has a better atmosphere than Wrigley? White Sox fans have a higher “fan IQ” than us? Pirates are 4th in hospitality…. I guess the 4,000 people that actually go to the games are pretty friendly.

did White Sox fans end up with a higher Fan IQ than us? That is absurd

and I can understand based off of those rankings why wrigley is ranked where it is. It is expensive, the food is basic, the traffic (if you count parking) is terrible and the Cubs team quality, well, we are the cubs. But TRADITION should be 2, neighborhood is about right, with a bias, i say 1. But if you polled all baseball fans they would probably overall pick wrigley and fenway for the spirit of baseball. If you polled all baseball players (hopefully they dont hold the clubhouse against us) they would vote Wrigley at 1 or 2. Just a guess of course, but I do truly believe that

Anybody can come up with list of criteria and rate ballparks. Under the criteria used by SI it is no surprise that the Cubs rank where they do.

I really dislike these so-called “fan” surveys, there is no realistic method to ensure that the sample of fans represents the whole population. Basically, this is a deal where a few hundred thousand fans vote via an online poll for thier ballpark. Probably during working hours…you know where 40k plus Cubs fans were when the Brewers and Indians fans were blowing off work to vote online… They can take thier poll, hands down anyone that loves baseball for everything that it is (And no; concessions, restrooms, and parking have nothing to do with watching a game) would pick Wrigley in the top three.

I was surprised to see Jacobs Field (or whatever its called these days) ranked at the top as I really disliked it compared to other newer parks. Pittsburgh deserves to rank very highly though and it would probably top the SI list if the Pirates weren’t terrible. I would guess that most of would put “Atmosphere” at or near the top of our list, as would most fans generally, which means that weighing it equally with secondary concerns such “Food” and “Traffic” really skews the results.

But what does “Atmosphere” mean? Raucous fans? Good sight lines? A combination of such things? For example, attending a Brewers game at Miller Park is great fun and I enjoy the Milwaukee fans but I don’t like the park at all…it feels like a hangar in which you’d store a spaceship. So how would those two opinions, which I don’t think of as competing with each other, enter in to it? It guess it’s pointless for me to wonder…

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/ballparks/wrigley.html

It doesn’t look at Wrigley through Cubbie Blue sunglasses but gives an honest perspective. The only problem is its starting to get dated (almost 4 years now IIRC) but you’ll get the point.

Most of the stereotypes regarding fans are 2 to 3 decades old (or more in many cases). For the Cubs, and many people who visit the park, and fit in with some of the negative stereotypes, they are there mostly for the experience and to mark that notch on their belt. Thats why they can often be seen, not paying attention to the game, and either making a cell call or text messaging. These things go on at any Ballpark, I think fans at Wrigley field are simply held to a higher standard because of the significance a trip there has to a solid baseball fan. I agree with the post earlier, any time I visit another park, or visit with other fans at spring training, they always comment on how much they love our park or how they would love to visit. Often players comment in the same way, good is good, even if it is old.

San Diego up on the neighborhood? The neighborhood is a bunch of foreclosed condo high rises surrounded by drunken tourists and the homeless…there is no neighborhood there, LOL!

Sox and Pittsburgh in the top 10? Only if you are talking about restraining orders issued for your season ticket holders and tops in viewing a AAA team at a MLB park..

St. Louis and Fenway are too low, in addition to Wrigley Stadium.

You must have walked into the ocean, or something.

The East Village, (albeit filled with condos that were built before the recession, some right up to the edge of the LF stands) is now, generally - a vibrant, active neighborhood - replacing a derelict warehouse district. Perhaps you didn’t walk toward the adjacent Gaslamp District, loaded with restaurants and bars— almost “Wrigleyesque” in its’ character. Cross Harbor Dr, and you are at the San Diego Convention Center, with Seaport Village just a few more steps away. You have to look at this as a complete entertainment district, which now includes residential dwellings.

Of course, there are tourists - this city circulates on tourism, that’s why it can be very hard to make a decent wage in this city. Of course, there are some homeless - they can be found in every city in America. Services for such individuals are usually located near downtown areas.

In the past, I wouldn’t have ventured east of 8th Street, and that’s even with a bustling Gaslamp Quarter. Now, there’s activity all the way to I-5, and that’s well over a mile and a half from Petco Park. Los Angeles should be so fortunate to have a real ‘downtown’ that works.

Your description of the neighborhood is entirely inaccurate. If any ranking is appropriate, it certainly should be in the top 10—perhaps #3 or #4.

And I’m sure your “Wrigley Stadium” is just sarcastic—right???

Anyone who has lived in Phoenix can attest to the asinine ratings the D-Backs got. It’s a fan poll. Opinion. Lots of stupid opinions abound.