A longtime Tigers fan takes on Comerica Park vs. Tiger Stadium

A buddy on the Fourth of July talked me into my first visit to Comerica Park to see our Detroit Tigers in action. I'd been conducting an informal boycott because I was among those who objected to the abandonment of the old Tiger Stadium. But with a pledge to keep an open mind, I joined my friend, "Rock," who said he didn't particularly care for the new park, either; he just wanted to see a ball game. He's been to Comerica Park dozens of times. In fact, he has visited all but six of the major league stadiums.

Here are the pros and cons of Comerica Park as I saw them.

Pro: Parking was more accessible. Tiger Stadium had virtually none, and owners of vacant lots would charge a fortune for the privilege to park.

Pro: Though neither Rock nor I had children in tow, the children's area has a carousel, Ferris wheel and other amenities. Of course, when my father first took me to Tiger Stadium during the early 1960s, I wasn't missing all that. My thrill was to emerge from the dark, musky tunnel and view the vast, green field of play. (The seats back then were green, too.)

Neutral: The $12 cost for the upper deck reserved seat seemed about right. It's certainly lower than the cost of a Lions football game or a Red Wings hockey match. In basketball, the Pistons have managed to keep their costs in check.

Con: The lack of shade that would have been offered at Tiger Stadium was a definite drawback to Comerica Park, and the distance of the seats from the action was even worse. When Comerica Park opened in 2000, supporters praised the "sight lines" as being superior to those at Tiger Stadium. This apparently was supposed to mean that all the seats are pointed straight toward the diamond so that fans don't have to turn their necks. Comerica Park enthusiasts also noted that there no longer were posts that obstructed the view. However, it was those posts that made Tiger Stadium's seats the closest to the action of any park — closer even than Boston's Fenway Park and Chicago's Wrigley Field. Also, a fan who purchased obstructed-view seats realized exactly what he was getting. Comerica seats about 40,000 people, while Tiger Stadium's capacity was more than 50,000, so the number of unobstructed seats still was higher in the old park.

Pro: Comerica Park is a cleaner facility with more restrooms. However, I've always made it a point to avoid having "to go" while at a ballpark or to go one time at the most. I've never understood the fans who miss half the game because they are constantly going to the restrooms.

Neutral: The Tigers played a stinker and lost 8 to 1 to the Seattle Mariners, but I don't hold that against them. All teams have their good and bad days, and the Tigers have been doing fairly well this season, especially on their home field. Roger Kahn, the baseball writer, once noted that during a typical week, a fan will see a pair of close games, a pair of marginally competitive games and a pair of blowouts.

Ultimate pro: The integration of the playing roster. As a child during the 1960s, unwise to the ways of the world, I failed to realize that the Detroit Tigers were one of baseball's final teams to racially integrate. Nowadays, their best rookies are center fielder Austin Jackson, who is black, and left fielder Brennan Boesch, who is white. Their star is first baseman Miguel Cabrera, from Venezuela. This is progress, even though I still wish we had the old Tiger Stadium back.

Source: