I was going to leave the N&R's recent 'I told you so' reporting about the current and future use of War Memorial Stadium alone, but I find that I simply can't.
An unposted editorial in this morning's paper opines that all is well over here on Yanceyville Street. This follows yesterday's article by Jim Schlosser that was a pretty fair assessment of what's going on at the old stadium and what will probably become of the place in the not-too-distant future. Of preservationists' efforts during the baseball debates, Schlosser writes...
"... fears were expressed that the next ball seen in the 79-year-old stadium would be a wrecking ball."
Well, yeah... and that is exactly what is going to happen as evidenced by subsequent paragraphs in the same article...
"...Amateur games draw maybe 100 spectators, 200 tops, compared to 2,000 to 3,000 during the Bats' era... The stadium's 7,000-seat capacity swallows those who attend amateur games. A proposed renovation probably will significantly reduce capacity, although to what size hasn't been determined..."
Is it just me, or doesn't the term "significantly reduce capacity" from 7,000 seats to five or six hundred at least suggest to otherwise intelligent people that a "wrecking ball", or similar piece of demolition equipment, will be in War Memorial's future?
What's with the mincing of words here? A large portion of WMS will likely be torn down - as in demolished - as in 'no longer standing' - in the coming years. Those of us who were "expressing fears" about the future of the stadium are sadly seeing our fears come to realization in my view. We are the ones who should be saying "I told you so".
9:00:56 AM 
|
