Re: Crosley vs. Riverfront
Went to Crosley once, and my memory of it is a lot like Randy's. I was only a kid, but there definitely was something special about it. Everything seemed close. It was crowded, loud, personal.
Riverfront had some of those qualities- anyone remember the band that played between innings, or the organ? Nevertheless, Crosley remains my first Reds memory and therefore it is strong. And the astroturf always seemed bad to me.
Now, this from my dad:
Crosley was great when he was a kid, but that was when you could take the streetcar down to the park. His aunt owned a "boarding" house and tavern across from Crosley and his grandfather owned a bar in lower Price Hill. He'd go to the bar on the 33 to have lunch, then walk through the West End to Crosley to meet his dad at his aunt's bar, who was usually finishing his truck driving shift around the time the game started. His recollection of Crosley was that it was a defining part of the neighborhood, a lot like I imagine Wrigley is. Everything revolved around games. Traffic couldn't move through, everything pretty much stopped, but it was kind of fun because it was an event every day.
My dad didn't mind Riverfront at all because he said that it was the right time for the transition away from Crosley. Once I-75 was conceived, it was clear that the West End and Crosley were done. And in that context, he has always said the same thing, that the last ten years of Crosley were pretty awful. Crime, heat, tough parking, smelly toilets, the place had really lost it's luster for people of his generation by the time Riverfront was opened.
Next Reds manager, second shooter. --Confirmed on Redszone.