Zambrano wants a new ballpark
Z was pretty impressed with Yankee Stadium. It will be interesting to see what type of plans Ricketts has regarding Wrigley.
almost 3 years ago
calicubfan
203 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
At the same time, he was quoted as saying...
“People are used to Wrigley Field,” he said. “As a fan it’s hard to think of a new ballpark.”
In the current environment, there is no way any state or locality will pay for a new park. The Ricketts are already borrowing hundreds of millions to buy the team, so it seems unlikely they could pay for a new park.
A renovated Wrigley can provide many of the amenities Z is talking about, while still maintaining its history. Much of what he, and other players, want, are expanded clubhouses and workout facilities and batting cages. When the Cubs build the triangle building, they’ll have that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
IMO, the Cubs should exercise that plan...
…about playing a season at the Cell and totally gutting and re-doing Wrigley. Let’s just hope we don’t get a Soldier Field type job!
"I always tell the truth -- Even when I lie"
Zambrano has a point.
I may be in the minority but I don’t have anything against moving away from Wrigley.
That is, when money allows.
"It's hard to win 97 games, it's hard to win the division. Our attitude is if you get in every year, you get in most of the time, sooner or later you are going to knock that door down." -- Jim Hendry
I don't...
see any reason to move from the site. But like Al stated, there are some obvious upgrades that could be done to the current building.
Agree
I think it would be exciting, Citifield looks amazing on TV….but I doubt Wrigley is going anywhere anytime soon, so its just wishful thinking at this point
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
In the first ballpark building boom...
…late 60s….early 70s…..Many people were calling to replace Wrigley Field & Comiskey Park. Shiny, new edifaces always make people so excited!
However, the luster wore off.
Architects looked to the past. Wrigley. Fenway. Crosley. Forbes.
The ball parks of the 70s…suddenly looked like garbage, and many were crumbling already, from neglect.
The next ballpark boom….the 1990’s! Every park….needed to look like…one of the aforementioned structures. (Except for Comiskey/US Cellular, that type of design — nixed by Jerry Reinsdorf, and Governor Thompson to save money. We know how that worked out.)
2009: “…Gee, shiny new ballparks. Wish the Cubs had one.”
And so it goes…..
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Apr 5, 2009 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I love Wrigley
It gives you that old time feel with the organ and stuff. It’s the only park in the majors without a jumbotron, and I think that’s cool. If the Cubs get a new park, it will most likely have a jumbotron, and a bullpen behind the fence, and no ivy. I really appreciate Wrigley for those things. It will also probably have some lame sponsorship name like US Cellular field.
"Check the magic of a winning season and there are always reasons beyond the talent." Ned Colleti
I'm not calling for a new park at all, but...
…if the Cubs DID get a new park, don’t you think they’d plant ivy?
"I always tell the truth -- Even when I lie"
Not necessarily.
I just don’t think there’s a compelling reason to move when renovations could accomplish the same goal.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Why wouldn't they?
Is it because they would lose the brick wall?
The argument in favor of moving would have to be the club seats, suites, restaurants, bars, and other revenue streams that Wrigley can’t accomodate. Even if they can come up with a really clever way of doing it, the cost of a massive renovation would likely cost close to 2/3 of what a new park would cost — Not to mention they could sell naming rights to a new park without a PR backlash.
The other issue would be relocating to the Cell for AT LEAST 1 season. Who knows what kind of attendance turnout that would be, and how much of the revenue they’d have to give the Sox.
"I always tell the truth -- Even when I lie"
The City of Chicago
owns the stadium, not the Sox, so they would have to negotiate that with the city
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
I think the state actually owns the Cell.
Either way, a lost season @ Wrigley would cost the Cubs. Wrigley itself attracts a good number of the fans that show up.
"I always tell the truth -- Even when I lie"
They've already discussed...
… trying to do it in an offseason and during road trips, closing off parts of the ballpark, so they wouldn’t have to move out.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Shut up and pitch, Carlos
If the organization ever gets around to making such a change, by the time it happens you’ll be throwing 5 1/3 rubber-armed innings for another team.
YOUR team just got destroyed for the final two games before the regular season starts. Perhaps that should be top of mind. Not talking nonsense about ballpark amenities.
You really got to wonder what’s going on between this guys ears….
Booze, Broads and Bullshit. What else do you need? - Harry Caray
Don't you think that's a little harsh?
He was asked a question and he gave his opinion.
Would you rather he gave a bunch of cliche answers?
Players tend to be less emotionally connected to a team than their fans and their perspective can be interesting.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Apr 4, 2009 9:41 PM CDT up reply actions
+1
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Good lord
Hostile much?
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 4, 2009 11:07 PM CDT up reply actions
BIG Z BIG MOUTH......
When the superstar players are long gone and moved on …Wrigley I hope will still be Wrigley . With the Bricks, Ivy and charm .. Yes it may need some upgrades but it is a special place to many of us . Carlos needs to be more concerned about where the Cubs are headed in 2009 and beyond .
I'm sorry...
But this is part of the problem in Chicago. Wrigley Field is a bigger name than anyone on the team. So he wants a new stadium? That’s his opinion. These guys have to walk a long way down small hallways to get to the cage and to the locker rooms. They hit their heads on the dugout ceiling and have a cramped clubhouse.
Maybe if these superstars are given better facilities they will play better. But people would rather celebrate a field that is falling a part over their players.
So you’re saying that these players will come and go, but Wrigley will remain? The players win championships (or try to) not the field. A field that hasn’t seen a championship since being built I might add.
Since 2000...
… the following new ballparks have opened:
2000: Comerica, Detroit
2000: Minute Maid, Houston
2000: AT&T, San Francisco
2001: Miller Park, Milwaukee
2001: PNC Park, Pittsburgh
2003: GABP, Cincinnati
2004: Petco, San Diego
2004: Citizens Bank Park, Philadelphia
2006: Busch, St. Louis
2008: Nationals Park, Washington
That’s ten new parks in nine years. The number of championships won in those parks is two (2006, St. Louis, 2008, Philadelphia).
New ballparks don’t win championships. Good teams win championships. Wrigley Field is not the problem.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
by Al Yellon on Apr 4, 2009 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
But many of those teams, save Pittsburgh of course, have made the playoffs
multiple times, and its too early to tell in DCs case, but there are certain advantages other teams have b/c of their modern surrounds that the Cubs dont enjoy, but more night games could solve a lot of problems as well as far as fatigue etc is concerned.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Hmmm. Let's examine that playoff claim.
Detroit: made playoffs once since 2000
Houston: made playoffs 3 times since 2000, WS once, lost
San Francisco: made playoffs 3 times since 2000, WS once, lost
Milwaukee: made playoffs once since 2001
Pittsburgh: no playoffs since new park
Cincinnati: no playoffs since new park
San Diego: made playoffs twice since 2004
Philly: made playoffs once since 2004
St. Louis: made playoffs once since 2006, won WS
Washington: no playoffs since new park
Not a stellar record. The night game issue is legitimate, and they may get more night games.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
7 of 10 making playoffs is pretty decent percentage, no?
5 0f 10 have been in the World Series since 2000. I’m not saying the new stadium has put them in the playoffs but I would imagine the expanded revenue streams haven’t hurt their organizations. I’m not advocating leaving their current site but Wrigley needs a complete overhaul in order to create additional revenue. Luxury suites and increased ad space could certainly be helpful in generating more money to sign players and expand our scouting department. What organization wouldn’t benefit from the additional income? It is a business after all.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 2:45 AM CDT up reply actions
In a sport where only 8 teams make the playoffs
those percentages are actually excellent.
Considering where Milwaukee and Detroit were as franchises before those parks opened, I’d say the revenue stream helped.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Not over 8 years
Someone else can do the math but you had 64 slots over those years so not particularly impressive. Also I am pretty sure a HIGHER percentage of teams that did NOT have new parks made the playoffs.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions
I owuld bet
64 teams with better talent and management in their respective divisions made the post season, sans the age of their stadium.
the new stadium may have helped attract new fans, or attract a few FA’s but Wrigley Field attracts more than the new ball parks do, so its a moot point to argue Wrigley Field vs other ball parks IMO
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Well thats a pretty good record when compared to the Cubs pre Piniella success
2 Playoff appearances for SD since 2004 is damn good, and the same as ours, Philly has been in contention for the past few years, I said DC isnt a good example yet….etc etc.
I dont know how you can say playing in an older stadium, that hasnt been retrofitted, isnt a disadvantage
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
You could ask the Red Sox
and their two World Series championships. Fenway has not been retrofitted. They have added some extra seats but so have the Cubs ( bleacher expansion and dugout boxes) for more revenue. San Diego is a strange example as they are a financial and baseball basket case and their is serious resentment from fans that public money was spent on a park but the team can no longer compete.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Fenway has more ad space in the park and they have added seating.
They also have more room outside the park where they have an outdoor patio area that helps generate revenue. If the Cubs put signage in Wrigley like they have at Fenway half of all Cubs fans would go nuts in protest.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions
My point wasn't exactly...
that a new park means a championship. My point would be more about how many of those fields got to the playoffs and how many of those teams got to the playoffs. I’m fairly positive that the number of fields to have ever gotten to the playoffs would be zero.
My point is that a building shouldn’t take precedent over the players. Zambrano has given us many memories and great performances and yet people wanna bash him because he expresses his opinion.
I would feel a little upset if other players were getting better treatment than the Cubs players simply because some people can’t let go of Wrigley Field. That isn’t to say tear it down, but people seem to have a had time even letting them change it.
Exactly right
Very well said- nothing was ever more irritating then when they had a “Wrigley Field” patch on their jackets, in a year where they frankly sucked. They need to pay more attention to the team then the stadium.
That said, I think a complete renovation of the main granstand, including locker rooms and other player facilities, is way past due and needs to be addressed. There is no need to build a new ballpark.
"I still don't know what happened"- Fergie Jenkins on '69
by tommy veryzer on Apr 5, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Let him finance a new park..........
if he wants one so badly
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Employers have found that providing employees with optimum working conditions increases productivity.
Who wouldn’t want the best possible environment in which to work? That certainly doesn’t seem unreasonable.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 2:50 AM CDT up reply actions
If I'm not mistaken...........
The height of the mound and the distance to home plate is the same in all major league parks so what’s your point?
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Wow... are you really that dense?
Locker rooms. Workout facilities. Clean bathrooms. Hallways that don’t look like something out of a horror movie.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Which they'll get when they do the renovations.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I agree with renovations, Al
But this guy doesn’t want anything.
And renovations to me means gutting the thing and rebuilding. The kind of project where the Cubs have to play in Rockford for a year to get it done.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
You don't need a complete gut/rebuild.
You’ve already got new bleachers. The press box and suites are 20 years old (granted, the suites need upgrading). What they need is that triangle building, so they can get the offices out of Wrigley and use that space for club seating (one of the proposals on the table), and have expanded clubhouses and workout facilities.
All of that can be done without closing the place down.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Al, if I may make a suggestion
Would it be possible to put the Cubs Annual article in which you go over possible renovations with drawings of Wrigley Field up in this FanPost, just as a sounding board for renovations?
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
I'll see if I can get that sent to me as a .pdf.
In the meantime (shameless promotion!) you can read some of my thoughts on renovating Wrigley and a couple of ideas from readers of this site who have architectural and design training who did drawings for my article, in the Maple Street Press 2009 Cubs Annual.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Thanks, Al.
To reinforce the plug, I would say I found the article quite thoughtful, and the proposed additions and renovations made a ton of sense.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
upper deck
needs to be revamped IMO, that would be hard to do while still playing there, wouldnt you agree?
other than that I agree the rest could be done while playing there
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Play in Rockford?!
Road Ranger Stadium is charming for the Riverhawks and very nice for Rockford College’s baseball team, but for the Cubs?! I trust you’re joking.
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"--The Brain
Not one of those ammenities win ball games
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
The $$$$$$$$$$$$$......
they make should make them happy and obligated to perform under any circumstances
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Tell me
Is all you need to be happy at work a rundown building with a desk and working phone and Internet connection?
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
No, but....
I’d like to think if I was making $12 million+ that I could grin and bear it. Look, I agree that upgrades need to be made to Wrigley and I think they will be within the next five years or so. They’ve already talked about having the new renovated Wrigley Field ready for the 2014 season, which is the park’s 100th anniversary. Once the new ownership is in place, I’d be shocked if the Wrigley renovation project (including the triangle building) picks up steam again very quickly. In the meantime, I have no problem with Z giving his opinion, but in the meantime, go play, Carlos.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
I meant to say...
I’d be shocked if the Wrigley Field renovation project DOES NOT pick up steam right away once the new ownership takes over.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
baseball players
always talk about their love for the history of the game, and how great it is to visit or play in an old park, so I would agree 100% with you there
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Cubs players do grin and bear it.
Carlos has played and performed for this organization. He has said innumerable times how much he loves being a Cub and wants to play here his whole career. He wasn’t complaining about Wrigley he was simply admiring a really awesome ballpark. Can you blame him for saying he would love to have similar facilities? Wouldn’t you? He even said he understand that fans love Wrigley. He does understand that people love Wrigley Field but he would also love to work in an upgraded environment. I don’t understand why fans think players can’t say what they feel when they are asked. He didn’t seek the media out to give his opinion, they asked, he answered. To his credit he was honest. Why are people so offended by this as to insult him and tell him he doesn’t have a right to speak his mind? This guy puts it on the line every time he goes on the field. There is not a player in a Cubs uniform that plays harder than he does.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions
If I'm making millions............
I don’t care if I have a desk…I’ll perform. And baseball doesn’t compare well with the typical workplace, so try a new argument.
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Actually it does make sense...
Be stubborn if you like, but it simply is not logical to invest in players without investing in their surroundings. A comfortable workplace does indeed contribute to productivity and workout facilities need to be top of the line if one wants to invest 140 million dollars on players.
Free Ronny Cedeno
Convice Reds fans of this.................
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
That should be a $140MM payroll.
The Reds aren’t going to invest as much of their stadium revenue into their payroll because they are a smaller market and don’t make as much off their tv and radio deals. Their payroll would be even smaller if they didn’t have a new stadium.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions
That doesn't even make sense. So why build a new stadium?
Thought new park = more revenue = ability to attract and pay for talent
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
okay, pay close attention
The Reds can’t afford a huge payroll due to the size of the market they are in. A new stadium has helped them increase their revenue but it’s not comparable to putting a new stadium in a large market like Chicago. You can’t say that a new stadium hasn’t helped Cinci because they don’t have a huge payroll when they don’t have the additional revenue streams the Cubs would have. The Cubs have an advantage of larger tv and ad revenues thus if they had a new stadium to go with this they would reap even greater rewards than any small market team could. Greater market = greater revenue potential. Also, a new stadium in Chicago is going to generate more revenue with more luxury boxes and more ad revenue than a new stadium in a small market. You can’t say that a new stadium in Cinci hasn’t resulted in a huge payroll thus a new stadium in Chicago won’t result in a top payroll.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Cubs would sell less tickets
since the novelty of seeing Wrigley for a game would not be there
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
There will be a novelty factor with a new park as well.
Ultimately what draws fans is the product on the field. If the Cubs maximize revenue and put a good product on the field people will show up to watch. A great thing about a lot of new parks is that because of pre-sold luxury suites and ad revenue in the stadium they don’t have to sell out the regular tickets to turn a profit. If Cubs fans only go to their games because of Wrigley then why do they draw so well on the road?
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions
the novalty of a new park
will wear off in a season or three as opposed to the novalty of Wrigley Field est 1914 which is running strong
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
pieces are crumbling
how is that ’running strong".
I’m as big a Wrigley fan as y’all. But if getting rid of Wrigley meant we got a WS, I’d volunteer to tear it down using my fingernails.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 6, 2009 1:29 PM CDT up reply actions
First of all...
… a few pieces fell, five years ago. The issue has not recurred, and according to a construction guy I know, does not mean there are any structural problems.
You should know that the ballpark isn’t the problem and that a new ballpark guarantees nothing.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I do know that
but i don’t worship wrigley.
everyone here so defensive of the place. and its beautiful and fantastic and i’m thankful i got to see it.
but z saying he likes the new parks doesn’t offend me. or make me think he’s an evil letcherous hump who hates playing in wrigley. or that wrigley is the only reason millions go to see the cubs every year.
i’m just annoyed that everyone is so eager to defend wrigley without even humoring the idea of a new park. I think wrigley COULD be updated but that doesn’t mean alternatives shouldn’t be discussed/looked at.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 6, 2009 2:27 PM CDT up reply actions
the premise of that last paragraph could also apply to...
… moving spring training site to Florida
… Micah Hoffpauir making the team
… Soriano batting leadoff
… alternate blue jersey tops
… etc. etc. etc.
Even the most open-minded people usually have a blind spot or two where they can all of a sudden be very close-minded. Maybe it’s human nature, or perhaps just inherent in Cubs fans… don’t know.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
those topics
usually only piss me off because of how beaten into the ground they get. that they happen doesn’t bother me.
its just the tone of this one and the fact that i’m in a grumpy mood and probably shouldn’t be around people today thats making me sound so terse.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 6, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions
So how.............
did a small market support The Big Red Machine?
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
And if someone asked you if you'd like a desk?
You’d say no! Funny.
"Baseball is like church- many attend, few understand." ~ Leo Durocher
No... no... I'm good
You don’t have to replace the 30-year-old coffee maker. I am good, thanks for asking! I like the tradition of the 30-year-old coffee maker and the first-off-the-line microwave in the break room that has probably made me sterile!
And those training videos? We love seeing them on those top-loader VCRs.
Really… we’re good.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
but I wouldn't whine if I didn't get one............
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
the point is not that you'd be making millions
the point is that you’d have the option to be making those millions in a place with a really nice environment or in a place with a really run-down environment.
which do you choose? it sounds like clutche might not care, but if all else is equal most people would choose to work in the nice environment.
having said that, i hope the cubs remodel wrigley instead of build a new stadium. even if they did close it down for a year to completely gut it, i’d be fine with that if that resulted in a nicer wrigley that would last longer.
So you're telling me...
That under terrible working conditions no matter how much you get paid you’ll be happy and work as hard as you can? If your work place was full of people who were mean to you, the place smelled, and you had no place to sit down ever you would still perform to the best of your ability simply because you’re making millions of dollars? That would last for about a month and then your performance would slack off.
This is obviously an extreme example because Wrigley isn’t THAT bad, but my point is that you get used to the money and money doesn’t buy happiness. You can’t throw money at them and expect them to just perform to the best of their ability. That can be shown by the numerous amount of contracts that have been paid to players that didn’t live up to expectations.
When the Cubs win the Series the stadium will be a mute subject
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
No it won't.
If the Cubs ever win a World Series people are going to be even more concerned with increasing revenue to keep the product on the field at a high level.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions
well, he actully is indirectly
he’s a great player and people pay to watch him play. Are you expected to upgrade your work environment when it needs an upgrade? Of course not- the employer is. That’s what makes your statement so stupid
by philadelphiacub on Apr 5, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
So you ..........
blame your under-performance on your working conditions?
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
A new stadium doesn't improve your.............
speed, power, average, accuracy, win/loss or anything else that earns you millions as a major league ballplayer
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
a new stadium only improves revenue which allows the club to get better players.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 12:54 PM CDT up reply actions
thank you
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
You're welcome
In case you don’t realize it, I am pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. You fail to understand that the additional revenue of a new facility helps the club acquire more talented players. More revenue is a good thing. These teams are businesses and to optimize success they need to optimize revenue. It makes no sense to say that you want to see the team be successful but not maximize their earning potential.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Really ?
How has that worked for San Diego, Cinci, Pittsburgh, Houston, Milwaukee etc. ?They have been so good at using all that added revenue on their fat payrolls. A new facility brings debts that have to paid off ( even if there was a chance in HELL of actually financing one today). Cubs have the 2nd highest ticket price now and a new park is unlikely to be have more seats. The Cubs rake in a fortune on the $ 50- $60 bleachers which a new park would almost surely lose as it won’t be at Clark & Addison. A new park is a pipe dream, a major renovation including redoing the upper deck is doable.
I think the Cubs have done an amazing job of optimizing revenues and they have done it in large part by marketing Wrigley which has given them the revenue to be one the top payroll teams.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions
There would be added luxury suites which are huge revenue producers.
Do you think bleacher seats can compare to the revenue from corporate suites? The teams you mention also don’t make as much off their tv deals because they are smaller markets. It’s comparing apples to oranges. Also, Houston has had a pretty competitive payroll which helped them get to a World Series. They wouldn’t have had as much to spend on that team without a new stadium. If you think they couldn’t make more money with a new stadium then you are just deluding yourself.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions
You just don't get the value of Wrigley
They can sell 4000 plus bleacher seats at $50 plus a pop while the Yankees get $12. The Yankees are literally BEGGING for sales in both luxury suites and field seats. They GROSSLY overestimated the value and have ads running daily to try to get rid of them. I don’t believe there is ANY WAY a Cubs stadium off the Kennedy , in Arlington Heights or anywhere besides Clark & Addison would come CLOSE to matching the revenue Wrigley generates.
Yesterday at the Yankees game all the people around me either talked about how they had visited Wrigley and it was the greatest park they had ever seen or how much they wanted and planned to do so. When I sell my tickets on Craig’s list etc I often get people from outside Chicago who have been dying to visit Wrigley. This is not about sentiment at least from ownership. They know Wrigley is a cash cow. They
are no doubt anxious to maximize this through advertising, renovation etc but they are not dumb enough let alone rich enough to try to play somewhere else.
PS how long did Houston’s competitive payroll last ? I am sure they will have great attendance in their lovely new park when they finish 5th this year.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Luxury suites generate more than bleachers, please.
The Yankees have lower bleacher tickets because they have more seats in their stadium. There are fewer seats in Wrigley which drives up the price. If you think the luxury suites at Yankee stadium generate less revenue than the Wrigley bleachers, well then I can’t convince you. What the Yankees have demonstrated is that if you put a great product on the field then you will fill any stadium you play in. There was a ton of WINNING tradition in Yankee stadium but they were able to move into a new state of the art facility. I would love to see the Cubs tear down the entire grand stand and build a state of the art replica. It’s probably not going to happen and it would be difficult due to their small foot print. It would also cost almost as much as building a whole new stadium elsewhere.
I can admit that if they built a new stadium in a totally different location with a good team in it they would have no problem drawing fans. There is no way they can make more money by just remodeling the current location. A brand new facility with more seats, more luxury boxes, more ad space, a parking and hotel facility attached would create more revenue than anything they can do at the current location. If they make more money and use it to put a consistently better product on the field they will draw wherever they play. I want a team that draws fans because it’s good not because of nostalgia and sentimentality. If you noticed before 2007 when the Cubs struggled the bleachers weren’t full in August and September. The Cubs will not continue to draw fans at Wrigley if they don’t put a good product on the field, the stakes and expectations of fans have been raised. They will not draw at Wrigley no matter what regardless of what people want to believe. I totally get the value of Wrigley and for too long this organization just milked that cash cow without regard to the product on the field. Those times have changed.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Luxury suites may generate more than bleachers, but only if they sell.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
They have sold in the United Center and at U.S. Cellular Field
There is absolutely no reason to believe that a market like Chicago and a product like the Cubs wouldn’t command huge corporate interest. The whole reason every sports team wants a new stadium is so they can put luxury suites in it. The general admission seats aren’t what generate the big bucks.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions
took winning to sell in both
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Really?
How did the UC sell out during the Tim Floyd era? People liked going to that new stadium to see the Bulls even when they were terrible. The other thing you neglect to consider is that if the Cubs increase revenue then they are more likely to be able to afford better players and a better scouting department.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions
You're right about luxury suites...
… and fancy club seating. The Cubs have plans for adding both of those in a Wrigley renovation. You don’t need a new stadium to do that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
So Wrigley hasn't acquire talent?
arguably the best talent in all of baseball, and a new ballpark doesn’t guarantee a better bottom line.
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Have you heard a ballplayer EVER............
use the excuse that “we would have won the division if only we had a new ballpark”?
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
LMAO
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Well Shawn Estes
Would of if had thought of it. He used every other excuse.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd expect a comment like this from a Philadelphian
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Don't understand the shock
He says this everytime he pitches at a place like Miller. It doesn’t mean he hates Wrigley or is a greedy SOB it just means sometimes he’d like to work in a nicer building.
Why is Carlos saying that so horrible? Really do not get it.
The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
by halfblindcubbiegirl on Apr 4, 2009 11:09 PM CDT reply actions
Because people think Wrigley
is a sacred shrine instead of a dilapidated old building with pee troughs and rickety locker rooms.
Honestly, if you told most Cubs fans they could have a championship without ivy or ivy without a championship, they’d have to think about it.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Apr 5, 2009 7:42 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I have to agree with this.
Wrigley Field = Kerry Wood x 1000.
Sentimentality can be its own prison.
"May the sun never set on American baseball." ~Harry Truman
The Red Sox renovated Fenway and won two WS in the last five years.
The Cubs can do the same thing. They are trying, in fact, to model the entire organization after what the Red Sox have done.
We’d take that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Don't they have more area outside Fenway than the Cubs do?
The Cubs are working in a smaller foot print than Boston and the Cubs can’t add the signage inside the stadium that Fenway has.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually, I think the Cubs have more room
I opened up two google maps side by side and it looks like Wrigley’s footprint is larger than Fenway’s. Certainly the city block is. I guess it depends on how much land, if any, the Red Sox control outside of that city block. Don’t forget, in addition to the triangle building area, Cubs also have two decent size parking lots across Waveland.
What Boston does that the Cubs haven’t been able to do yet is take over a street on game days. Haven’t seen this in person, so someone else please jump in with details, but I think the Red Sox close off Yawkey Way to vehicle traffic and somehow control fan traffic, i.e. you need a game ticket to enter. I think they have their own vendors, booths, and other attractions up and down the street.
A similar approach for the Cubs would be to shut down Waveland and/or Sheffield on game days and expand/control the whole Wrigley experience out there. You can imagine what I would think about that. I’m guessing it’s been brought up within Cubs braintrust before, but I’m also guessing that having the Engine Co. 78 Fire Station right there on Waveland shoots down that idea every time. Fire trucks need to be able to quickly get out and go in any direction needed.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Yes, street area closed down.
The area outside of Fenway is closed off to the general public and the Red Sox have revenue generating food, drink and merchandise vending in that area. The city has never shown that they would be willing to close down the streets around Wrigley to do this and the businesses would most likely do all they could to prevent that from happening.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't be so sure about that.
I think that’s entirely possible — especially since if the Cubs did that, they’d get the exclusive rights to sell stuff on the street there, not the street vendors. If they did so, that would surely increase tax revenue to the city. Even the city might sit up and take notice of that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
totally agree
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Let him have his own opinion
But there’s nothing wrong with what he said. I think people are really too sensitive when it comes to Wrigley Field. While it’s a lovely venue — so many things are outdated. As a player, I would completely understand what Carlos is coming from.
Tamia Lynn Davis:
Born: August 18, 2008
Z is entitled to his opinion but the weird thing is
I agree with LOU ( for once)
“I don’t see why,” Piniella said when asked if the Cubs need a new stadium. "Wrigley’s got its own uniqueness. There’s no question the facilities need to be redone but that’s going to happen.
“My favorite time of year is when the ivy turns green. It’s really a great environment to play a ballgame,” he said.
Now if I only agreed with him on game strategy , roster moves etc.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
You can plant ivy anywhere
the aura can be recreated, look at the new Yankee stadium, for a minute I could hardly tell the difference….different or new doesnt have to mean worse.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Yep plant the Ivy
In Arlington Heights in a nice state of the art Wrigley replica with lots of suites & some nice $2700 front seating. No one will know the difference and fans will flock there even during financial and or on field downturns.
Have fun getting the 1.5 billion your going to need in government bonds /tax incentives etc.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 12:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I wasnt arguing the financial aspect, merely the asthetics
Which can be recreated and modernized at the same time, and its not necessarily a bad thing as many Cubs fans seem to think it would be.
Its just a building, one full of a history of losing, whats the attachment? Ivy? Beer?
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Like it or not
Financial aspects and asthetics are intertwined with the Cubs. You can NOT re create Wrigley in another location because much of its drawing power is in its location. It is also just silly to talk about building a new park ANYWHERE other than Indian Casino land in the present financial situation.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Well I wont argue about the geography of Chicago
b/c Im not familiar with, but I sincerely doubt that the team would suffer a lapse in attendance in a new stadium
Not sure if I made my point clearly enough, In saying you could plant Ivy anywhere, I wasnt arguing about the availability of funds, rather that a new home for the Cubs isnt necessarily a bad thing, and it wouldnt be a cookie cutter stadium; it is possible to recreate the atmosphere of Wrigley.
In any event, its all academic as there are no concrete indications that a new building is even desired by ownership
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
I don't know if there is a lot large enough in Chicago city limits
that is vacant and could have a new stadium built on it
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
First place that springs to mind
is on Elston between Division and Chicago, just south of the old Slow Down bar. There is a huge parcel of undeveloped real estate there, but I’m not sure about its current state of development. Also, it’s right on the river, so it’s got that going for it, in addition to a spectacular view of the skyline.
"May the sun never set on American baseball." ~Harry Truman
Except that...
… if you built a ballpark on that land facing the skyline, it would be facing the wrong way for baseball (you’d have to put home plate in the northwest corner, something no team would do.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
With the glaring exception, of course, of the Chicago White Sox
"Who's Bob Brenly? The guy that used to be the manager for Arizona?" ~ Alfonso Guilleard Soriano
Another one
The Rangers also have home plate in the northwest corner, but as it’s an enclosed facility with a fairly high upper deck, the setting sun isn’t really a problem.
"You know, you should be a lot more careful crossing the street like that, otherwise you could die - if that bothers you."
wasn't it built on what once was a cemetary
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
great point
most likely with a new stadium will come higher ticket prices, and huge “taxes” to pay the bill to have it built
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Don't you mean if he only agreed with you on game strategy, roster moves, etc.?
;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Yes that sounds much better.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 12:46 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree Cubs need a new ballpark
I’ve been going to Wrigley for countless games for 32 years. While I love the charm as much as anybody, I’m sick and tired of the drippy sentimentality for the ballpark. And for presumed love of the ballpark overwhelming everything else. Fact is Wrigley has numerous flaws…
1. Cramped lockerrooms
2. No inside room for batting cages and other appropriate player facilities
3. Bullpens rammed onto the field
4. Decades out of date concourses, restrooms and concession facilities
5. God awful hideous exterior
6. God awful appendages to the ballpark like this latest restaurant on Addison which looks like a pancake house that you see attached to a budget hotel
7. Great difficulty getting to and parking at for the majority of Cub fans
Make Wrigley Field a baseball museum and build a brand new state-of-the-art ballpark near the Kennedy on one of the old industrial sites. Either that or build next to Arlington Park Racecourse where the land and infrastructure (highway, Metra train, parking) is already there for a ballpark.
WOW, your disdain for Wrigley is overwhelming but...........
you still go to games after 32 years of misery??
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Wrigley is overrated
And I’m sick of it being all about the ballpark. It should be about the Cubs and actually WINNING something of consequence as opposed to drippy sentimentality for a ballpark that, while beautiful in many respects, is an ancient relic in need of extreme makeover.
It is about winning.
Or haven’t you noticed what the Cubs have been trying to do the last three years?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
It's about winning with tradition.
And don’t feed me the b.s. counter argument that the tradition at Wrigley is losing (I know you won’t, Al). The tradition at Wrigley is day baseball, Banks, Santo, Williams, Jenkins, Hawk, Ryno, Grace and any other player or memory we cherish.
I want victory to occur in that treasured park and love the idea of renovations so I can take my grandchildren to their first game 20+ years from now in the same park. Fenway was altered and is still as good or better. My loyalty to the team isn’t to the uniform, but accumulated memories of games attended and watched. Wrigley field is the backdrop to most of those memories.
Wrigley was underrated, but then the soulless parks of the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s were build on the cheap and the remaining historical structures were replaced. Tiger Stadium, Comiskey, etc.
I despise the Yankees, but appreciated the reverence Yankee fans had for Yankee stadium. What I’ve seen of that new park implies good food and drink service, but doesn’t look like Yankee baseball to me.
As a child and young adult, I was followed the Tigers and still tracked them after discovering the Cubs. Their move to a new ballpark in a new location has made the current iteration of the franchise seem more like a relocated team to me. My childhood memories of the team and certain players are strong, but the current version seems watered down.
Sorry for the Sunday ramblings, but this struck a nerve.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Apr 5, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well thats not really a rational argument
I can certainly appreciate what youre saying, and agree in some respects, but its not really a strong argument against a new building.
I think Comerica park is beautiful and Citi Field looks like a modern classic, ditto for Yankee Stadium; they borrowed old school aesthetics and modernized them for the 21st century. I see no reason why the Cubs couldnt do the same, provided they had a suitable location.
Safeco, PNC, GABP, Camden Yards, AT@T all are widely renowned as some of the best stadiums in the league and all are new buildings, albeit with corporate names, but thats the cost of the sports business these days.
My point, and others like me, is simply that newer doesnt mean worse, it can still have a unique, timeless feel while providing modern amenities.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Indians opened Jacobs field
and won 5 of the next 6 division crowns and made two WS.
This after they hadn’t been in the playoffs for 50 years.
And I’m sick of the whining over corporate names. How much more traditional is that than owners like Wrigley, Busch and Comiskey naming the buildings after themselves?
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Indians are not great example as the previous ballpark
could not go on and wasn’t a quality ballpark to start. Take a mediocre to poor ballpark, add decades of deferred maintenance and you get nothing left.
While my preference would have been to restore that park, I don’t believe the way it was build made it possible.
Renovation is possible at Wrigley.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
I can personally attest to the previous ballpark, Municipal Stadium - it was a hole.
but it was our hole, dammit. The fans made it a great place to watch a game. It was a cavernous coliseum of concrete, but when those 73,000 seats were full of screaming Indians (or Browns) fans, oh man, was it a sweet sweet time. But I’ve been there other times when the likes of Seattle or Oakland was in town, and the announced attendance was in the sub-5000 range. Was still fun to watch a game, but it was definitely a different experience.
As to Worf’s point – Cleveland’s playoff push in the 90s was probably more due to the organizational strategy of signing their good young ballplayers to multi-year contracts before they were eligible for free-agency. An excellent way of controlling costs for an extended period of time. The new park was probably more for the benefit of the fans than the players.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Apr 5, 2009 2:17 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Pirates have the nicest new park in the MLB
They still have not finished over .500
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions
The difference between
the “corporate” names of yore and today, is the subtlety of it all. You say Wrigley, I think of the Cubs; gum doesn’t come into my initial thoughts. If it were “Double Mint Gum Field,” then your argument would be apt.
Busch, Miller, and Turner are following in that tradition. I suppose they could have just as easily called each park Anheuser-Busch, MGD Lite, and Turner Broadcasting System Field. Therein lies the difference between the “corporate” names of the past and Tropicana Field, Minute Maid Park, and University of Phoenix Stadium, Citi Field, et al.
When Anheuser-Busch bought the Cardinals in the 1950's...
… they wanted to rename the stadium “Budweiser Field”. MLB nixed that.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
It's about winning
Yankee Stadium would have been condemned 30 years ago without those banners. So, the fact that DiMaggio, Mantle and Ruth played there made it “traditional”
The Cardinals were the best team of the 80s playing in a park with all the charm of a DMV office. The Jays and Twins won twice in plastic domes. The Marlins have won twice in a football stadium.
Ask their fans if their victories aren’t as sweet.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Yankee stadium was re-built and it was
that renovation that ruined it (imo).
My belief is that winning and tradition are best when paired. While I love the Cubs and would still, my obsession with them would diminish if they played in the HumpDome. I know many Twin fans and while they love their team, many would rather watch the Twins play from some beergarden (outside) on a summer night than go inside.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Nothing wrong with being attached to the ballpark.
I am as well. What I don’t understand is the mindset by some here at BCB that you’re either committed to winning OR you’re committed to the ballpark. Personally, I am committed to both, and I can’t understand why that’s such a strange idea. The number one goal is winning the World Series, of course. But if you feel that way, as I do, it doesn’t mean you have to be indifferent about the ballpark also. I want the Cubs to win more than anything, but I also want them to do whatever it takes (even if it means a full season playing in the Cell) to stay at their current location in Wrigleyville forever. If that means a Soldier Field or Yankee Stadium (in the ‘70s) overhaul complete with modern amenities, so be it. Maybe I’m greedy, but I want a world championship AND the same ballpark I grew up with. I don’t think that’s asking too much after all we’ve put up with.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
by ctcoff99 on Apr 5, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Just to piggypack on that....
anyone who is in favor of keeping Wrigley, in my opinion, also needs to be reasonable and understand that baseball in the 21st century requires some sacrifice on our part as fans also. That means being okay with SOME advertising in the park (done tastefully, of course), more night games, more amenities like restaurants, etc. As long as ownership adds these things with respect to the tradition and architecture of the park (which so far they have), I’m fine with all of that. I’m a traditionalist, but I’m also a realist, and if we want to compete in our old historic ballpark, we need to be flexible. Just no Jumbotron, please!!
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
TIGER STADIUM.....
My Dad grew up on the West Side of Detroit….He was a huge Tigers fan ..I saw him cry a total of 3 times, 68 Champs, When Tigers announced Ernie Harwell was let go, and when Tigers announced they would knock down Tiger Stadium,,,So of course I at one time was a Tiger fan converted in 84 to Cubs…I had tickets in hand to see Tigers/Cubs at Comerica in 2001 when he was too ill with cancer to make the trip…So as Tiger Stadium meant alot to it’s fans Wrigley means alot to the faithful that wonder is this the year ….I went with some college buddies to Comerica last August ..They were playing the Tribe who had more fans in attendance ….Go Figure…
Yes I am sure Daley and Gov. Quinn
Will be happy to use a billion plus of state financing for a new Cubs park.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Good points
but really moot. They are not going to build a new ballpark. A renovation done right (like they did with the bleachers) would be every bit as good.
Can’t argue with the “drippy sentimentality”, though
"I still don't know what happened"- Fergie Jenkins on '69
by tommy veryzer on Apr 5, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Leave some parts and rebuild others.
Leave field, scoreboard, wall/ivy, but tear down the grandstand and rebuild. They could add more seats, elimnate a lot of the obstructed seats, and have room for the modern day amenities that the players deserve.
Is there anyone out there that has strong emotional ties to the grandstand?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
I dunno...
I’ve grown rather fond of the safety nets. ;-)
"May the sun never set on American baseball." ~Harry Truman
I'm very fond of them if my seats are directly beneath. :D
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Oh, brother.
You’ve been talking to Ozzie again, haven’t you?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
lol!
ol Pete must be a White Sox fan.
Steal a little and they throw you in jail, Steal a lot and they make you king -- Bob Dylan
He's a Brewer fan, actually
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Apr 7, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Cost benefit analysis
New ballpark would likely cost $600 million or so if built to deluxe standards. Rehabiliting Wrigley the right way will cost $300 million plus and will still not fix its numerous shortcomings.
Build a new Wrigley clone near the Kennedy Expressway or in Arlington Heights. Cubs can control the parking and add seating capacity and luxury suites to the hilt. Personally, I hope Ricketts tells Richie “I hate the Cubs” Daley and Tom Tunney to pound sand and not waste a moment of time in “negotiating” with the city and the neighborhood on a renovation plan for Wrigley. Money and time is far better off spent building brand new and selling Wrigley to whoever wants it to turn it into a baseball museum.
600 million
not come CLOSE to covering it. You will need closer to one BILLION . Tell Richie and Tunney to pound sand and I am SURE Rickets can get the money from Citibank or Chase especially since the Cubs are now their only asset.
Wrigley clone does not get the tourists and the $50 bleacher seats. Luckily no Cub owner is as dumb as you in terms of seriously saying they would leave Wrigley. The know a cash cow when they see one and they don’t have to build a false god in the burbs in order to start losing money hand over fist.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions
The Chicago market can generate huge corporate ticket purchases thus making tourists fairly irrelevant.
The key to almost all of the newer facilities is luxury suites for corporate purchase. Between the luxury suites the ad revenue and adding their own tv network the Cubs would not have to rely on tourist ticket sales. The other thing people neglect to consider is that if the Cubs maximize profit and invest it back into producing a winning team then they will draw anywhere.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Per above
Ask the Yankees about those corporate sales not to mention companies pulling back on advertising. Funny thing about tourists, and real fans , they actually come in hard times too.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 5, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions
In the long term the Yankees will make much more money in the new building.
The corporate sales and advertising will increase when the economy rebounds. In case you aren’t aware the average fan and tourists aren’t going to spend as much money in the current economic crisis either. You have to look at the big picture.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 2:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Excellent! - you've just described "Rollerball"
the 1975 version, starring James Caan and John Houseman. Great movie. Great quotes:
- “Corporate society takes care of everything. And all it asks of anyone, all it’s ever asked of anyone ever, is not to interfere with management decisions.”
- P.A. Announcer: "Ladies and gentlemen, will you stand please for the playing of our Corporate Hymn. "
- “JON-A-THAN! JON-A-THAN! JON-A-THAN! JON-A-THAN!”
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Haven't the Cubs been owned by a faceless corporation for the last 25 plus years?
Part of the reason Wrigley is falling apart is that it’s been run by a corporation only seeking to bleed it dry. Wrigley has generated revenue that hasn’t been used to keep it at the level it should be. Trib Co had no interest in taking profits and creating a safe and updated environment in Wrigley. That’s a big reason that it would cost almost as much to rehab the place now as it would to build a whole new facility. The entire grand stand needs to be torn down and expanded at a bare minimum.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Wrong.
The lower deck was rebuilt in 1968. The suites and press box were added in 1989. The bleachers are three years old. Only the upper deck needs replacement.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Don't you think they want to expand and upgrade the current suites?
They would also be better off tearing out the dugouts if they want to build bigger clubhouses beneath the lower deck.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 6, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
It would also be nice if they improved the sight lines and obstructions in lower deck.
Personally, I hate sitting in the lower terrace if you are below the over hang of the upper deck. You can’t see flyballs and there are usually numerous poles blocking your view.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 6, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
There are SOME obstructed view seats...
… and yes, the last few rows you can’t see fly balls. That’s not representative of the great bulk of seats.
About bigger clubhouses, the triangle building will help with that because they can move stuff out of the main park that doesn’t need to be there, expanding available space within the Wrigley footprint.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
can move stuff out of the main park that doesn’t need to be there
What’s stopping them from renting some office space nearby? Why do they have to wait for the elusive triangle building?
"Who's Bob Brenly? The guy that used to be the manager for Arizona?" ~ Alfonso Guilleard Soriano
Why would you want to do that?
First, where would you find “nearby office space”? Second, that wouldn’t be adjacent to the park. Want to make the employees walk several blocks to the park?
That wouldn’t work.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Well, you said there’s stuff blocking clubhouse expansion that doesn’t need to be in the ballpark. I assumed that meant it didn’t need to be adjacent to the ballpark either, and thought you were talking about back office functions that don’t need access to the field, players, or broadcasters. (I’m thinking IT, accounting, most but not all of marketing/publications, and a good chunk of tickets/customer service).
"Who's Bob Brenly? The guy that used to be the manager for Arizona?" ~ Alfonso Guilleard Soriano
Many of those "back office functions"...
… DO need access to the field. There’s no team that would put offices several blocks away.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Bull
There are tens of thousands of people who will gobble up tickets to the Cubs if they are available, which generally speaking they are not right now.
Cubs need a state-of-the-art ballpark, period. Professional baseball is a business, and a business that should be focused on WINNING (a foreign concept to the Cubs over the years) and catering to FANS. There is voluminous market for Cub tickets, and for corporate suites and PSLs. Even in the current awful economy the Cubs would have little problem selling out big ticket suites and seats.
You can keep bashing the Yankees all you want, but in doing so you come across as a hypocrite. Fact is Wrigley Field continues to be prostituted to death to milk every dime out of the joint. But the problem is that ballpark is a painted lady that just as soon as you peel back all the makeup you see all the problems. Wrigley either needs an EXTREME MAKEOVER (and Tunney and the residents of Wrigleyville be damned) or the Cubs need to build a new palace somewhere else on the northside or in Arlington Heights.
Ricketts is a businessman. The Ricketts family didn’t amass their business empire by letting drippy sentimentality for things like a ballpark and the Luvable Loser syndrome get in the way of building their wealth. Tom Ricketts needs to carry thru with that singular focus in his operation of the Cubs. Assessment of Wrigley needs to be black and white.
talk about sentimental value to Wrigley Field
Tom Ricketts met his wife there. Not much sentimental than that, right?
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Good luck selling tens of thousands of tickets
to the Arlington Heights Cubs. The Cubs have based their entire marketing on seeing games at Wrigley Field not at Abbott Labs
Stadium. Bells and whistles fades and teams have injuries and bad seasons leading to to the decline in sales. Remember how Baltimore & Cleveland used to sell out every game. Yes I know the Cubs are a BIG market so they could not POSSIBLY fail to draw that oodles of corporate money you seem certain is there. Luckily Rickets is indeed a business man ( and a Cubs fan) and he knows that good business is sticking with a sure thing rather than going with New Coke.
As often pointed out, these arguments can never be settled and under the current and foreseeable future there is zero chance of the financing needed for a new park. Ricketts will be lucky to have the money to do major renovations.
How bout a friendly wager BLou ? You pay for my Opening Day tickets in 2015 if it the game is at Clark & Addison and I will pay for yours if it is anywhere else ?
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 6, 2009 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions
How is it possible that the Cubs are one of the biggest draws on the road?
If they can draw in every city in the league why wouldn’t they draw at a new ballpark?
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 6, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Nearly everyone I meet on the road
Became Cub fans watching games at Wrigley at one time or another.
However you are welcome to piece of my bet re where the Cubs will be in six years.
I have to say that the funniest thing about the situation is that you have a group of fans insisting that Wrigley is falling apart, and in order to make more money to increase payroll etc the Cubs have to build a new modern park, at the same time the owners of the Cubs have virtually never even brought it up at least seriously. Usually you have owners insisting their facility is no good and they must be allowed to build a new one with some public funding but oddly the Cubs never have. Could it be that they find milking their cash cow a perfectly satisfactory situation ? I am sure the new owners will want to do as much as they can to get even more revenue through renovation, advertising etc but you are welcome to any game you want of my season tickets if the Cubs are anywhere but a renovated Wrigley in 2015 or 2025
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 6, 2009 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Then the SOLUTION is extreme makever of Wrigley
That means Mayor Daley and the Wrigleyville neighborhood not serving as obstructionists as is so often the case. That means living within the intent of the landmark status attached to the park, but allowing EXTREME renovation. That also means the city of Chicago finding property near the park for a BIG HONKIN PARKING DECK to go up that lines the pockets of the CUBS. That also means full blessing for developing the triangle piece of property.
Believe it or not
I think some version of this will happen. Tribune and before that Wrigley made a BIG mistake in not buying the land
on South side of Addison. Frankly everything on south side of Addison and west side of Clark is commercial and I don’t have problem using eminent domain to get it for Cubs use. Only the developer who plans to make money piggy backing on the Cubs would really be out much ( I can live without the McDonalds).
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Apr 6, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree with Jessica.
There will be some sort of parking, but “big honkin” probably isn’t going to be what it is.
Wrigley is where it is. People can get there by train, and many do.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Can you do a............
cost analysis on the price of tickets at the new $600,000,000 stadium?
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
help.......reply button stuck
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Price of tickets is mostly a function of supply and demand
In the case of the Cubs they have the luxury of an enormous fan base able to support some of the highest ticket prices in the game. There is more room to raise prices because there are thousands more of fat cat fans who will gladly gobble up tickets if available. Even in bad economic times.
I'd say it's a function of..............
rent and salaries mostly
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
And you would be mostly wrong...
Cubs can command ever-increasing ticket prices because they are a product that tens of thousands are willing to pay through the nose to go see. Compare the price of Cubs tickets to that of the White Sox, a franchise that actually won a World Series in 2005. Sox tickets are distinctly lower than Cub tickets. And always have been, even when the Cubs have sucked on the field.
IIRC
only Boston is more expensive on average
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
And the Yankees.....Cubs are third highest on average
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
meaning
that a new stadium would not guarantee higher ticket revenue IMO
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
they have the product because of the salaries they pay...............
that’s my point which you obviously missed
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
Where do they get the revenue to pay the salaries?
New Yankee Stadium is going to increase revenue and allow the Yankees to invest even more money in improving their on-field product. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Talk about missing the point.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Apr 5, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions
I think the Ricketts have other revenue streams as well
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
I'd say it's a function of..............
rent and salaries mostly
If you had to choose just one characteristic that would get you through life, choose a sense of humor.
My Dream of Wrigley
Stepping onto the field of the Yankees new park isn’t a dream of mine. Going to Wrigley and walking onto the field, the grass, the dirt… that is a dream of mine.
Fun argument?
Some people would rather keep Wrigley essentially as it is- with some renovations.
Some would rather gut and totally rehab the place.
Some would rather a brand new stadium somewhere else.
The players would like better facilities.
Some don’t care.
Can’t see a way to argue any of these points of to convince anyone of anything other than what they currently think. It’s just an opinion, and as everyone has already argued- no option really will make or break the Cubs chance of winning on the field. This is a Cubs version of a “religion- politics” subject.
"Baseball is like church- many attend, few understand." ~ Leo Durocher
So he'd like a new park, most players would
…and the fans comment is pretty much right on.
I believe Ricketts will go through with the supposed 5-year plan to renovate a little at a time, so they can celebrate the 100-year anniversary in ’14.
The only way that won’t happen is if there can be a deal made to build a new place in a different location. I don’t see it happening at least for a couple years. So as long as they begin to carry out the renovations, everyone can stop holding their breath.
Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.
Twittermeyer update on the Z situation:
“Big Z says he doesn’t want to get rid of Wrigley but as a player would like a park w/ modern, spacious facilities”
So there’s some clarification. I still appreciate the fact that he gave an honest answer to a question instead of dodging it with BS cliches.
Ron Santo should sing TMOTTBG everyday. Period.
Agreed, and agreed with Z's clarification.
I believe he will get both.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
how about we sink the state funds into
education, instead of a stadium that is not truly needed
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Only slightly off topic
When Mark Cuban was actively pursuing the Cubs and said something about renovated the current clubhouse ala the one he has for the Mavericks, Reed Johnson said something like he did not think Cuban understood that there was no room to add those kind of amenities unless they dynamited down though of course Reed put it in a much funnier phrase.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
Wrigley Field
is the best and worst asset the Cubs have
Best asset, because people (both fans of the Cubs and non baseball fans) want to see a game there at least once in their lives. It is a shrine to the history of baseball, and it proves that sometimes the house you live in is more special than the tenants.
Worst asset for the same reasons above. The Cubs do not need to win to draw people to come see the museum that is Wrigley.
Friendship is like peeing on yourself: everyone can see it, but only you get the warm feeling that it brings.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
MLB 12 The Show Marlins Park Trailer, complete with the monstrosity and the fish. Here's the link...
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
