PDA

View Full Version : SELIG: 2014 All Star Game at Wrigley has appeal


Fenway
08-25-2011, 12:26 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/15479173/selig-says-wrigley-field-has-allstar-game-appeal

chisoxfanatic
08-25-2011, 02:46 PM
I'd be dreaming of Wrigley completely collapsing during the all star festivities on television!

DumpJerry
08-25-2011, 02:56 PM
I'd be dreaming of Wrigley completely collapsing during the all star festivities on television!
I'm sure Dunn and Rios aren't losing sleep over that possibility.:angry:

russ99
08-25-2011, 03:54 PM
What a scam. Ricketts is now getting Bud to throw in this on his push for public money to renovate Wrigley.

What about all the parks that haven't had a ASG? Shouldn't they go before Wrigley gets it again?

DumpJerry
08-25-2011, 03:59 PM
What about all the parks that haven't had a ASG? Shouldn't they go before Wrigley gets it again?
Who has not hosted one yet?

doublem23
08-25-2011, 04:05 PM
Who has not hosted one yet?

Sun Life (Miami)
Tropicana
Great American
Citizens Bank
PETCO
Nationals Park
Citi Field
New Yankee Stadium
Target Field

gobears1987
08-25-2011, 04:30 PM
Well I know the Sox aren't getting one until 2033. THat actually would be the most fair since it would be exactly 30 years since the last one and would mark the 100th anniversary of the first one.

As for Wrigley, the Cubs wouldn't have had one in over 20 years at that point so I see no problem, other than structural failure thatis.

DumpJerry
08-25-2011, 04:31 PM
Sun Life (Miami)
Tropicana
Great American
Citizens Bank
PETCO
Nationals Park
Citi Field
New Yankee Stadium
Target Field
But, are they "storied?"

How many of those cities have not hosted an ASG?

Lip Man 1
08-25-2011, 05:03 PM
Off the top of my head I'd say Tampa and Miami.

Lip

Milw
08-25-2011, 05:54 PM
What a scam. Ricketts is now getting Bud to throw in this on his push for public money to renovate Wrigley.

What about all the parks that haven't had a ASG? Shouldn't they go before Wrigley gets it again?
We may not like it, but it's a smart business decision by Selig and MLB. It's not a scam, it's called leverage.

The Sox had leverage in spades when they were pushing for public financing of New Comiskey Park--they were ready to pack up and leave the state. The Cubs don't have that card to play. (Even if they threatened to skip town, who would really take them seriously?) The All Star Game is a carrot that MLB is smart to play.

all*star quentin
08-25-2011, 06:56 PM
I'll be attending. I love all*stars! :gulp:

central44
08-25-2011, 07:04 PM
I don't like Wrigley, but I see nothing wrong with them commemorating the 100th anniversary of the park with an All Star Game. It's not like they just hosted a few years ago, either, as was the case when Boston tried to have the 2012 game at Fenway after just having it in '99.

Maybe it's just because i'm a history person, but not only does this not bother me...it actually seems like the right thing to do.

BleacherBandit
08-25-2011, 07:09 PM
I don't like Wrigley, but I see nothing wrong with them commemorating the 100th anniversary of the park with an All Star Game. It's not like they just hosted a few years ago, either, as was the case when Boston tried to have the 2012 game at Fenway after just having it in '99.

Maybe it's just because i'm a history person, but not only does this not bother me...it actually seems like the right thing to do.

I'm not someone who'll condemn Wrigley Field. In fact, I was at the Cubs game today. (They lost big time :tongue:). It has its own charm, although it obviously has the aforementioned structural issues. If those are dealt with accordingly and it's safe to play there by 2014, why not?

Milw
08-25-2011, 09:14 PM
I'm not someone who'll condemn Wrigley Field. In fact, I was at the Cubs game today. (They lost big time :tongue:). It has its own charm, although it obviously has the aforementioned structural issues. If those are dealt with accordingly and it's safe to play there by 2014, why not?
You guys talk about the structural issues like the All Star Game requires some enhanced degree of structural integrity. They play 81 games a year--if it's safe enough for those (and I'm not saying it is or it isn't) then it's safe enough for one more...

g0g0
08-26-2011, 08:38 AM
While Ricketts might have an ulterior motive, I don't see it as anything more than celebrating 100 years at Wrigley.

Hitmen77
08-26-2011, 09:04 AM
While Ricketts might have an ulterior motive, I don't see it as anything more than celebrating 100 years at Wrigley.

Even though the park was built in 1914, the Cubs didn't move to Wrigley until 1916.

That being said, I don't have a problem with the ASG coming back to Wrigley at some point in the near future. Last time was 1990 and that will have been 24 years by 2014. On the other hand, I don't think other cities/teams who have had to wait longer than the Cubs for a game should have to keep on waiting.

Another problem is that 2014 is the AL's "turn" at having home field for the ASG. Since Selig made these games "count" by tying them to WS home field advantage, then I'm not so sure about having the AL "skip a turn" just to have the game at Wrigley in 2014.

Milw
08-26-2011, 09:22 AM
Even though the park was built in 1914, the Cubs didn't move to Wrigley until 1916.

That being said, I don't have a problem with the ASG coming back to Wrigley at some point in the near future. Last time was 1990 and that will have been 24 years by 2014. On the other hand, I don't think other cities/teams who have had to wait longer than the Cubs for a game should have to keep on waiting.

Another problem is that 2014 is the AL's "turn" at having home field for the ASG. Since Selig made these games "count" by tying them to WS home field advantage, then I'm not so sure about having the AL "skip a turn" just to have the game at Wrigley in 2014.
While the Cubs didn't move to Wrigley Field (actually Weeghman Park at that point) until 1916, there has been major league baseball played there since 1914 (by the ChiFeds/Whales). So I think it counts.

The AL/NL yearly rotation hasn't been in play for several years now. It's counterintuitive, given the whole "counts" thing, but they wouldn't be making an exception just for Wrigley.

Hitmen77
08-26-2011, 09:35 AM
While the Cubs didn't move to Wrigley Field (actually Weeghman Park at that point) until 1916, there has been major league baseball played there since 1914 (by the ChiFeds/Whales). So I think it counts.

The AL/NL yearly rotation hasn't been in play for several years now. It's counterintuitive, given the whole "counts" thing, but they wouldn't be making an exception just for Wrigley.

I wouldn't have thought that Federal League games counted as "major league baseball".

The AL/NL rotation is still in play:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/asgmenu.shtml
The only except was when they had Pittsburgh and San Fran back to back in 2006-07. Otherwise, its very clearly a rotation and I thought that at the time of the Pitt/SF games that Selig said that they were otherwise still sticking with alternating between leagues. Of course, if Selig has his way, there might not even be an AL or NL in a few years. So maybe it won't matter.

Milw
08-26-2011, 09:45 AM
I wouldn't have thought that Federal League games counted as "major league baseball".

The AL/NL rotation is still in play:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/asgmenu.shtml
The only except was when they had Pittsburgh and San Fran back to back in 2006-07. Otherwise, its very clearly a rotation and I thought that at the time of the Pitt/SF games that Selig said that they were otherwise still sticking with alternating between leagues. Of course, if Selig has his way, there might not even be an AL or NL in a few years. So maybe it won't matter.
The Federal League was in its time considered a third major league. It was probably akin to the USFL in the 80s, relative to the NFL--a decidedly second-rate league but with its fair share of first-rate talent that gave the NFL a bit of a scare.

Keep in mind that it's only been relatively recent that the AL and NL united to become "Major League Baseball," but for much of history they were legitimately competing entities.

Hitmen77
08-26-2011, 09:52 AM
The Federal League was in its time considered a third major league. It was probably akin to the USFL in the 80s, relative to the NFL--a decidedly second-rate league but with its fair share of first-rate talent that gave the NFL a bit of a scare.

Keep in mind that it's only been relatively recent that the AL and NL united to become "Major League Baseball," but for much of history they were legitimately competing entities.

That's what I was thinking....it was akin to the USFL. I wouldn't exactly consider USFL games and stats as part of NFL history.

Also, the AL and NL may have been rivals for many years, but they had a single commissioner going back to at least the Black Sox era. So, I wouldn't say that they were united relatively recently.

It doesn't matter. I was just pointing out that the Cubs won't be celebrating 100 years at Wrigley in 2014. That's just a simple fact no matter what the Whales did there. But, the park will still be 100 in 2014 and many people are fans of Wrigley more than they are fans of the Cubs anyway.:tongue:

I can't wait for the national media to say this will be the first All Star Game in Chicago since 1990.

Milw
08-26-2011, 09:58 AM
That's what I was thinking....it was akin to the USFL. I wouldn't exactly consider USFL games and stats as part of NFL history.

It doesn't matter. I was just pointing out that the Cubs won't be celebrating 100 years at Wrigley in 2014. The park will still be 100 in 2014 and many people are fans of Wrigley more than they are fans of the Cubs anyway.:tongue:

I can't wait for the national media to say this will be the first All Star Game in Chicago since 1990.
Not that BaseballReference.com is the ultimate authority on this, but they list the Federal League as a major league (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/). On sister site ProFootballReference.com, they don't list the USFL. So maybe that was a poor analogy. My point is people in 1914, from what I understand, didn't differentiate much between the AL/NL/FL.

/historyhijackover

Wrigley sucks.

SOXPHILE
08-26-2011, 11:05 AM
That's what I was thinking....it was akin to the USFL. I wouldn't exactly consider USFL games and stats as part of NFL history.

Also, the AL and NL may have been rivals for many years, but they had a single commissioner going back to at least the Black Sox era. So, I wouldn't say that they were united relatively recently.

It doesn't matter. I was just pointing out that the Cubs won't be celebrating 100 years at Wrigley in 2014. That's just a simple fact no matter what the Whales did there. But, the park will still be 100 in 2014 and many people are fans of Wrigley more than they are fans of the Cubs anyway.:tongue:

I can't wait for the national media to say this will be the first All Star Game in Chicago since 1990.

That's why I always laugh at those douchebags who wear that dark blue hat with the logo of the cute white cubby bear holding the bat. They probably think they are wearing some rad retro type of hat, but it's actually sort of a bastardization of something they wore from 1908-1914:

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkWimKv4bxf5opzwS8vu7XZlu7SXZFc 52EpZ-H4OP5NsQWFUxdYg

But, these hats also have 1914 on the bottom back part of the hat. It's dumb because I always assumed it was because that was the year Wrigley opened, but it shouldn't be on the hat because, as mentioned before, the Cubs did not play there until two years later. I always wanted to ask the people I saw wearing them if they knew why that year was on there.

Milw
08-26-2011, 11:27 AM
This all begs the question: If I were to wear this T-shirt

http://www.teamontop.com/all_images/whales1_detail.jpg

Would I be indirectly showing support for the Cubs? That is, if you saw someone wearing Whales memorabilia, would you assume they were a Cubs fan?

FielderJones
08-26-2011, 01:39 PM
Not that BaseballReference.com is the ultimate authority on this, but they list the Federal League as a major league (http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/).

In 1968 MLB formed a Special Baseball Records Committee and officially recognized (http://books.google.com/books?id=4yDtlquCJiYC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA338#v=onepage&q&f=false) the Federal League, American Association, Union Association, and Players' League as major leagues.

Frontman
08-26-2011, 03:09 PM
I didn't think I'd ever miss Santo in the broadcast booth, until the thought of this guy covering the Home Run Derby came to mind:
http://www.crsportsnews.com/primages/Berman.jpg


At least nobody mistook Santo for an actual broadcaster, unlike this guy.

DSpivack
08-26-2011, 03:13 PM
This all begs the question: If I were to wear this T-shirt

http://www.teamontop.com/all_images/whales1_detail.jpg

Would I be indirectly showing support for the Cubs? That is, if you saw someone wearing Whales memorabilia, would you assume they were a Cubs fan?

The Cubs even technically played on the south side then, as West Side Park was where the U of I medical center is now. Supposedly the phrase "way out in left field" started there, as there was a mental health facility beyond the LF wall (though I don't how much of that is myth and how much truth).

DumpJerry
08-26-2011, 03:41 PM
Also, the AL and NL may have been rivals for many years, but they had a single commissioner going back to at least the Black Sox era. So, I wouldn't say that they were united relatively recently.
It was only recently (IIRC, some time in the past 10 years) that MLB got rid of NL and AL umpires and made the umps MLB working both leagues. When they unified the umps, they also got rid of the discrepancies in the Strike Zone the two leagues had (I believe one had the armpit and the other the shoulder for the top of the Zone, but I might be mistaken on the existence of a Strike Zone difference).

Lip Man 1
08-26-2011, 04:04 PM
I don't think there was an "official" difference... the strize zone was the strike zone... however because one league used the balloon chest protecters and the other did not, the zone was called differently because some umps had a better view of certain parts of it than others.

Lip

Daver
08-26-2011, 04:13 PM
It was only recently (IIRC, some time in the past 10 years) that MLB got rid of NL and AL umpires and made the umps MLB working both leagues. When they unified the umps, they also got rid of the discrepancies in the Strike Zone the two leagues had (I believe one had the armpit and the other the shoulder for the top of the Zone, but I might be mistaken on the existence of a Strike Zone difference).

The AL/NL umps thing disappeared when Bud Selig broke the umpires union and brought it's decision making to his office exclusively. The strike zone discrepancies started to disappear before that, when the AL umps abandoned the "balloon" style chest protectors in favor of the catcher style chest protector.

I have yet to see an MLB umpire call the actual strike zone though, the so-called "high strike" is not all that high.

Chi Dye
08-26-2011, 06:00 PM
ESPN Chicago thinks 2016 (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6898332/sources-wrigley-field-most-likely-host-2016-all-star-game).

Lamp81
08-26-2011, 10:36 PM
Washington DC should get the next available NL slot. The city hasn't hosted a game since 1969 (because for most of the time since '69 they had no team). They have a beautiful ball park, that has great access to the wonderful DC train system.

Wrigley shouldn't get an ASG until it is in it's last season, a la Yankee Stadium, a few years back.

DumpJerry
08-27-2011, 01:52 PM
ESPN Chicago thinks 2016 (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6898332/sources-wrigley-field-most-likely-host-2016-all-star-game).
Apparently Wrigley is in bad shape and cannot take the stress of all the events of the All Star Game. Selig says it has to be renovated on the inside and outside before the ASG can happen there.


Who knew Selig was a WSIer?

Lip Man 1
08-27-2011, 02:42 PM
Phil Rogers in his MLB whispers column at the Tribune says that Wrigley probably won't get an All-Star game for at least the rest of this decade.

Lip

RKMeibalane
08-28-2011, 12:25 AM
Phil Rogers in his MLB whispers column at the Tribune says that Wrigley probably won't get an All-Star game for at least the rest of this decade.

Lip

I'm hoping that Wrigley is destroyed before the end of the decade, and never gets the game.

Frontman
08-28-2011, 08:07 AM
Washington DC should get the next available NL slot. The city hasn't hosted a game since 1969 (because for most of the time since '69 they had no team). They have a beautiful ball park, that has great access to the wonderful DC train system.

Wrigley shouldn't get an ASG until it is in it's last season, a la Yankee Stadium, a few years back.

That is a very valid point; and would help the Nationals out as far as gaining national (pardon the pun) attention.

HomeFish
08-28-2011, 10:27 AM
As a resident of the DC metro area I agree with all the posters who said that Nationals Park should get the next available ASG.