PDA

View Full Version : White Sox mission: Combat the Cub factor


Jerry_Manuel
02-23-2004, 10:18 AM
SouthTown (http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/231sd1.htm)

"We're hovering somewhere below the Blackhawks right now, I think," Sox reliever Kelly Wunsch said when asked where the Sox currently rank in popularity within the Chicago area. "It's just a fact of life we've come to accept. If we can put together some winning seasons a few in a row and sustain the interest in the team, then maybe that could be us in a few years ... maybe.

"Until then, it's a Cubs city and there's nothing you can do about it."

kittle42
02-23-2004, 10:43 AM
Well, he's right - but at least he expresses optimism about changing the situation unlike our bleoved owner.

CubKilla
02-23-2004, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by kittle42
Well, he's right - but at least he expresses optimism about changing the situation unlike our bleoved owner.

The Sox are not below the SlackHawks. But if this Organization doesn't right a sinking ship, eventually the White Sox may become less relevant than the Slacks.

KingXerxes
02-23-2004, 11:15 AM
In no way are the White Sox below the Blackhawks in terms of either fan support or popularity, this entire quote is ridiculous.

I frankly am getting sick and tired of this "woe is us" attitude. First it was the front office, then from the broadcast booth - and now from the players themselves? C'mon people, this is getting stupid.

I can't see what possible advantage can come from the fact that Kelly Wunsch believes he works for a step-child of a team (or Reinsodrf, or Harrelson etc. ad nasuem). I can guarantee you this though, if everybody from this organization wants to mope around and talk about how the Cubs are Chicago's Team - there is no doubt in my mind that the prophesy will come true. Nothing breeds failure like failure.

Sell the team Reinsdorf.

SSN721
02-23-2004, 11:27 AM
I dont know if I agree with a player saying that in a newspaper interview. He may be right and we may all agree with him. But I think there is a big difference between us as fans stating that view and someone who is paid or one of the mouthpieces of the organization or an official source stating that view. Its just bad for public perception to say that and I totally agree the "woe is me" attitude looks terrible and is just the wrong approach for a player on the team to have.

Lip Man 1
02-23-2004, 11:49 AM
Funny.....things weren't that way when this ownership took over.
Hmmmmmm.....I wonder what could have happened to change that?

Lip

Lip Man 1
02-23-2004, 11:51 AM
SSN says: "I totally agree the "woe is me" attitude looks terrible

"Chicago has always been a Cubs town..."--Jerry Reinsdorf ESPN Radio 1000. June 2002.

What do you expect? Competing costs money and the Sox claim they don't have any.

Lip

WSox8404
02-23-2004, 12:03 PM
Honestly the Hawks may have more popularity right now. The average Blackhawks ticket is 50 dollars. The average Sox ticket is about 20. The Hawks average about 11,000 fans a game. The Sox averaged in the mid twenties. So 50 dollars to 20 is the same as 25,000 to 10,000. Although one may say that attendance at games is not the only factor in judging how much popularity a team has, it does show the outside world a lot. This doesn't bother me at all because fans will show up if they start winning.

I have always said that there are just as many Sox fans in the city as there are Cubs fans. The difference is the types of fans each team has. We all know the stereotypes everyone attributes to Cub fans. Yuppies, mid to upper class, typical "Northsiders." Naturally there will be more of these people going to games as opposed to Sox fans. Sox fans are said to be middle class, hard working people. If we don't put a winning team on the field we figure why should we give our hard earned money to JR for nothing in return. There is nothing wrong with this. It shows that we actually care about the winning aspects of baseball as opposed to Cub fans who enjoy the "world's largest outdoor bar" more than the actual game.

Hullett_Fan
02-23-2004, 12:07 PM
Chicago is 1st and foremost a Bears town...always. How the other teams fall is determined by how we'll they're playing.

Current Rank:
1. Bears
2. Cubs
3. Bulls (falling fast)
4. Sox
5. Hawks (still falling)
6. Wolves (deserve to be higher)
7. Fire (deserve to be higher)

2007:
1. Bears
2. Cubs
3. Sox
4. Fire
5. Wolves
6. Bulls
7. Hawks

P.S. How can anyone still follow the Bulls (IMO)??? I was a big fan during the Orlando Woolridge, Reggie Theus days into the Jordan dynasty but after 2 years post dynasty I gave up. Not necessarily because they stink, more because the attitude of players across the league has become terrible and the game is not technically played the way it was in the past.

ChiSox14305635
02-23-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by Hullett_Fan
Chicago is 1st and foremost a Bears town...always. How the other teams fall is determined by how we'll they're playing.

Current Rank:
1. Bears
2. Cubs
3. Bulls (falling fast)
4. Sox
5. Hawks (still falling)
6. Wolves (deserve to be higher)
7. Fire (deserve to be higher)

2007:
1. Bears
2. Cubs
3. Sox
4. Fire
5. Wolves
6. Bulls
7. Hawks

P.S. How can anyone still follow the Bulls (IMO)??? I was a big fan during the Orlando Woolridge, Reggie Theus days into the Jordan dynasty but after 2 years post dynasty I gave up. Not necessarily because they stink, more because the attitude of players across the league has become terrible and the game is not technically played the way it was in the past.


I think Chicago should be a Bears town, but right now, even with a new coaching regime and a promise by management to change things, it's definitely a Cubs town and probably has been for awhile. No team gets more bandwagon fans than those puds. To be a Sox fan means you've been through the few highs and many lows this club has experienced. And yet, every year we gear ourselves up for another run.

Most dedicated:

1. White Sox (86 years, and not blaming them on a goat or a stupid fan)

2. Blackhawks (No TV games, pathetic)

3. Bears (At least we can always say we had the sporting world in our hands in '85)

4. Bulls (MJ comes along once in awhile, but I also think alot of bandwagon fans came along during the early '90s)

5. Fire (2 championships, and no coverage. I don't follow soccer, but I do think that's wrong)

6. Wolves (See same analogy for Fire)

7. Cubs (The ultimate bandwagon team. They depend on people who go for the atmosphere and not the team. That usually means big $$$$$$ for the Tribune)

Feel free to disagree if you will.

vegyrex
02-23-2004, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by ChiSox14305635
[B] To be a Sox fan means you've been through the few highs and many lows this club has experienced. And yet, every year we gear ourselves up for another run.



One baseball almanac I bought back in '94 described White Sox history as being a roller coaster ride.