PDA

View Full Version : Why the Cubs will not win until the fans stop showing


Whitesox029
11-05-2005, 10:59 PM
I know this is a stupid topic of discussion because I shouldn't care, but as a casual observer, I don't think the Cubs are ever going to win anything until their fans stop coming out to support a 4th place team, unless they get lucky. From a business standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense for Tribune Co., or any other owner, for that matter, to shell out extra $$ to field a winning team when the park sells out in March anyway. They aren't going to make extra profit from a winning team because they already max out on profit from a losing team. Am I right or is my logic flawed?

The Dude
11-05-2005, 11:10 PM
I know this is a stupid topic of discussion because I shouldn't care, but as a casual observer, I don't think the Cubs are ever going to win anything until their fans stop coming out to support a 4th place team, unless they get lucky. From a business standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense for Tribune Co., or any other owner, for that matter, to shell out extra $$ to field a winning team when the park sells out in March anyway. They aren't going to make extra profit from a winning team because they already max out on profit from a losing team. Am I right or is my logic flawed?

I'm sorry man but.....
:whocares

RealMenWearBlack
11-05-2005, 11:18 PM
The Cubs have a relatively high payroll, but they should be spending more based on Cub's attendance.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=chc

veeter
11-05-2005, 11:30 PM
I know we shouldn't care, but I do. I'm a keen observer of the cubs mainly because I love to see them and their fans suffer. I hear stuff from cub fan friends like, "we under achieved" and I say, "no you achieved". The fans are dilusional. But make no mistake, the Trib. co. is not. They're making gobs of money. As long as that formula is working, the cubs will not win.

Banix12
11-05-2005, 11:42 PM
eh, doesn't have a lot to do with the fans actually going to the game in my opinion. They have all the means in the world to actually win a championship, high payroll, decent farm system, and no matter how much I think he is overrated Dusty Baker is a manager with a winning track record.

I see the cubs right now right around where the white sox were in 2003. A team with a lot of promise that seems to be spinning i's wheels. Their 2003 was like the white sox 2000 team, a team that did well but seriously outperformed their actual abilities. You get stuck thinking the team is on the verge of the big time but in reality something needs to change because you were really nowhere near as good as you thought.

Hendry has just put together some really lousy teams the last couple of years. He needs to either start trading off some of his minor league prospects or start playing them. Last count I think Hendry has traded for like 3 minor league second basemen in the last couple years and a couple of them are in the high minors, blocked by the Free Agents they acquire.

SoxSpeed22
11-05-2005, 11:47 PM
Unless they have some freak-makeover go right, like with us, they might pass the century mark.
And for me responding to this, I might have to add this in order to describe this whole thread.
http://img387.imageshack.us/img387/84/whatyousay5wd.gif

It's Time
11-05-2005, 11:53 PM
eh, doesn't have a lot to do with the fans actually going to the game in my opinion. They have all the means in the world to actually win a championship, high payroll, decent farm system, and no matter how much I think he is overrated Dusty Baker is a manager with a winning track record.

I see the cubs right now right around where the white sox were in 2003. A team with a lot of promise that seems to be spinning i's wheels. Their 2003 was like the white sox 2000 team, a team that did well but seriously outperformed their actual abilities. You get stuck thinking the team is on the verge of the big time but in reality something needs to change because you were really nowhere near as good as you thought.

Hendry has just put together some really lousy teams the last couple of years. He needs to either start trading off some of his minor league prospects or start playing them. Last count I think Hendry has traded for like 3 minor league second basemen in the last couple years and a couple of them are in the high minors, blocked by the Free Agents they acquire.


The worse the cubs are, the better it is for White Sox fans. Mark it down, if they ever win a ****ing ws, the 2005 White Sox become a distant memory in Chicago. To those of you who don't care, just remember what it was like when we were on equal ground in this town as far as mediocrity.

If they win a ****ing title, magnify the disrespect towards the White Sox times 100.

Dem da facts and it's up to the White Sox to pile up championships to make sure they can always one up the cubs.

Those of you that live in this city know what I'm saying. Those of you that do not live here, you have no idea.

LuvSox
11-05-2005, 11:59 PM
Those of you that live in this city know what I'm saying. Those of you that do not live here, you have no idea.

Yeah, Cubs fans only live in Chicago

dakuda
11-06-2005, 12:14 AM
Yeah, Cubs fans only live in Chicago

Same for Sox fans. You MUST live on the southside to be a lifelong White Sox fan.....

Ol' No. 2
11-06-2005, 12:22 AM
I agree with the basic premise, but not for the same reasons. The Cubs are still spending plenty of money, and as KW has shown, you don't need a huge payroll to build a winning team. The Cubs' problem is the KIND of team they put together. It's put together to try to appease and draw fans to the game. If they want to put together a winning team, the first thing they need to do is dump Kerry Wood, but they'll never do it because of the legions of Kerry Wood fans that fill the place to see him pitch. These are the same legions that came to see Sosa. Garciaparra was another disaster, signed more for star value than any actual baseball value. As long as their roster decisions are based on star attraction they'll neve build a winning team.

Banix12
11-06-2005, 02:05 AM
I agree with the basic premise, but not for the same reasons. The Cubs are still spending plenty of money, and as KW has shown, you don't need a huge payroll to build a winning team. The Cubs' problem is the KIND of team they put together. It's put together to try to appease and draw fans to the game. If they want to put together a winning team, the first thing they need to do is dump Kerry Wood, but they'll never do it because of the legions of Kerry Wood fans that fill the place to see him pitch. These are the same legions that came to see Sosa. Garciaparra was another disaster, signed more for star value than any actual baseball value. As long as their roster decisions are based on star attraction they'll neve build a winning team.

I can agree with this, there does seem to be far more emphasis placed on flash over substance. Most of their moves over the last few years certainly have been to appease the fan-base, not so much build a winning team.

-Running Sosa out of town, fan base seemed to want it though tribune did fuel that fire
-Signing Greg Maddux for his farewell tour, definitely overpaid for a now average starter.
-Running manager after manager out of town (mostly the fault of the GM, those teams had zero talent. Though Bruce Kimm did blow.) and finally landing dusty baker.
-Bringing in Garciaparra (who my cubs fan grandfather absolutely cannot stand, he wants to jump through the TV and staple his batting gloves to his hands to make him stop that stupid pre-AB ritual), and the Mia Hamm good vibes experience was definitely one for the fans, though they really didn't give up much
-Todd Hundley was also orginally brought in because the fans wanted Randy's kid.

Though they haven't made all their moves it seems for fan base reasons. I certainly know a lot of cubs fans irritated that the cubs went cheap and didn't pick up Alou's option. Also going cheap on the bullpen the last two years has been a sore subject. Wellemeyer, Mitre?

My cubs fan buddy wants Wood in the bullpen, where he can just let it fly and hit 100 on the radar gun. 10 million dollar a year closer though.

tebman
11-06-2005, 12:16 PM
After the Sox' season, I have to take a deep breath to put aside my distaste for the Cub universe to think about this. I think their current non-championship problem is a lack of baseball focus. The reason the Sox did what they did this year is because KW and Ozzie had a tight focus on how to win. By now we all know the stories about KW's trades, his long meetings and phone calls with scouts and players, Ozzie's insistence on pitching and defense, and their scrutiny of players' personalities. Obviously it worked.

The Cubs, on the other hand, have been building an "experience" of baseball. Sosa is Exhibit A, which demonstrates that kind of thinking. Same with Wood and Prior, who have been given icon status even though they're both injury prone. It's about building an experience and not a championship. The marketing of the ballpark that overshadows the team is obvious to everyone and makes it clear that their focus isn't on winning ballgames, but in creating an experience they can sell.

Bill Veeck said in an interview once that he was concerned about television's influence on baseball. He said that TV already dictates the scheduling of games, as well as the pacing of games (obvious this year with Fox's 3-1/2 minute commercial breaks). He said the next logical step was dictating who plays in the games, based on their looks, sex appeal and marketability. I think a form of that is what's keeping the Cubs from having a winning team -- they're more about selling an experience than getting a championship, and as long as the parent company is making money, that's enough.

VenturaSoxFan23
11-06-2005, 12:21 PM
Bill Veeck said in an interview once that he was concerned about television's influence on baseball. He said that TV already dictates the scheduling of games, as well as the pacing of games (obvious this year with Fox's 3-1/2 minute commercial breaks).

Not to divert from the original topic, but Rooney & Farmer were getting miffed at constantly having to wait for TV to get back from commercial breaks.

"And we're in the top of the...no, wait. Game's on hold."
"We're waiting for TV to come back from commercial."

hose
11-06-2005, 12:33 PM
Not to shoot holes in your statement but the Cubs weren't winning when their fans didn't show up.

Either way the Cubs lose.

MadetoOrta
11-06-2005, 01:01 PM
Burls is right. You can take the seats at the urinal, have them face away from the field and it would still sell out. Until the neighborhood became gentrified in the early-mid '80s, cubune purchase and night games, they were lucky to hit 10,000 on a weekday. I see the cubune pulling out all stops to win NEXT YEAR. This post-season exposed the cubune for what it is. The national media saw first hand how there are literally millions of Sox fans in the Chicagoland area. Every time the final out is re-played and [although he's a tool] Joe Buck says "second team in the second city no more" the cubune brass has a heart attack. :tongue:

eastchicagosoxfan
11-06-2005, 02:20 PM
It'll be interesting to see how the Trib, and the Cubs, handle another losing season. They have very little going for them next year. One really good pitcher, when he's healthy, a head case, an aging vet, and two question marks. The bullpen is shoddy, and the outfield is unsettled. KW had a plan going into the offseason last year, I doubt the Cubs have one. They really believe they are a player or two away from 90+ wins. The infield is set, but is weak defensively, and Derek Lee probably had a career year, putting up Frank Thomas-like numbers. They will sell-out, but but how will they handle the empty seats from no shows, and the sudden loss of interest? I don't see Dusty Baker piloting a team going through a rebuilding process. Another long year at Wrigley, but that's why it's important to be lovable losers.

DumpJerry
11-06-2005, 02:37 PM
I fully agree with the original premise of this thread. I've been saying for a long time now that the Cubs are the reason why there should not be ownership of a sports team by a publicly held corporation. The reason is quite simple.

The people who make the ultimate decisions in a publicly held corporation are the ones who will be sued by the shareholders or SEC if they seem to fritter away the corporatie funds (profits/dividends). With the current payroll (expense), the Cubs sell out all games (maximize revenues). If the Cubs increase the payroll without increasing revenues (difficult to do when already maxed out), the shareholders might see a decrease in their return on the investment. The gamble for the decisionmakers is that an increase in payroll might result in a corresponding increase in revenues (playoff tickets sold which would otherwise not have been sold). Since an increase in the payroll will not guarantee a postseason, it could be considered too risky to contemplate. Even if the increased payroll results in a post season for the Cubs, elimination in NLDS (50% possibility) could result in a financial loss. A World Series win with 4 home dates (12.5% possibility if the post season is achieved) is the best case scenario.

I'm not sure how revenue-sharing effects this model, however.

Private ownership, like what most pro sports teams have, does not hamper the decisionmakers since the risk is assumed by the decisionmakers and not the public. Losses are borne by the consortium which owns the team. Unlike publicly owned corporations, a private consortium is not worried about the SEC.

Cub fans need to stop buying tickets to force the Blue Corp's. hand in increasing payroll to bring in more revenues or sell the team to a private consortium.

I am willing to put together a consortium to buy the Cubs. I hear New Delhi, India is looking for a MLB team....

cheeses_h_rice
11-06-2005, 03:04 PM
I don't quite buy the initial premise here.

The Cubs have come close to the World Series twice in the last 25 years, 1984 and 2003. Both times, they blew seemingly insurmountable leads (2-0 on the Padres in '84, and 3-1 on the Marlins in '03). I seriously think if they weren't the Cubs, with all that weight of losing history on their side, they would have at least made the World Series both of those years.

In comparison, the '05 White Sox made the weight of history seem like a feather, for which I am eternally grateful. But at the same time, I think what the Sox did this year will actually help the Cubs make the World Series and win it one of these years. It won't be the "city of Chicago" waiting for a World Series win, it will just be one segment of fans. It won't seem as important or momentous, because it won't be; it'll have already been done, by the White Sox. The White Sox setting the example that it can be done, and the fact that they already did it, will diminish the ultimate importance of any Cubs World Series appearance and/or title.

Thus, the pressure will be less on any future Cubs team, so I think as long as they can continue to pack 3,000,000 bodies in that park every year, the odds are in their favor that they will indeed win a title one of these years. They already have the main thing needed, going based on empirical evidence: money to support a large payroll. When you consider the Sox really didn't have a large payroll, AND they had the weight of history on their shoulders, it makes their 2005 accomplishments seem all the more incredible.

NWSox
11-06-2005, 03:51 PM
I have long told my Cub fan friends that they should be insulted by the way the Cubune Co. treats them. The payroll should be higher and the commitment to winning should be stronger. A franchise like the Red Sox, which has many similarities to the Cubs, has made a commitment to being in the playoffs every year. The Cubs still hope for lightning to strike like a small market team. If you're a Cub fan, you should be pissed.

Hawk Harrelson
11-06-2005, 04:02 PM
I know this is a stupid topic of discussion because I shouldn't care, but as a casual observer, I don't think the Cubs are ever going to win anything until their fans stop coming out to support a 4th place team, unless they get lucky. From a business standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense for Tribune Co., or any other owner, for that matter, to shell out extra $$ to field a winning team when the park sells out in March anyway. They aren't going to make extra profit from a winning team because they already max out on profit from a losing team. Am I right or is my logic flawed?

This is so true. Although the Cubs still do have a big payroll (2nd to the Mets in the NL I believe.) I think if they really spent the money they would have more of a Red Sox level payroll, but as long as the sheep keep herding into Wrigley why spend the money? The cubs are a great business.

SOXSINCE'70
11-06-2005, 05:20 PM
The sCrUBS will not win because:

A.The Cub-Une doesn't care.3 milllion lemmings would
fill The Urinal to watch 9 beanie babies take the field.

B.The lemmings are too busy plotting what bar to
go to after the game.

C. THEY WON'T GET OFF THEIR DAMN CELL PHONES!!

Banix12
11-06-2005, 05:26 PM
This is so true. Although the Cubs still do have a big payroll (2nd to the Mets in the NL I believe.) I think if they really spent the money they would have more of a Red Sox level payroll, but as long as the sheep keep herding into Wrigley why spend the money? The cubs are a great business.

It's not the amount of the money, it's how they spend it. They probably could add a bit to the payroll but frankly they spend enough now to field a winning team.

Next year they will go into the season with I think around $19 million dollars, roughly 1/5 of their payroll, tied up in Maddux and Wood. That's just poor management.

Sly
11-06-2005, 05:32 PM
Bill Veeck said in an interview once that he was concerned about television's influence on baseball. He said that TV already dictates the scheduling of games, as well as the pacing of games (obvious this year with Fox's 3-1/2 minute commercial breaks). He said the next logical step was dictating who plays in the games, based on their looks, sex appeal and marketability. I think a form of that is what's keeping the Cubs from having a winning team -- they're more about selling an experience than getting a championship, and as long as the parent company is making money, that's enough.

That's funny you mention the "looks" department. Several of my girlfriends (who are usually Cubs fans) are absolutely smitten with Scotty Pods, Aaron Rowand, Joe Crede and Jon Garland ... Not that it matters, but it'll be interesting if those girls "convert" to being "Sox fans."

antitwins13
11-06-2005, 08:50 PM
I know this is a stupid topic of discussion because I shouldn't care, but as a casual observer, I don't think the Cubs are ever going to win anything until their fans stop coming out to support a 4th place team, unless they get lucky. From a business standpoint, it makes absolutely no sense for Tribune Co., or any other owner, for that matter, to shell out extra $$ to field a winning team when the park sells out in March anyway. They aren't going to make extra profit from a winning team because they already max out on profit from a losing team. Am I right or is my logic flawed?


It's not the amount of money they spend it's who they spend their money on (i.e. Corey Patterson, Wood and Prior aka the sim game bros, Jeremy Burnitz, Nomar Garciapara).