PDA

View Full Version : The Tribune strikes again


doogiec
04-07-2006, 07:30 AM
Check out this "objective" article about the Wrigley bleacher rebuild.

Note the Tribune again fails to mention that they own the Cubs or Wrigley Field in this "review".

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-0604070148apr07,1,121868.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed

RedHeadPaleHoser
04-07-2006, 07:46 AM
Painted "Wrigley Green"? They have their own goddamn paint now? Is it color tint or green paint that smells like urea??

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2006, 08:26 AM
Do you honestly think Blair Kamin would be allowed to pan Wrigley Field's renovatned bleachers, even if he really thinks they're bad? Here are some choice quotes:

Ivy is to be planted on the exterior walls, in effect turning Wrigley's outfield walls inside out, though it's even money certain out-of-control fans will rip it out for souvenirs.

No, Cub fans wouldn't do that, would they???

Still, passersby are sure to take advantage of this "knothole" [an open rectangle in the wall on Sheffield] on non-game days. It's like peering into Eden.

Eden? Eden??? In terms of biblical references, Wrigley Field is the golden calf.

Now if only the Cubs can be as good as their ballpark.

Ozzie will still call it a piece of [poop].

Does anyone recall what Kamin said about our ballpark after its renovations?

oeo
04-07-2006, 08:45 AM
Look at these pictures (http://www.mlb.com/chc/photogallery/year_2006/month_04/day_06/cf1387112.html)...the new bleachers definately stick out, they don't look like pieces of **** like the rest of the park does. Next time somebody tells me about Wrigley's "historic experience", I'm going to throw the "Budlight Bleachers" in their faces because they're newer than all of the Cell.

thepaulbowski
04-07-2006, 09:02 AM
From looking at the photos I can't tell, are the bleacher wood or aluminum?

itsnotrequired
04-07-2006, 09:06 AM
From looking at the photos I can't tell, are the bleacher wood or aluminum?

Aluminum.

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2006, 09:10 AM
Aluminum.

That ought to feel real good on hot summer days.

Steelrod
04-07-2006, 09:12 AM
Sun Times had similiar article and gave seat prices. Sorta fogot about the 200 seats around home plate. And BTW, seating capacity of the urinal is now 1,500 more that the cell!

kobo
04-07-2006, 09:12 AM
Check out this "objective" article about the Wrigley bleacher rebuild.

Note the Tribune again fails to mention that they own the Cubs or Wrigley Field in this "review".

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-0604070148apr07,1,121868.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed
I didn't know it was a requirement for the Tribune to include this information when writing an article about the team they own. Come on guys, there is always going to be a media bias when a company that owns of the newspapers in town also happens to own one of the baseball teams in town. If you don't like the Tribune or the coverage they give to the Cubs then don't read the paper, it's really that simple. I just think that all the bashing that goes on around here about the Tribune and their bias is way out of hand. It's not worth getting upset over!

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2006, 09:16 AM
Sun Times had similiar article and gave seat prices. Sorta fogot about the 200 seats around home plate. And BTW, seating capacity of the urinal is now 1,500 more that the cell!

That will change when we build that home run porch in right field.

Looking at the pictures, doesn't it look like the center field camera booth could obstruct some views of fans sitting in the upper bleachers under the scoreboard? The booth was elevated so that they could accommodate that center field restaurant, which looks like a carbon copy of what the recently demolished Busch Stadium had.

Dan Mega
04-07-2006, 09:23 AM
I didn't know it was a requirement for the Tribune to include this information when writing an article about the team they own. Come on guys, there is always going to be a media bias when a company that owns of the newspapers in town also happens to own one of the baseball teams in town. If you don't like the Tribune or the coverage they give to the Cubs then don't read the paper, it's really that simple. I just think that all the bashing that goes on around here about the Tribune and their bias is way out of hand. It's not worth getting upset over!

I wouldn't have a problem with it if the Tribune would stop claiming to treat both teams fairly and give the same amount of good/bad coverage to each. They claim not to be biased, but when the Sox made the playoffs, the Tribune's first article was about someone smoking pot 3 blocks away from the stadium.

Thats the kind of crap I have a problem with. If the Tribune would come out and say "yeah, we're biased towards the Cubs", I don't think people here would care as much.

TomBradley72
04-07-2006, 09:25 AM
This whole ariticle reads like an "Onion" parody:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-0604070148apr07,1,121868.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed


"preciousness of its countless retro ballpark imitators"
"Wrigley's matchless character"
"...in keeping with Wrigley's identity as a kind of campus, or sacred garden, where the only schedule that really matters is the nine innings of baseball."
"It's like peering into Eden."
"...the rooftops are an essential part of its zany urban feel, a reminder that Wrigley's sense of excitement is not contained within the ballpark but spills beyond it."
"It improves on Wrigley as a work of architecture, as part of the city and as a place of joy, where time stops and life promises (if only for nine fleeting innings) to begin anew."
You can almost smell the history.

Cuck the Fubs
04-07-2006, 09:28 AM
Looking at the pictures, doesn't it look like the center field camera booth could obstruct some views of fans sitting in the upper bleachers under the scoreboard?

Wait a minute here.....what ever gave you the idea any of those lemmings in the bleachers are even watching the game?!?!?:D:

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2006, 09:29 AM
Wait a minute here.....what ever gave you the idea any of those lemmings in the bleachers are even watching the game?!?!?:D:

You're right. My bad.

kobo
04-07-2006, 09:36 AM
I wouldn't have a problem with it if the Tribune would stop claiming to treat both teams fairly and give the same amount of good/bad coverage to each. They claim not to be biased, but when the Sox made the playoffs, the Tribune's first article was about someone smoking pot 3 blocks away from the stadium.

Thats the kind of crap I have a problem with. If the Tribune would come out and say "yeah, we're biased towards the Cubs", I don't think people here would care as much.
Oh, I agree, but we all know that no matter what the Tribune says there is always going to be a bias. That's why I stopped reading not only the Tribune, but all of the Chicago papers.

And I heard that there will be some obstructed views now at Wrigley. Not sure where exactly, but we know it's not going to keep people from going to the game.

Hangar18
04-07-2006, 09:38 AM
I didn't know it was a requirement for the Tribune to include this information when writing an article about the team they own. Come on guys, there is always going to be a media bias when a company that owns of the newspapers in town also happens to own one of the baseball teams in town. If you don't like the Tribune or the coverage they give to the Cubs then don't read the paper, it's really that simple. I just think that all the bashing that goes on around here about the Tribune and their bias is way out of hand. It's not worth getting upset over!


but its this nonsense, this non-truth that has perpetuated all of the BS regarding that team, their stadium, their "experience". When buses full of old ladies and little leaguers from Iowa, japanese businessman all ask
wheres wrigley, im told its like the garden of eden, then you know why.
Tribune=Propoganda

Hangar18
04-07-2006, 09:40 AM
"...........and thus more Revenue to lure better players"

Is the tribune still rationalizing?

Hangar18
04-07-2006, 09:45 AM
And ................. isnt this the FIRST TIME IN RECORDED HISTORY (or at least in the last 2 decades) that someone acknowledged what a dump wrigley really is? "The once dumpy gate into the bleachers now sports a handsome green cast-iron fence instead of doors that resemble jail cell bars"
Havent we been saying this for years and years here?

Viva Medias B's
04-07-2006, 09:47 AM
There is Henry firing on all cylinders. This has to be his least favorite day of the year, unless the Cardinals kick the Cubs' arses!

Hangar18
04-07-2006, 09:49 AM
What a sickening article. This is less story about expansion and more paid advertising. This folks, is what ive been talking about. This perverse love affair between media and the story its supposed to objectively cover. who says theres no bias?

champagne030
04-07-2006, 09:54 AM
Check out this "objective" article about the Wrigley bleacher rebuild.

Note the Tribune again fails to mention that they own the Cubs or Wrigley Field in this "review".

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-0604070148apr07,1,121868.story?coll=chi-sportsnew-hed

I'm shocked that the Tribune architecture critic said that the Tribune Stadium bleacher expansion did not take away from the charm.

oeo
04-07-2006, 10:06 AM
There is Henry firing on all cylinders. This has to be his least favorite day of the year, unless the Cardinals kick the Cubs' arses!

No way, the Cubs put up SIXTEEN runs against the Reds just four days ago...these guys are the real deal. No Cardinals are going to stand in their way now.

Fenway
04-07-2006, 10:13 AM
In Boston fans of the Red Sox mutter about the massive rebuild on the roof, the biggest change in the park since 1934

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060405&content_id=1385226&vkey=news_bos&fext=.jsp&c_id=bos


Wrigley and Fenway will be around after we all gone, they both have become baseball theme parks

Flight #24
04-07-2006, 10:20 AM
Anyone catch the back page of Sports future look at Wrigley? Another piece of fluff, but some very interesting subtle tidbits:

- The Jumbotron in the pic says "2xx6 World Series". The X's could be 0s, but in the article it says the Jumbotron wouldn't go in until 2012. So.......is the Trib saying the Cubs will be in the Series in 2086?

- The pic is of a Cubs player watching an HR ball bounce off of the jumbotron. Which is pretty accurate given the state of their pitching staff

- The last bit in the article mentions "Commissioner Ozzie Guillen", which in itself seems nice......but he apparently orders the removal of Steroid *s from the record books...:angry:

Henry, surprised you didn't pick up on all that - you're slowing down my friend!

russ99
04-07-2006, 10:31 AM
Anyone catch the back page of Sports future look at Wrigley? Another piece of fluff, but some very interesting subtle tidbits:

- The Jumbotron in the pic says "2xx6 World Series". The X's could be 0s, but in the article it says the Jumbotron wouldn't go in until 2012. So.......is the Trib saying the Cubs will be in the Series in 2086?


Um... in the Vine Line (I mean Red Eye) the 00s are very clear in the "Chicago Cubs 2006 World Series Champions" :angry: to which I had to add in sharpie, "When monkeys fly out of my butt"

GoSox2K3
04-07-2006, 10:31 AM
The only evidence of creeping social segmentation is in the Batter's Eye Lounge, a new, glassed-in area for private parties in the middle of the center-field stands. It's essentially a giant skybox, to be enjoyed by the privileged few and therefore out of place amid the bleachers' democratic atmosphere.

This guy conveniently fails to mention that bleacher tickets start at $40 and go as high as $60! ....and that's before the Cubune scalps them at higher prices. Typical pro-Cubs lies to make it out like the bleachers are a working-class paradise.

The other thing they fail to criticize is that those crappy seats still have no backs to them. I'm sorry, but sitting in seats like that when you are crammed in with a bunch of drunken fools on a hot day just SUCKS!

The bleacher seats at the Cell are 1000 times better because of those seat backs. I hate how the Tribune and Cub fans get to excuse away every thing that sucks about Wrigley by just wrapping that "it's the Wrigley experience" blanket around it.

Sorry, $40 to sit on a general admission bench and be crammed in with a bunch of slobs in front of you sitting far back on their seat and the dopes in back of you jamming their knees in your back on a 90 degree day is not a good baseball experience.

SOXPHILE
04-07-2006, 10:34 AM
Today is just a sickening, overabundance of Cub crap in the media, especially from the Big Blue Monster TribCo. The entire back page of the sports section by one Mr. Paul Sullivan, a sugary, satirical (or maybe not) look at what the future holds for the Bud Lite Bleachers, has got to be one of the stupidest, worst written articles to appear in that paper. It draws comparisons to a 5th grade school newspaper article. WGN morning news is even worse. They are practically peeing all over themselves about today. They did have o.k. coverage of Tuesdays home opener for the real Chicago team, but they easily have 2-3 times more hype, coverage & fluff stories for today. They even sunk so low as to have that Anna Belaval (sp ?), the gal' about town, to do a report from Red Vines, (full of drunk, unemployeds at 7 a.m.) and ask a certain homeless, urine stained buffoon, (who's name we shall not mention), what his thoughts were on today's game, and the season were. Shockingly, he picked the Cubs to win today, and in fact win it all, because, again, now it was "their turn". Seeing this, and all other the drunken idiots on t.v. just reminds me to never underestimate the stupidity of the stupid, and just how stupid they can be.:angry:

russ99
04-07-2006, 10:37 AM
In the Cubs picture gallery they quote "Wrigley Field green". Since when do the Cubs now own the paint color that is used in almost all ballparks?!?

:angry:

CaptainBallz
04-07-2006, 10:53 AM
....Garden of Pee-den, maybe....





*sigh* Ok, I'm done now.....

roylestillman
04-07-2006, 10:58 AM
No, he said the knothole is for peeing into Eden.

Kamin is usually a good critic, but really the inside of this redo really looks terrible. The regular seats in right throw it all out of balance and the blockiness of the regular bleachers take away from the old slope. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for the cutesy ol' ballfield.

tebman
04-07-2006, 11:10 AM
Kamin is usually a good critic, but really the inside of this redo really looks terrible. The regular seats in right throw it all out of balance and the blockiness of the regular bleachers take away from the old slope. Maybe this is the beginning of the end for the cutesy ol' ballfield.
Kamin might be a good critic, but we don't know that because he's the only architecture critic. The Sun-Times used to have a guy (Lee Bey?) who wrote on architecture, and Chicago magazine and The Reader have occasional pieces about architecture, but in a bit of luck for The Tribune Company (officious throat-clearing), the only full time architecture writer works for them.

See, that's the problem with the Tribune owning the Cubs. Maybe Kamin knows what he's talking about, but we'll never know because of the taint of conflict of interest. It's significant to me that nowhere in there is it mentioned that he and the Cubs work for the same company.

"Get a grip," wrote Don Wycliff, when someone else asked about Tribune/Cubs conflicts of interest. That pretty well sums up their attitude.

BainesHOF
04-07-2006, 11:36 AM
Blair Kamin won a Pulitzer Prize. He's normally a great writer, but this story is an embarrassment. He should be ashamed of himself.

DumpJerry
04-07-2006, 11:42 AM
Well, if there is a Navy flyby like ours last weekend, the "old" part of The Urinal will collapse from the shock and awe leaving only The Bud Lite Bleachers standing.

The Cubune will immediately announce the acquisition of parking at Clark and Addison for those of you who are sitting in The Bud Lite Bleachers.

People will fill up The Bud Lite Bleachers on game days to get get drunk, take off their shirts and cheer for a game that is not taking place because what was once Home Plate is now Row F of the parking lot.

Nobody will notice the difference.

tebman
04-07-2006, 12:02 PM
Blair Kamin won a Pulitzer Prize. He's normally a great writer, but this story is an embarrassment. He should be ashamed of himself.
Exactly -- he's the winner of a Pulitzer Prize, and he doesn't mention the fiduciary interest he shares with the Cubs as he writes Hallmark-card poetry about some new concrete?

George Knue spent a lot of his spleen on this board last year telling us that the newspaper and the corporation have some kind of impervious force field between them that allows the newspaper to remain a vessel of Pure Truth. If that's true, then where's the disclaimer in Kamin's cloying article? Rick Morrissey wrote a week or so ago about how tired he is of hearing about the Tribune's relationship to the Cubs. Did he mean it? Who the hell knows, because the paper doesn't seem to care when these questions come up.

dis·in·gen·u·ous
Pronunciation: "di-sen-'jen-yoo-wus
Function: adjective
: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness

Chip Z'nuff
04-07-2006, 12:24 PM
"...........and thus more Revenue to lure better players"

Is the tribune still rationalizing?

If being in the top 5 for attendance in the MLB for the past 10 years has not built enough revenue to lure better players, then I am sure adding 1500 bleacher seats will.

TheOldRoman
04-07-2006, 12:25 PM
"...........and thus more Revenue to lure better players"

Is the tribune still rationalizing?
C'mon, Hangar. The Cubs signed HENRY BLANCO! As a backup!

Chip Z'nuff
04-07-2006, 01:14 PM
Just read Slezak's column on the new bleachers
http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-wrigg07.html

"Cubs plan to install a TV in [obstucted view] section to help people see the game."

Where have I seen this before?

Lip Man 1
04-07-2006, 01:19 PM
Gang:

:rolleyes:

It's the Cubs remember......who cares.

Lip

TomBradley72
04-07-2006, 01:22 PM
Just read Slezak's column on the new bleachers
http://www.suntimes.com/output/cubs/cst-spt-wrigg07.html

"Cubs plan to install a TV in [obstucted view] section to help people see the game."

Where have I seen this before?


What could be better than paying $60 to sit in the right field corner and watch the game on TV?

What a deal! And it's so consistent with the great traditional feel of Chewing Gum Field and the Bud Light Bleachers!

peeonwrigley
04-07-2006, 01:33 PM
I laughed out loud a few times when reading this article. Although the "knothole" has been talked about ad nauseum on this website, I can't get over this paragraph.


Best of all, a rectangular opening in the brick walls along Sheffield lets passersby look into Wrigley's emerald greensward, though on game days their view is likely to be blocked by fans inside the ballpark and a chain-link outfield fence outfitted with a mesh screen. Still, passersby are sure to take advantage of this "knothole" on non-game days. It's like peering into Eden.

This is the best part of the expansion? Well, that sums it up.

Hitmen77
04-07-2006, 02:26 PM
Hey, considering today is Cubs opening day, I was surprised to see alot more people wearing Sox stuff vs. Cubs stuff as I walked through the loop to work today.

Yes, they'll still have all the lemmings selling out their dump, but I wonder of the Tribune is worried that the momentum is shifting in this town.

Railsplitter
04-07-2006, 02:34 PM
Yes, they'll still have all the lemmings selling out their dump, but I wonder of the Tribune is worried that the momentum is shifting in this town.

The trib had the foresight to by the Cubs right before the Cable TV boom. The Urinal's attendence figures are padded by the Cable Carpetbaggers who come as tourists.

Max Power
04-07-2006, 03:38 PM
I wonder if I can get the author to do my obituary someday. Once he's done "reviewing" my life I'll seem like a God among men.

Seriously, this article was so over the top in fawning over the new bleachers that I can't believe it could be taken seriously. It's unfortunate that I wasted two minutes skimming it.

miker
04-07-2006, 04:02 PM
Well, if there is a Navy flyby like ours last weekend, the "old" part of The Urinal will collapse from the shock and awe leaving only The Bud Lite Bleachers standing.
Should this be in deep pink?

maurice
04-07-2006, 04:45 PM
Paul Sullivan's vision of the future:
Wrigley Field 2026: Welcome to Wooville (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-060406cubswrigley,1,6252670.story?coll=cs-home-headlines)
:rolleyes:

Edit: This is a featured story in the main "news" section of the Trib's website right now.

santo=dorf
04-07-2006, 05:41 PM
Aluminum.
So does that mean they're ripping off the Sox? Cub fans blabbing about the Sox having green seats, I'm looking at you. :rolleyes:

Hitmen77
04-07-2006, 08:01 PM
So does that mean they're ripping off the Sox? Cub fans blabbing about the Sox having green seats, I'm looking at you. :rolleyes:

Hmmm....let's see...wide concourse around the perimeter of the outfield section, "batter's eye" fan de...er..luxury suite, aluminum seats.....

Yep, sounds like the Comiskification of the Urinal.

PaleHoseGeorge
04-07-2006, 08:27 PM
Blair Kamin won a Pulitzer Prize. He's normally a great writer, but this story is an embarrassment. He should be ashamed of himself.

My thoughts exactly. I'm embarrassed for him.
:anon:

Listen to this drivel. I swear to God he must have reached orgasm at least three times writing this bull****...

It's ridiculous. To understand just how ridiculous, simply substitute the word "phallus" for "Wrigley" throughout the article. Then it makes perfect sense.
:o:

a model of elegant evolution
Wrigley's matchless character
Wrigley's identity as a kind of campus, or sacred garden
great sensitivity
A nice feel
handsome
hand-crafted detail that gives Wrigley its extraordinary domestic scale
Wrigley's emerald greensward
etcetera... etcetera...

Blair Kamin... what a maroon!

:roflmao:

RealMenWearBlack
04-07-2006, 09:19 PM
I went to the bleachers at Wrigley Field last year for the first time and didn't really see why they were such a big deal, but they did an amazing job on the new bleachers. I'm not Tribune-registered so I can't read it, but I'm sure that they made many exaggerations.

IowaSox1971
04-09-2006, 02:58 AM
What bothers me about Kamin's article is that he really, really blasted the architecture for the Soldier Field renovation several years ago, and he wrote several articles ripping the city and the Bears for it. He went way overboard in his criticism back then. But now that the Cubs are doing something, it's the best renovation ever, etc., etc.

There seem to be a lot of questionable things about these new bleachers, such as:

1. The selling-out aspect of the naming rights and how this has over-commercialized the renovation.

2. The soaring prices of the bleacher tickets.

3. The increasing number of obstructed views.

4. The shrinking of the sidewalks.

If the White Sox, Bears, Bulls or Blackhawks had done this type of renovation, I am sure Kamin's review of the work would have been far more critical.

Thome's Homey
04-09-2006, 10:12 AM
Don't you just love the "Bleacher Box Seats" that happen to be...Ummmm...Box seats? How exactly do they get a "bleacher" qualification?

Foulke You
04-10-2006, 02:45 AM
Anyone remember Kamin was the same critic who gave the US Cellular Field renovations a more fair and balanced review than the Wrigley one. While he did praise the aesthetic improvement to the park, especially the windscreens, he also had these negatives to say:

"They could not make the ugly sea of parking lots around the stadium vanish."

"They couldn't shift the orientation of the stadium, which maddeningly faces southeast (away from the downtown skyline)"

"That's some architectural time machine they have built at U.S. Cellular Field: As time moves forward, the stadium moves backward. The White Sox were behind their curve when they built their sterile mallpark in 1991, a year before Oriole Park at Camden Yards in Baltimore led the wave of retro ballparks."

What?? No Garden of Eden references?