PDA

View Full Version : All eyes on the Cubs


Fenway
02-11-2007, 02:16 PM
Looking at the Sunday baseball notes here in the Northeast it appears that outside of Barry Bonds the Cubs are going to be the most watched team in spring training

from Nick Carfardo in the Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2007/02/11/taking_a_national_perspective/)

Spring training can be dull and mundane, but in Mesa, Ariz., watching the new and improved Chicago Cubs should provide plenty of entertainment value.

"After the terrible year we had last season, we felt we owed it to the 3 million fans who walked through our turnstiles to do something this offseason so they don't have to go through that again," said Cubs general manager Jim Hendry last week. "I'm just very anxious to see what it's going to look like when all the parts are together."

from Bill Madden in the New York Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/496445p-418395c.html)
In terms of wild offseason spending, no team came close to the Cubs. GM Jim Hendry spent more than $288 million of the Tribune Company's cash, not counting the $10.5 million on Lou Piniella as his manager. Now, both Hendry's job and Piniella's reputation are on the line.

Optipessimism
02-11-2007, 02:40 PM
Poor Lou. He left a team with a solid young nucleus but no willingness to spend for another team that trades away solid young players and spends money on garbage.

The Cubs will finish much better than they did last year in the NL Central and unfortunately have a decent shot to win it. But that is in no way praise for the Cubs because that entire division is still going to be the laughing stock of baseball. I'm willing to bet that between AZ/San Diego/LA/Florida/Philly/NY, at least one of those teams will finish with a better record than the NL Central champ yet still miss the playoffs.

RedHeadPaleHoser
02-11-2007, 04:16 PM
I think it's GREAT!!!

Let the entire country focus on the Cubs and their wonderful offseason spending - they spent $100 for every body that spun through their turnstyles....according to Hendry - they owed it to the fans to spend the money.

Notice, he left the word "wisely" out of his sentence.

IndianWhiteSox
02-11-2007, 04:20 PM
Aren't they always on the Cubs until the post-season?

Cuck the Fubs
02-11-2007, 06:01 PM
When the eyes of the world are affixed to the lovable losers is often when they seem to tank the worst.

They cannot be worse than a 96 loss team again, and they have an honest chance to win the sorry NL Central.

Don't look for much beyond that though

cheeses_h_rice
02-11-2007, 06:09 PM
http://i.cnn.net/si/2004/magazine/03/29/main/cover_0405.jpg

'Nuf said.

bryPt
02-11-2007, 09:38 PM
On the northside, all cameras are pointed

On the southside, crickets are heard

Come October, vice versa.

In Kenny we trust.

RedHeadPaleHoser
02-11-2007, 10:04 PM
Well put Bry.

Dan Mega
02-11-2007, 10:06 PM
Let the world watch them. I'm watching the White Sox.

Cuck the Fubs
02-11-2007, 10:13 PM
http://i.cnn.net/si/2004/magazine/03/29/main/cover_0405.jpg

'Nuf said.

Expect to see something very much the same on a cover near you:redneck

ChiSoxGirl
02-11-2007, 10:54 PM
On the northside, all cameras are pointed

On the southside, crickets are heard

Come October, vice versa.

In Kenny we trust.

:yup: Post of the Week, in my opinion! :thumbsup:

Let all the love be directed to them; just puts the chip back on our shoulder even more than it already is and lets us fly under the radar. Seem familiar?

areilly
02-11-2007, 11:19 PM
I think it's GREAT!!!

Let the entire country focus on the Cubs and their wonderful offseason spending - they spent $100 for every body that spun through their turnstyles....according to Hendry - they owed it to the fans to spend the money.

Notice, he left the word "wisely" out of his sentence.

The Cubs had the money to burn and in all honesty, what great players were they supposed to pick up? Stupid as the contracts might be, there's still the matter of convincing people to sign on with a perennial loser. I'll laugh if they choke, but at least they did something.

dcb56
02-11-2007, 11:56 PM
That's funny, I was under the impression that all eyes would be on Pods's groin this season. :duck:

Aren't they always on the Cubs until the post-season?

No, usually all eyes are taken off the Cubs by June.

vegyrex
02-12-2007, 12:17 AM
They cannot be worse than a 96 loss team again,

Sure it can be worse.

110 loss season for the flubbies would be a great way to welcome Lou to cub's baseball. :D:

Whitesox029
02-12-2007, 01:49 AM
Watching the Cubs will provide some entertainment value, I don't deny that...but only for people who enjoy seeing their hopes dashed.

WhiteSoxFan84
02-12-2007, 02:10 AM
Start printing the tickets....

2007 World Series
Cubs vs. White Sox
Game 1:
Carlos Zambrano @ Jose Contreras
Game 2:
Mark Prior @ Mark Buehrle
Game 3:
Jon Garland @ Ted Lilly
Game 4:
Gavin Floyd @ Jason Marquis
Games 5, 6, and 7:
Not neccessary, Sox have already swept

*Side Notes*
AL won All-Star game to give us home-field
Javier Vazquez becomes best reliever on team next to Bobby Jenks

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2007, 05:49 AM
Sure it can be worse.

110 loss season for the flubbies would be a great way to welcome Lou to cub's baseball. :D:
You know, I look at the Cubs and think "Man, they're still just an injury away from being a 90 loss team again." The only good pickup they got was Soriano. If Lee goes down again, I'd walk Soriano and take my chances with Rameriz. And if Soriano is leading off (as I've heard he will) I may as well just pitch to him. The guy has a ton of strikeouts. And that rotation doesn't exactly strike fear into the hearts of the opposition. You got Zambrano and then what? Ted Lilly? Jason Marquis? If Mark Prior stays healthy, maybe, but we've been saying that since 2004. And I don't buy the whole "Lou Pinella will turn the Cubs around" arguement either. Wrigley Field is where managers go to die. Dusty Baker was the guy that was supposed to turn it around for the Cubs before, and before him there was Don Baylor and before Baylor Jim Riggleman. Each of those guys had ONE (Dusty actually had two) good year and then the team loses ninety and the guy gets canned. EVERYONE in the NL Central has a chance to win it, and everyone in the NL Central has a good chance to lose ninety games too.

rdivaldi
02-12-2007, 09:51 AM
The Cubs had the money to burn and in all honesty, what great players were they supposed to pick up? Stupid as the contracts might be, there's still the matter of convincing people to sign on with a perennial loser. I'll laugh if they choke, but at least they did something.

Making deals just to make deals is a good way to go 100 years without winning a World Series. They can do "something" as much as they want as there is a huuuuge difference between doing "something" and doing "something smart".

It would have been smarter to sign no one and tried getting players via trade as the season wore on.

Scottiehaswheels
02-12-2007, 10:00 AM
Here's my honest opinion... Hendry did what he did to try to save his job... Does he himself think this "team" he built can compete? No. But maybe just do well enough to get himself an extension.... In signing all of these crappy free agents he gave up 4-5 sandwich draft picks while their farm system is still in shambles, at the same time locking older/poor players into extravagent contracts keeping future prospects on the outside looking in.. Just plain dumb.. The Cubs would have been better served blowing up their team like the Marlins and starting from scratch but such a thing would not go over well with the Tower because the fans wouldn't like it due to that 100 years thing :smile: ...

WizardsofOzzie
02-12-2007, 10:25 AM
Start printing the tickets....

2007 World Series
Cubs vs. White Sox
Game 1:
Carlos Zambrano @ Jose Contreras
Game 2:
Mark Prior @ Mark Buehrle
Game 3:
Jon Garland @ Ted Lilly
Game 4:
Gavin Floyd @ Jason Marquis
Games 5, 6, and 7:
Not neccessary, Sox have already swept

*Side Notes*
AL won All-Star game to give us home-field
Javier Vazquez becomes best reliever on team next to Bobby Jenks

You are a bold individual to assume that Prior would even have an attached arm by October and Marquis was actually put on the postseason roster :redneck

AuroraSoxFan
02-12-2007, 10:26 AM
I think they'll be much like the Sox of the 2001-2004 era. Solid hitting. But timely hitting will probably be lacking. And they will not have the pitching to go very far. They may slug their way to the crown of their horrible division but that is about as far as they'll get with what they currently have. In addition to all but 1 of their starting pitchers being a huge ?, and a pen full of headcases they will be pretty bad defensively. Their 3B got conked in the head by a routine pop up, their RF has a horrible arm and their CF has never played an inning there in his career. Their catcher also does not do too well calling a game or throwing people out.

Fenway
02-12-2007, 10:28 AM
The reality is the Cubs could win that division....and in the playoffs anything can happen ( see St Louis 2006 )

Funny thing is I like Milwaukee to challenge this year

itsnotrequired
02-12-2007, 10:58 AM
Funny thing is I like Milwaukee to challenge this year

Sheets healthy = yea

Sheets injured = nay

Railsplitter
02-12-2007, 11:14 AM
Shouldn't this thread title end in a question mark?

areilly
02-12-2007, 11:19 AM
It would have been smarter to sign no one and tried getting players via trade as the season wore on.


Exactly what bargaining chips would they have to use for such a trade? Zambrano? D. Lee? If you thought 1997 looked like surrender, either of those options would be nothing short of franchise suicide.

And since when do the Cubs need to be smart?

PatK
02-12-2007, 11:46 AM
Soriano= this year's Candy Maldonado

Lilly and Marquis= Mel Rojas

rdivaldi
02-12-2007, 12:13 PM
Exactly what bargaining chips would they have to use for such a trade? Zambrano? D. Lee? If you thought 1997 looked like surrender, either of those options would be nothing short of franchise suicide.

And since when do the Cubs need to be smart?

They have enough over-hyped prospects in their farm system to make trades. I'm sure that some GM would buy into the "Felix Pie is G-d" nonsense that we're constantly hearing.

Eventually if they keep bumbling and we keep churning out 90+ win seasons, it's going to bite them in the butt.

bryPt
02-12-2007, 01:08 PM
Here's my honest opinion... Hendry did what he did to try to save his job... Does he himself think this "team" he built can compete? No. But maybe just do well enough to get himself an extension.... In signing all of these crappy free agents he gave up 4-5 sandwich draft picks while their farm system is still in shambles, at the same time locking older/poor players into extravagent contracts keeping future prospects on the outside looking in.. Just plain dumb.. The Cubs would have been better served blowing up their team like the Marlins and starting from scratch but such a thing would not go over well with the Tower because the fans wouldn't like it due to that 100 years thing :smile: ...

your honest opinion is DEAD ON CORRECT!

WizardsofOzzie
02-12-2007, 02:02 PM
They have enough over-hyped prospects in their farm system to make trades. I'm sure that some GM would buy into the "Felix Pie is G-d" nonsense that we're constantly hearing.

Eventually if they keep bumbling and we keep churning out 90+ win seasons, it's going to bite them in the butt.

Wow i forgot all about him. I remember when they were thinking about calling him up even when they still had Patterson and he was struggling. He's just rotting away down in the minors while they put a career infielder in CF??? Doesn't make much sense but when have the Cubs or Cubs fans ever made sense. :dunno:

gobears1987
02-12-2007, 02:06 PM
:yup: Post of the Week, in my opinion! :thumbsup:

I second the motion

White Sox Randy
02-12-2007, 02:32 PM
Get used to it guys. This year the flubs will likely win their weakass division.

There will be flub mania like in 2003. But, they will NOT win a World Series.

areilly
02-12-2007, 02:34 PM
They have enough over-hyped prospects in their farm system to make trades. I'm sure that some GM would buy into the "Felix Pie is G-d" nonsense that we're constantly hearing.

Eventually if they keep bumbling and we keep churning out 90+ win seasons, it's going to bite them in the butt.

But with all the new guys on board at the Major League level, they're at least in a position where they don't have to deal away those over-hyped prospects and give up what little hope they might have for the next few years...yet. Who knows what will happen in Cubland between April and July, but I don't think they'll be in as bad a spot as we all would like to see them.

AuroraSoxFan
02-12-2007, 02:41 PM
But with all the new guys on board at the Major League level, they're at least in a position where they don't have to deal away those over-hyped prospects and give up what little hope they might have for the next few years...yet. Who knows what will happen in Cubland between April and July, but I don't think they'll be in as bad a spot as we all would like to see them.

I do not think they will be in too bad of a position either. In any other division I do not think they'd fare too well. But in that division, you really can't rule out anyone due to its weakness.

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2007, 03:02 PM
Exactly what bargaining chips would they have to use for such a trade? Zambrano? D. Lee? If you thought 1997 looked like surrender, either of those options would be nothing short of franchise suicide.

And since when do the Cubs need to be smart?
Dealing Zambrano might make sense, because he's as good as gone next year, so if you're the Cubs maybe you might think "I can get a lot for this guy..." and trade him rather than get absolutely nothing.

johnr1note
02-12-2007, 03:06 PM
I think they'll be much like the Sox of the 2001-2004 era. Solid hitting. But timely hitting will probably be lacking. And they will not have the pitching to go very far. They may slug their way to the crown of their horrible division but that is about as far as they'll get with what they currently have. In addition to all but 1 of their starting pitchers being a huge ?, and a pen full of headcases they will be pretty bad defensively. Their 3B got conked in the head by a routine pop up, their RF has a horrible arm and their CF has never played an inning there in his career. Their catcher also does not do too well calling a game or throwing people out.

Bad defensively? I think that's the understatment of the "century-without-a-world-series-title." The outfield of Murton/Lee in Left, Soriano in Center, and Jones in right may be the worst defensive outfield at Wrigley since Dave Kingman/Jerry Martin/Mike Vail. Of the rest of the team, only Itzuris (if he is the the everyday SS) and Derrick Lee have any defensive potential. So unless every putout is a ground ball to short, expect a lot of "adventure" in the field with this Cubs team.

98navigator
02-12-2007, 04:48 PM
Cubs pitchers rely on their defense less than any other staff in the Majors. They have led the league in strikeouts for three years running which is strange because they have had a lot of different hurlers during that time. This year's staff looks to be more strikeout dominant. The other side of that equation is they will also lead the league in walks allowed. :supernana:

I'm afraid to say it but, this team scares me! Don't get me wrong, I don't think they are good but they should have an easier route to the postseason than the Sox. If you think there's bias, in town, now don't let them get to the playoffs.

If we take care of our own business we should be able to maintain the ratings and dominance of the past 2 years but its fragile and could all disappear with one flubs postseason (regardless of how bad they choke). As it stands, we will barely be news to start the season. Even The Score, which is suppose to be Sox radio, is catering to Cubs fans with the anticipation that they will be competitive this year.:angry::angry::angry::angry::angry:

While I don't agree that there is blanket bias, I am tired of taking a back seat to a team that hasn't done anything in a century. I thought it all ended in 2005 but that was short lived. Already the media is critical of the Sox again instead of giving KW the benefit of the doubt!

Anyway, I'm not trying to come off as a hater because I'm not really. I have a few friends who are good guys, except they root for the cubs, but when it comes to Sox Pride and my pocket (I've got a couple of bets against them) I have to go with my heart.

PKalltheway
02-13-2007, 01:03 AM
Cub fans better get ready for some 12-10 and 15-14 ballgames at Wrigley this summer, because that starting rotation, outside of Zambrano, isn't going to get them far (and I'm including the fact that Prior will be afflicted with some sort of injury).

They'll contend in that weak division this year I think, but St. Louis will probably pull away toward late August/early September and win their fourth straight division title.

WhiteSox5187
02-13-2007, 01:08 AM
Cubs pitchers rely on their defense less than any other staff in the Majors. They have led the league in strikeouts for three years running which is strange because they have had a lot of different hurlers during that time. This year's staff looks to be more strikeout dominant. The other side of that equation is they will also lead the league in walks allowed. :supernana:

I'm afraid to say it but, this team scares me! Don't get me wrong, I don't think they are good but they should have an easier route to the postseason than the Sox. If you think there's bias, in town, now don't let them get to the playoffs.

If we take care of our own business we should be able to maintain the ratings and dominance of the past 2 years but its fragile and could all disappear with one flubs postseason (regardless of how bad they choke). As it stands, we will barely be news to start the season. Even The Score, which is suppose to be Sox radio, is catering to Cubs fans with the anticipation that they will be competitive this year.:angry::angry::angry::angry::angry:

While I don't agree that there is blanket bias, I am tired of taking a back seat to a team that hasn't done anything in a century. I thought it all ended in 2005 but that was short lived. Already the media is critical of the Sox again instead of giving KW the benefit of the doubt!

Anyway, I'm not trying to come off as a hater because I'm not really. I have a few friends who are good guys, except they root for the cubs, but when it comes to Sox Pride and my pocket (I've got a couple of bets against them) I have to go with my heart.
As a Sox fan I couldn't care less what the Cubs do, I only have one goal for the Sox: win. Winning takes care of so many problems!

Soxfanspcu11
02-13-2007, 02:52 AM
YAWN.

Same story, different year.

Last year at this time it was all about Juan Pierre and Jockstrap Jones coming to town.

I can't even recall how many times I heard the local media fawn over Pierre and say that with him at the leadoff spot, the flubs were a SHOE-IN for the playoffs.

When he hit that triple in his first at-bat as a flub, the next day, all the local sports morons and flubs fans were going nuts.

When they were in 1st place for like 4 days, everyone continued to go nuts.

Of course, we all know how that turned out.

EVERY YEAR is their year. I can't believe that ANYONE continues to fall for this.

Especially considering that they haven't really done much to make themselves that much better.

But hey, it makes it more fun to watch when come July, they are in second to last place.

Looking forward to it.

Grzegorz
02-13-2007, 05:54 AM
As a Sox fan I couldn't care less what the Cubs do, I only have one goal for the Sox: win. Winning takes care of so many problems!

Same here; the Cubs are better off ignored. They are a non-story. We have good things going on the south side; any expenditure of thought on the north side is a waste.

mshake10
02-13-2007, 11:44 AM
YAWN.

Same story, different year.

Last year at this time it was all about Juan Pierre and Jockstrap Jones coming to town.

I can't even recall how many times I heard the local media fawn over Pierre and say that with him at the leadoff spot, the flubs were a SHOE-IN for the playoffs.

When he hit that triple in his first at-bat as a flub, the next day, all the local sports morons and flubs fans were going nuts.

When they were in 1st place for like 4 days, everyone continued to go nuts.

Of course, we all know how that turned out.

EVERY YEAR is their year. I can't believe that ANYONE continues to fall for this.

Especially considering that they haven't really done much to make themselves that much better.

But hey, it makes it more fun to watch when come July, they are in second to last place.

Looking forward to it.
Being a more recent fan, I'm curious. Prior to 2005, did Sox fans simply not believe they could win every way? Did they just observe the offseason and go "we suck, better luck next year?"

WizardsofOzzie
02-13-2007, 12:01 PM
Being a more recent fan, I'm curious. Prior to 2005, did Sox fans simply not believe they could win every way? Did they just observe the offseason and go "we suck, better luck next year?"
I don't speak for everyone but personally i think the answer to your question is yes. Unlike the blind sheep that drink Cubbie Kool-Aid, most sox fans can tell when a team is going to lose 96 games and wait for it........Actually give a **** that their team is crap and don't follow blindly. Cubs fans are optimists, Sox fans are realists.

johnr1note
02-13-2007, 12:12 PM
I don't speak for everyone but personally i think the answer to your question is yes. Unlike the blind sheep that drink Cubbie Kool-Aid, most sox fans can tell when a team is going to lose 96 games and wait for it........Actually give a **** that their team is crap and don't follow blindly. Cubs fans are optimists, Sox fans are realists.

This is generally true. But there were times when a better on-field product got us dreaming, and we would see the future through rose colored glasses. I thought the 1963 or 1964 Sox teams were teams of destiny. Before the season started, I thought we were going to win it all in 1973. Repeat in 1984? It had to happen. I thought the early 90s Sox teams would eventually add that last piece and we'd win the pennant.

But, one thing is certain -- I think Sox fans always had this pessimistic sense that SOMETHING was bound to go wrong. Have your heart hit with a sledgehammer enough, and you figure its a done deal. When the Indians were breathing down our neck in September of `05, I figured we would eventually stumble. Even going into the playoffs in 2005, most of us were cautiously optimistic. Even when we're looking good, there is alwasy a feeling with the White Sox, that its too good to be true. And, except for 2005, it always was. I am "cautiously optimistic" that this trend is changing, and we will start to begin to expect 90 win seasons, division titles, deep runs into the playoffs, pennant winners, and world championships on a somewhat regular basis.

Jurr
02-13-2007, 12:13 PM
Being a more recent fan, I'm curious. Prior to 2005, did Sox fans simply not believe they could win every way? Did they just observe the offseason and go "we suck, better luck next year?"
It always felt like a form of suffocation, like there was very little room for hope, especially when teams in the AL began to really start spending big money. We had all been starving our entire lives for a WS winner, and we didn't feel like JR had our backs. The big "A" word would always creep up, too.

Then came 2000. The team looked like it had turned the corner. Years after that were very hard, because the team, though flawed in certain ways, always looked at times like it could beat anybody. It always seemed like there wasn't enough character or offensive versatility to overcome surging teams like the Twins or Tribe.

We knew that 2005 had the makings of something special for a couple of reasons. A.)We had pitchers ready to go 1-5. B.)We had versatility on the offensive side that Ozzie promised to use effectively. No more project guys like Willie Harris or Julio Ramirez. With Pods, we knew we had someone that could swipe a bag and get a bunt down. C.)It just "felt" different, as far as the excitement level. That was the first time since 2001 that I expected the Sox to be really, really good.

So, to sum it up, Sox fans had become so used to coming close but failing, and we became really adept at seeing on the front end what the problems were going to be that held the Sox back.

It's definitely a new era.

WizardsofOzzie
02-13-2007, 12:17 PM
This is generally true. But there were times when a better on-field product got us dreaming, and we would see the future through rose colored glasses. Before the season started, I thought we were going to win it all in 1973. I thought the early 90s Sox teams would eventually add that last piece and we'd win the pennant.

But, one thing is certain -- I think Sox fans alwasy had this pessimistic sense that SOMETHING was bound to go wrong. Having your heart hit with a sledgehammer enough, and you figure its a done deal. When the Indians were breathing down our neck, I figured we woudl eventually stumble. Even going into the playoffs in 2005, most of us were cautiously optimistic. Even when we're looking good, there is alwasy a feeling with the White Sox that its too good to be true. And, except for 2005, it always was. I am "cautiously optimistic" that this trend is changing, and we will start to begin to expect 90 win seasons, division titles, deep runs into the playoffs, pennant winners, and world championships on a somewhat regular basis.

Well put. My nitty gritty reply was mostly aiming at the statement "Prior to 2005, did Sox fans simply not believe they could win every way". I think it shows alot about our fan base that not every year is "our year". Sure there are years that the fans think its going to happen (73,94,00) but there are other years where we stepped back, looked at the product and said "It's not happening this year"

Jurr
02-13-2007, 12:23 PM
Well put. My nitty gritty reply was mostly aiming at the statement "Prior to 2005, did Sox fans simply not believe they could win every way". I think it shows alot about our fan base that not every year is "our year". Sure there are years that the fans think its going to happen (73,94,00) but there are other years where we stepped back, looked at the product and said "It's not happening this year"
That's why 2004 made me so mad. I came into that year thinking that the rotation was so flawed that it would be impossible to make the playoffs. However, I still believe to this day that if Maggs and Frank didn't both go down to injuries, that team had a chance.

mshake10
02-13-2007, 01:32 PM
So basically, it's "I knew we had no shot", and you more or less didn't go to any games that year.

Somehow, I have a hard time believing that, especially with a championship drought that was approaching 60, then 70, then 80+ years. There had to be a boiling point where you just got sick of waiting and starting demanding a championship and hoping beyond hope that it would finally happen.

TomBradley72
02-13-2007, 01:39 PM
The more they hype...the greater the fall...what's lost in all of the Cubbie hype:

One of the worst defensive OF's in MLB (Floyd/Soriano/Jones)
Very mediocre middle infield (Izturis and DeRosa?) plus weak defense at 3B
Weak starting rotation (Lilly as #2, Marquis as #3, Hill as #4 (27 years old...AAAA pitcher))
Dempster as closer?So other than that...start printing the World Series tickets!

WizardsofOzzie
02-13-2007, 01:52 PM
So basically, it's "I knew we had no shot", and you more or less didn't go to any games that year.

Somehow, I have a hard time believing that, especially with a championship drought that was approaching 60, then 70, then 80+ years. There had to be a boiling point where you just got sick of waiting and starting demanding a championship and hoping beyond hope that it would finally happen.
Ding Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!! Unlike Wrigley, if Sox fans don't like the product or are fed up with the teams direction, they don't go to the games. It doesn't make them less of a fan or a band wagoner. They can still watch on TV and root for their team (although they may be disgusted with the results), or catch an occasional game just for fun, even though the outcome of the game may be sealed thanks to the product on the field, and tell people "Yes i am a Sox fan, unfortunately we really suck this year". See link below to go with the following stats.

1959 Sox go to WS, 1,423,144 in attendance
1964 Sox only 1 game from winning the division, 1,250,053 in attendance
1968 Sox go below .500, 36 games out of first , 803,775 in attendance
1970, 3rd straight year below .500, 42 games out of first, 495,355 in attendance
1983, Sox win AL West Pennant, 2,132,821 in attendance (first time sox go over 2 mil)

You get the picture

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/history/year_by_year_results.jsp

itsnotrequired
02-13-2007, 01:56 PM
Ding Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!! Unlike Wrigley, if Sox fans don't like the product or are fed up with the teams direction, they don't go to the games. It doesn't make them less of a fan or a band wagoner. They can still watch on TV (although they may be disgusted with the results), or catch an occasional game just for fun, even though the outcome of the game may be sealed thanks to the product on the field See link below to go with the following stats.

1959 Sox go to WS, 1,423,144 in attendance
1964 Sox only 1 game from winning the division, 1,250,053 in attendance
1968 Sox go below .500, 36 games out of first , 803,775 in attendance
1970, 3rd straight year below .500, 42 games out of first, 495,355 in attendance
1983, Sox win AL West Pennant, 2,132,821 in attendance (first time sox go over 2 mil)

You get the picture

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/history/year_by_year_results.jsp

Until recently, the same could be said of the Cubs.

WizardsofOzzie
02-13-2007, 02:03 PM
Until recently, the same could be said of the Cubs.
By the look of it, the Cubs started pulling in large amounts of fans regardless of their record starting in the mid 80's or so, coincidently around the time Harry Caray came along

itsnotrequired
02-13-2007, 02:13 PM
By the look of it, the Cubs started pulling in large amounts of fans regardless of their record starting in the mid 80's or so, coincidently around the time Harry Caray came along

I heard they also got purchased and promoted by some large type of media concern around the same time. Their name escapes me...

WizardsofOzzie
02-13-2007, 02:21 PM
I heard they also got purchased and promoted by some large type of media concern around the same time. Their name escapes me...
Walter E. Smithe Custom Furniture? :redneck