PDA

View Full Version : Any Renovations Planned This Offseason


Red Barchetta
10-19-2007, 04:01 PM
I know the US Cellular major renovations have been completed, however in addition to the Legacy Brick and north parking lot changes, any other minor renovations planned? Additional brickwork, changes to the Fandeck, etc.

Perhaps installing blue seats?! :D:

chisoxmike
10-19-2007, 04:04 PM
How about a roster renovation?

dickallen15
10-19-2007, 04:10 PM
While walking down 35th St. during the last series, there was a grease board in an office that had a few projects on it. Stadium club renovation and some sort of hospitality room are a couple I remember, but there wasn't anything like additional seating or anything you would notice if you just came to the game and sat in your seat.

ondafarm
10-19-2007, 04:30 PM
I have to say, I really like USCF the way it is right now. It is much nicer than during the blue spaceship era.

Red Barchetta
10-19-2007, 04:36 PM
There was talk that they were going to continue to brick over exposed concrete similar to the concourse renovations that occurred before the US Cellular deal was made.

I agree it that I like the ballpark the way it is now in terms of design, however I would love to see some more brick work as the areas they have covered over look great IMO. I would love to see bricks in the bullpen and outfield concourse area. This really helps sell the ballpark on TV. I love the first base dugout angle that shows the Fundamentals area.

Hitmen77
10-19-2007, 05:16 PM
I know the US Cellular major renovations have been completed, however in addition to the Legacy Brick and north parking lot changes, any other minor renovations planned? Additional brickwork, changes to the Fandeck, etc.

Perhaps installing blue seats?! :D:

What changes are they making to the north parking lot? Which lot is the "north lot"? Is it A, B, C, or G?

Cellview22
10-19-2007, 05:31 PM
I hope they make some changes to the exterior behind the outfield, as seen from the Dan Ryan. The exterior looks great everywhere else, like at 35th and Shields, but when you drive past the stadium on the Dan Ryan, nothing sticks out as being impressive (especially now that the "Home of the 2005 World Champions" sign is gone). It looks bland, dull and black. Here's a picture from Google Street View: http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.852493,-87.62661&spn=0.045328,0.10849&z=14&om=1&layer=c&cbll=41.829571,-87.630441&cbp=2,276.9737213863682,0.5,0,1.9555083229364714
(Click Full-screen)

What could they do to make this part of the stadium more of a WOW factor when you drive past, since millions of people only see the stadium from this vantage point?

itsnotrequired
10-19-2007, 05:59 PM
Have all the concourse TVs been upgraded or was that still a work in progress at the time of the last series?

chisox77
10-19-2007, 06:11 PM
I love these renovation threads. It's a major sign of the offseason.

:cool:

DumpJerry
10-19-2007, 06:44 PM
nothing sticks out as being impressive (especially now that the "Home of the 2005 World Champions" sign is gone).
Huh? It was there yesterday when I drove by.

Hitmen77
10-19-2007, 06:53 PM
My "wish list" renovation item would be to improve the scoreboard information layout. Right now, the only place that shows the game's line score and R-H-E totals are on the aux. scoreboard in LF and view of that board is obstructed (by the Fundamentals structure) at many seats along the 3B line.

Also, it would be great to have an improved out of town scoreboard like many other ballparks have.

What ever happened to the Sox museum/hall of fame that used to be adjacent to the main gift shop? I thought I heard that it got moved to the Scout Seats area. It would be nice if this feature was made accessible again to a majority of the fans.

FedEx227
10-19-2007, 07:00 PM
I'm sure most Sox fans would agree (I see Hitman already has) that we need a much better out-of-town scoreboard. It's decent for now, I mean I'm usually paying attention to the game at hand, but it is still a major eyesore along with the fact that it's slow changing and never seems to be updated or you'll be at one inning for about 45 minutes then all of a sudden you've jumped ahead 5 innings.

DumpJerry
10-19-2007, 07:05 PM
I'm sure most Sox fans would agree (I see Hitman already has) that we need a much better out-of-town scoreboard. It's decent for now, I mean I'm usually paying attention to the game at hand, but it is still a major eyesore along with the fact that it's slow changing and never seems to be updated or you'll be at one inning for about 45 minutes then all of a sudden you've jumped ahead 5 innings.
Come on, they painted it green last season to give it that "old school" look.

Funny thing about the updates on scores on it is that sometimes I think it is real-time even though you'll see a team at bat for 30 minutes in one inning and nothing scores. When they show other games live on the scoreboard during rain delays, they keep it updated with those games. I know, they're watching the game so they can make the update. However, whenever people sitting around me are following games on their cell phones and someone scores or a third out is made, the scoreboard changes within 20 seconds to refelct what happened.

One change I would like to see to out of town scoreboard is more losing games for the Twins, Tigers and Tribe.

Martinigirl
10-19-2007, 07:07 PM
Huh? It was there yesterday when I drove by.

I could have sworn I saw it today.

DumpJerry
10-19-2007, 07:19 PM
I could have sworn I saw it today.
I'll try to swing by tomorrow to make sure they did not take it down. We worked hard to get it.

Can someone get there on Sunday? I'm stuck up north watching the Bears' game. Thanks, all of us at WSI would appreciate it.

Martinigirl
10-19-2007, 07:23 PM
I'll try to swing by tomorrow to make sure they did not take it down. We worked hard to get it.

Can someone get there on Sunday? I'm stuck up north watching the Bears' game. Thanks, all of us at WSI would appreciate it.

I drive west on 35th Street past the park every work day and I am 99.9% sure I would notice if it suddenly wasn't there.

If no one reports back, I will tell you on Monday.

itsnotrequired
10-19-2007, 07:24 PM
One change I would like to see to out of town scoreboard is more losing games for the Twins, Tigers and Tribe.

What about the Cubs! I HATE THEM ROMGZ!

DumpJerry
10-19-2007, 07:25 PM
I drive west on 35th Street past the park every work day and I am 99.9% sure I would notice if it suddenly wasn't there.

If no one reports back, I will tell you on Monday.
Thanks. Hopefully others will also be checking every day so you don't have bear the entire responsibility.

Martinigirl
10-19-2007, 07:26 PM
Thanks. Hopefully others will also be checking every day so you don't have bear the entire responsibility.

Thanks, I was already starting to crumble under the pressure ;)

mrfourni
10-19-2007, 07:31 PM
Come on, they painted it green last season to give it that "old school" look.

Funny thing about the updates on scores on it is that sometimes I think it is real-time even though you'll see a team at bat for 30 minutes in one inning and nothing scores. When they show other games live on the scoreboard during rain delays, they keep it updated with those games. I know, they're watching the game so they can make the update. However, whenever people sitting around me are following games on their cell phones and someone scores or a third out is made, the scoreboard changes within 20 seconds to refelct what happened.

One change I would like to see to out of town scoreboard is more losing games for the Twins, Tigers and Tribe.

I think this season they actually got a little better at updating the scores in real time. I sat in a suite and watched another out of town game on the plasma and they were updating the scoreboard pretty regularly.

HomeFish
10-19-2007, 07:34 PM
What about the Cubs! I HATE THEM ROMGZ!

You know, one of these days somebody will coin the term "flubsessedsessed" to describe you.

itsnotrequired
10-19-2007, 07:38 PM
You know, one of these days somebody will coin the term "flubsessedsessed" to describe you.

DumpJerry will forever by ridiculed with my barbs.

I just hope the crappy D-Backs find a way to beat that powerful Cubs offense. I heard that if the Cubs get a runner to second, it is all over for Arizona.

:D:

Frontman
10-19-2007, 07:40 PM
My brother's team was not approached yet to do any cabinetry work (which I think they got all of them done last offseason, but I can't recall if they did any stadium level work after the pressboxes.)

You guys know if he does work there this off-season, I'll get you all the 4-1-1 as soon as possible!

bahn1225
10-19-2007, 09:15 PM
I assume, with politics as usual in Illinois, that the proposed new METRA station at 35h Street won't be open by next season.

That's one thing that definitely would improve my game day experience.

Ragator43
10-19-2007, 09:39 PM
I assume, with politics as usual in Illinois, that the proposed new METRA station at 35h Street won't be open by next season.

That's one thing that definitely would improve my game day experience.

Where is it supposed to be?

rdivaldi
10-19-2007, 10:01 PM
Where is it supposed to be?

Right at 35th Street.

Old Cubune article talks about it... (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0610140230oct14,0,5768031.story?coll=chi-business-hed)

paciorek1983
10-20-2007, 01:21 AM
I hope they make some changes to the exterior behind the outfield, as seen from the Dan Ryan. The exterior looks great everywhere else, like at 35th and Shields, but when you drive past the stadium on the Dan Ryan, nothing sticks out as being impressive (especially now that the "Home of the 2005 World Champions" sign is gone). It looks bland, dull and black. Here's a picture from Google Street View: http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.852493,-87.62661&spn=0.045328,0.10849&z=14&om=1&layer=c&cbll=41.829571,-87.630441&cbp=2,276.9737213863682,0.5,0,1.9555083229364714
(Click Full-screen)

What could they do to make this part of the stadium more of a WOW factor when you drive past, since millions of people only see the stadium from this vantage point?


Yeah, they really need to improve that view. My proposal is to extend the arched window design around to that side and make it a concouse for the 200 & 500 levels.

steff
10-20-2007, 02:00 AM
I'm sure most Sox fans would agree (I see Hitman already has) that we need a much better out-of-town scoreboard. It's decent for now, I mean I'm usually paying attention to the game at hand, but it is still a major eyesore along with the fact that it's slow changing and never seems to be updated or you'll be at one inning for about 45 minutes then all of a sudden you've jumped ahead 5 innings.


One like the one they have in Milwaukee would be awesome. Unfortunately it costs about $2 milllion so I don't see that happening anytime soon.

FedEx227
10-20-2007, 09:35 AM
One like the one they have in Milwaukee would be awesome. Unfortunately it costs about $2 milllion so I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Yeah, the LCD out of town scoreboard is not happening anytime soon, especially considering where it's located currently. I'd just like a little touching up on it and maybe some people that actually want to update it.

whitesoxwilkes
10-20-2007, 11:12 AM
One like the one they have in Milwaukee would be awesome. Unfortunately it costs about $2 milllion so I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Yeah, the LCD out of town scoreboard is not happening anytime soon, especially considering where it's located currently. I'd just like a little touching up on it and maybe some people that actually want to update it.

I'm all for that idea, but wouldn't they need to make the outfield walls a few feet higher in order for it to fit?

Cellview22
10-20-2007, 11:14 AM
I drive west on 35th Street past the park every work day and I am 99.9% sure I would notice if it suddenly wasn't there.

If no one reports back, I will tell you on Monday.

If you've seen it up recently, then I believe it's still up..

I don't get to drive past that area too often, so I wouldn't know if it's always hanging there. The reason I assumed it had been taken down is I had driven west along 35th about a month ago, and as I was driving over the bridge next to the Red Line station, I looked over specifically to see that sign and did not see it. From that point on, I had assumed it was taken down. But if someone saw it the other day, then take their word over mine. :redface:

With that said, I still think that sign looks rather cheap. It doesn't look good at all, it's almost an eye sore how it was designed. Too much black and white around that whole back area makes it look like a dump from that view.

I agree with paciorek's idea about the arched window design and the concourse wrapping around the whole stadium.. although I wouldn't built it any higher than the outfield area already is. The open air feeling walking out on the outfield concourse is perfect the way it is.

Here's my proposal: Have another smaller concourse above the outfield concourse. It would start from the staircase of the Fundamentals Deck (anyone with an UD ticket could access this area), about 12 feet above the outfield concourse and right beneath the scoreboard and billboards, that would wrap around to the other side and out a bit to connect to the right-field ramps going up to the UD. It would be a relatively narrow concourse (8-10 ft wide) and it would have a railing identical to the one on the Fundamentals Deck.. with a few areas designed with stools to take in the view... and the sea of people 12 feet below marching on the concourse. This could be an eye sore if done the wrong way, but it could also be an extra perk/incentive to purchase UD tickets. You wouldn't feel like a 2nd class citizen, and you could walk out and be literally 12 feet above all the action on the main concourse. You could even yell down and ask someone to toss you a hot dog! :D:

steff
10-20-2007, 11:27 AM
I'm all for that idea, but wouldn't they need to make the outfield walls a few feet higher in order for it to fit?


No idea on the height thing, but currently there is no where for them to put it in comparison to where Milwaukee's is (all of the outfield walls at the cell are "movable") so I would guess the only choice they would have is to make a change where the current one is. I don't care where they would put it. That board is amazing there. As someone who follows other games it would be a Godsend to not have to follow by Treo or bringing the XM.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-20-2007, 11:35 AM
The scoreboard layout has been below White Sox standards ever since April, 1991. The "improvements" haven't been good for much more than showing more dot races. As many others have already noted, the information we fans are seeking is often not available... and this is a Cardinal Sin for any franchise that carries the legacy of the greatest and most influential scoreboard in the history of sports, Veeck's Original Monster at Old Comiskey.

It's a plain shame the scoreboard has been this neglected throughout what is now 7 years worth of ballpark upgrades.

The Sox have done a lot of things right the last few years. Improving the scoreboard isn't one of them.
:(:

DumpJerry
10-20-2007, 11:47 AM
With that said, I still think that sign looks rather cheap. It doesn't look good at all, it's almost an eye sore how it was designed. Too much black and white around that whole back area makes it look like a dump from that view.
Don't worry. Pretty soon it will also say "2008."

tick53
10-20-2007, 12:35 PM
There was talk that they were going to continue to brick over exposed concrete similar to the concourse renovations that occurred before the US Cellular deal was made.

I agree it that I like the ballpark the way it is now in terms of design, however I would love to see some more brick work as the areas they have covered over look great IMO. I would love to see bricks in the bullpen and outfield concourse area. This really helps sell the ballpark on TV. I love the first base dugout angle that shows the Fundamentals area.

I agree with the bricking. I would also like to see more the other exposed concrete areas painted green to match the seats.

paciorek1983
10-20-2007, 12:39 PM
I agree with paciorek's idea about the arched window design and the concourse wrapping around the whole stadium.. although I wouldn't built it any higher than the outfield area already is. The open air feeling walking out on the outfield concourse is perfect the way it is.

Here's my proposal: Have another smaller concourse above the outfield concourse. It would start from the staircase of the Fundamentals Deck (anyone with an UD ticket could access this area), about 12 feet above the outfield concourse and right beneath the scoreboard and billboards, that would wrap around to the other side and out a bit to connect to the right-field ramps going up to the UD. It would be a relatively narrow concourse (8-10 ft wide) and it would have a railing identical to the one on the Fundamentals Deck.. with a few areas designed with stools to take in the view... and the sea of people 12 feet below marching on the concourse. This could be an eye sore if done the wrong way, but it could also be an extra perk/incentive to purchase UD tickets. You wouldn't feel like a 2nd class citizen, and you could walk out and be literally 12 feet above all the action on the main concourse. You could even yell down and ask someone to toss you a hot dog! :D:


I want the concourse to go in between the arched windows. they are at the same height as the billboards and scorboards. the 5oo level concourse wouldn't be covered.


5529



As you can see the space in betweem would be enough for a concourse. It would replace the billboards.

steff
10-20-2007, 12:49 PM
It would replace the billboards.


Which are a huge source of revenue so I doubt that would be presented as an option.

MCHSoxFan
10-20-2007, 12:53 PM
I hope they make some changes to the exterior behind the outfield, as seen from the Dan Ryan. The exterior looks great everywhere else, like at 35th and Shields, but when you drive past the stadium on the Dan Ryan, nothing sticks out as being impressive (especially now that the "Home of the 2005 World Champions" sign is gone). It looks bland, dull and black. Here's a picture from Google Street View: http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.852493,-87.62661&spn=0.045328,0.10849&z=14&om=1&layer=c&cbll=41.829571,-87.630441&cbp=2,276.9737213863682,0.5,0,1.9555083229364714
(Click Full-screen)

What could they do to make this part of the stadium more of a WOW factor when you drive past, since millions of people only see the stadium from this vantage point?

First of all, you guys do know I live in Bridgeport right across the street from the field. What you guys may not know, is that I go to De La Salle High School. If you do not where that it is, it is on 35th & Michigan (Just east of the field). I walk to school going down from 35th & Normal to the school. The "Home of the 2005 World Series Champions" sign is still there. Also, when I was going to school on October 15, I saw construction workers on the exit ramps from the upper deck outside gate 3. Not sure what was going on, but it was 6 in the morning!!! There are also trucks on 35th and Shields because of the brick memorial. I will keep you guys updated. In fact, I am going to the Red Line L today, so I will pass the field.

MCHSoxFan
10-20-2007, 12:55 PM
One change I would like to see to out of town scoreboard is more losing games for the Twins, Tigers and Tribe.

YEEEESSSS!!!! :D:

chisoxfanatic
10-20-2007, 02:13 PM
How about a roster renovation?
Bam! That's what I'm wanting more than anything as well. They can make a lot of improvements over just this offseason.

I do know they're creating a Wall of Fame for season ticketholders. A form came with the renewal forms where we were to give them permission to display our name on the wall.

Fenway
10-20-2007, 02:29 PM
Which are a huge source of revenue so I doubt that would be presented as an option.

When it comes to billboards the White Sox are the only game in town as the Cubs can't do it because of the landmark restrictions. They had to fight to get the United Airlines message board and Sears radar gun installed.

Daktronics is the way to go for out of town scores as they have done in Cleveland, Toronto and other parks.

It is called ProFence and it is up to the second

http://www.daktronics.com/video_prod/images/clevprofence.jpg

Of course since the USCF wall is not permanent that might have to put it above the bleachers but they could also display ads on it like Anaheim
http://www.daktronics.com/video_prod/images/profenceangels.jpg

of course in Boston we stuck getting our NL scores by somebody coming out with a ladder every half inning
http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/pg2/2002/0822/photo/scoreboard_i.jpg

paciorek1983
10-20-2007, 02:45 PM
Which are a huge source of revenue so I doubt that would be presented as an option.


Ok, what I meant was, since I have an 8 yr old vying for attention I couldn't finish, is that ads would be posted on the concrete facings---ok?

dickallen15
10-20-2007, 04:42 PM
Ok, what I meant was, since I have an 8 yr old vying for attention I couldn't finish, is that ads would be posted on the concrete facings---ok?
Not a bad idea, but companies are also paying for the size of the ad.

chisoxmike
10-20-2007, 06:31 PM
I assume, with politics as usual in Illinois, that the proposed new METRA station at 35h Street won't be open by next season.

That's one thing that definitely would improve my game day experience.

That wasn't supposed to be completed until 2009, that is if everything went smoothly, if I remember correctly. Right now, we'll probably see a Metra stop there in 3008.

Hitmen77
10-20-2007, 09:41 PM
Yeah, the LCD out of town scoreboard is not happening anytime soon, especially considering where it's located currently. I'd just like a little touching up on it and maybe some people that actually want to update it.

I'm all for that idea, but wouldn't they need to make the outfield walls a few feet higher in order for it to fit?

Do these kind of out of town scoreboards have to be on the outfield wall? Couldn't they put something like that where the current out of town scores are located?

Hitmen77
10-20-2007, 09:55 PM
The scoreboard layout has been below White Sox standards ever since April, 1991. The "improvements" haven't been good for much more than showing more dot races. As many others have already noted, the information we fans are seeking is often not available... and this is a Cardinal Sin for any franchise that carries the legacy of the greatest and most influential scoreboard in the history of sports, Veeck's Original Monster at Old Comiskey.

It's a plain shame the scoreboard has been this neglected throughout what is now 7 years worth of ballpark upgrades.

The Sox have done a lot of things right the last few years. Improving the scoreboard isn't one of them.
:(:

George,
I completely agree.

I know a real fix is cost prohibitive, but isn't there any affordable alternatives to at least partially address the problem? Could the ribbon video boards on the upper deck facade be set up somehow so that a sector at the end shows game info? What about the main scoreboard? It mostly just shows birthday and anniversary announcements and also some career stats for the current batter or pitcher. Couldn't the video being sent to that screen be split somehow so that some game data could be displayed on the main screen?

itsnotrequired
10-20-2007, 10:53 PM
George,
I completely agree.

I know a real fix is cost prohibitive, but isn't there any affordable alternatives to at least partially address the problem? Could the ribbon video boards on the upper deck facade be set up somehow so that a sector at the end shows game info? What about the main scoreboard? It mostly just shows birthday and anniversary announcements and also some career stats for the current batter or pitcher. Couldn't the video being sent to that screen be split somehow so that some game data could be displayed on the main screen?

Excellent idea. The text would need to be small but it could work. The Sox would still want the space for advertising so maybe it could only be up when teams are changing sides?

Parrothead
10-21-2007, 08:18 AM
George,
I completely agree.

I know a real fix is cost prohibitive, but isn't there any affordable alternatives to at least partially address the problem? Could the ribbon video boards on the upper deck facade be set up somehow so that a sector at the end shows game info? What about the main scoreboard? It mostly just shows birthday and anniversary announcements and also some career stats for the current batter or pitcher. Couldn't the video being sent to that screen be split somehow so that some game data could be displayed on the main screen?


I already brought this up when they got them and I noticed it is only ads to some Sox personnel and I was told that is not going to happen due to the companies are paying for the whole board. I agree too, who really needs to see ATA or whatever 8 times on the board, I think 6 or 7 would be enough.

dickallen15
10-21-2007, 08:33 AM
I already brought this up when they got them and I noticed it is only ads to some Sox personnel and I was told that is not going to happen due to the companies are paying for the whole board. I agree too, who really needs to see ATA or whatever 8 times on the board, I think 6 or 7 would be enough.

They could hang a couple of small boards off the club level facade, even around the concrete by the stadium club. They do have to get another board or 2 with a line score. I always have read that the out of town scoreboard was supposed to be replaced. This was several years ago. You couldn't put it on the outfield wall without killing the view of the patio or bullpen bar. The giant ads aren't going away, but maybe they could raise them up, well at least the one in the RF corner and use that space for a huge board. Just put the ad on top of it.

Frontman
10-21-2007, 09:12 AM
I'd love to see some reworkings of the scoreboards as well. The out-of-town board, the stat board, and the exploding scoreboard don't "match." If you're in the outfield looking in, the ribbon boards match; same color and almost same spacing.

The out of town board is one color, the left field stat board is a second color, and the exploding one is a third color. Never mind that the center board should be the center of attention; but I find myself watching the left field board more for stats more than ever checking the main board.

Plus, if the Chevy Pride Dancers (or whatever they are called) could be cut back a bit and use the main board for team changes more; I'd be all over it.

Brian26
10-21-2007, 11:53 AM
I'm frustrated that you can't see the leftfield scoreboard due to the Fundamentals Deck if you're sitting anywhere down the leftfield line or in the corner. However, I understand that it would be impossible to show the team lineups anywhere else in the park.

What is disappointing is that the Sox have quietly stopped flashing defensive substitutions and pitching changes in the bottom left corner of the rightfield scoreboard, in addition to flashing "WP" or "PB" and who errors are called on. This used to be standard practice to benefit people keeping score at the game.

paciorek1983
10-21-2007, 12:28 PM
Not a bad idea, but companies are also paying for the size of the ad.


Well I guess size could be replaced for quantity.

anewman35
10-21-2007, 01:11 PM
I'm frustrated that you can't see the leftfield scoreboard due to the Fundamentals Deck if you're sitting anywhere down the leftfield line or in the corner. However, I understand that it would be impossible to show the team lineups anywhere else in the park.


I'm sure it won't happen, since the team doesn't seem to really care, but there doesn't really seem to be any good reason they couldn't post little boards with the lineups on the light standards in right field. Ah well.

Frater Perdurabo
10-21-2007, 03:14 PM
What is disappointing is that the Sox have quietly stopped flashing defensive substitutions and pitching changes in the bottom left corner of the rightfield scoreboard, in addition to flashing "WP" or "PB" and who errors are called on. This used to be standard practice to benefit people keeping score at the game.

I'm sure it won't happen, since the team doesn't seem to really care, but there doesn't really seem to be any good reason they couldn't post little boards with the lineups on the light standards in right field. Ah well.

I would be willing to bet that far fewer fans attending games actually keep score than in say 1987 or 1957. And I'll bet the Sox know this and are trying to use what "limited" real estate to please the greatest number of fans in attendance. And let's face it, many if not most fans are casual fans and are there to be entertained. The Sox know that it's only a minority of fans attending who want "traditional" elements in their game experience - Nancy's organ music, scoring notes, etc.

Brian26
10-21-2007, 03:30 PM
I would be willing to bet that far fewer fans attending games actually keep score than in say 1987 or 1957. And I'll bet the Sox know this and are trying to use what "limited" real estate to please the greatest number of fans in attendance. And let's face it, many if not most fans are casual fans and are there to be entertained. The Sox know that it's only a minority of fans attending who want "traditional" elements in their game experience - Nancy's organ music, scoring notes, etc.

I agree. What I'm talking about, though, is that little dot matrix box in the bottom of the rightfield scoreboard that will have the "Sox Split" winning number on it for three straight innings. It seems the scoreboard operators are unwilling to take it down for 30 seconds to flash an error, WP/PB ruling, or "now pitching". It doesn't seem like it would be that difficult of a fix.

Hitmen77
10-21-2007, 09:13 PM
I would be willing to bet that far fewer fans attending games actually keep score than in say 1987 or 1957. And I'll bet the Sox know this and are trying to use what "limited" real estate to please the greatest number of fans in attendance. And let's face it, many if not most fans are casual fans and are there to be entertained. The Sox know that it's only a minority of fans attending who want "traditional" elements in their game experience - Nancy's organ music, scoring notes, etc.

But, those game stats aren't just used by people keeping score. I rarely keep score, but I still want to see these stats (was that a hit or error? wild pitch or passed ball?).

The question I have is not whether the Sox think their fans care less about game info on the scoreboard compared to 1987, but rather whether our team thinks our team thinks Sox fans don't care about this as much as fans in other ballparks. It's been several years since I have been to other MLB parks, but at the time the ones I visited had more game info on their scoreboard.

DumpJerry
10-21-2007, 09:13 PM
I agree. What I'm talking about, though, is that little dot matrix box in the bottom of the rightfield scoreboard that will have the "Sox Split" winning number on it for three straight innings. It seems the scoreboard operators are unwilling to take it down for 30 seconds to flash an error, WP/PB ruling, or "now pitching". It doesn't seem like it would be that difficult of a fix.
I don't keep score, but I noticed that most of the time, they won't post it. I like to see what the ruling is so I know who to curse at if the Sox are on the field when the PB or WP happens.

tebman
10-21-2007, 11:22 PM
But, those game stats aren't just used by people keeping score. I rarely keep score, but I still want to see these stats (was that a hit or error? wild pitch or passed ball?).

The question I have is not whether the Sox think their fans care less about game info on the scoreboard compared to 1987, but rather whether our team thinks our team thinks Sox fans don't care about this as much as fans in other ballparks. It's been several years since I have been to other MLB parks, but at the time the ones I visited had more game info on their scoreboard.
It's frustrating to me too that there is usually no indication on errors, passed balls, wild pitches, or defensive substitutions on the board(s). The big board in center has become just a video screen and the smaller light-matrix board in LF has assumed all the game information that used to be on the big board. Because there's only so much room on the LF board they squeeze lineups, the line score, batter info and brief displays of relief pitcher stats in a revolving pattern so that not all the info is available at any one time.

To resolve this the Sox would have to redesign the whole display system. That's big money they probably don't have budgeted. But the technology exists to provide all this information we're grumbling about and still have a raucous and funny exploding board that would make Bill Veeck proud.

They'll have to update it eventually. I just hope when it happens that it's done right.

DumpJerry
10-21-2007, 11:30 PM
My beef with the LF Board is that after about 5 innings or so, it becomes useless. No more information about how the batter has done during the game or season stats. Just messages about who is at the game, travel times (useless to us since they will change in about, oh, 10 seconds once the crowd starts leaving), etc. I sit in the RF corner (112) so I can see everything except the clock in the lower left-hand corner of the CF scoreboard.

soxfan1983
10-22-2007, 11:20 PM
how long until the contract with US Cellular is up? i wish they would change it back to Comiskey

IlliniSox4Life
10-22-2007, 11:32 PM
how long until the contract with US Cellular is up? i wish they would change it back to Comiskey

The reason the stadium is so nice today is because of US Cellular. The only reason I wish the contract was up soon is so that we could sell them the naming rights all over again and continue to improve the stadium.

Nellie_Fox
10-23-2007, 12:42 AM
How long until the contract with US Cellular is up? I wish they would change it back to ComiskeyThose days are gone. If the US Cellular contract expired and they chose not to renew, they would sell the rights to another corporation, and it could become one of those stadiums that changes names every few years (PacBell, SBC, AT&T). In fact, it may happen anyway, as these telecoms get bought up and merge like crazy.

anewman35
10-23-2007, 07:19 AM
how long until the contract with US Cellular is up? i wish they would change it back to Comiskey

I believe it was a 20 year contract, so we have about 15 more years. But as other people have said, it's highly unlikely it would go back to Comiskey, they'd just sell it to somebody else.

itsnotrequired
10-23-2007, 07:25 AM
I believe it was a 20 year contract, so we have about 15 more years. But as other people have said, it's highly unlikely it would go back to Comiskey, they'd just sell it to somebody else.

It is a 23 year, $68 million contract.

DumpJerry
10-23-2007, 07:49 AM
how long until the contract with US Cellular is up? i wish they would change it back to Comiskey
Most of us call it Comiskey. There is nothing to stop you from doing that.

Mr.1Dog
10-23-2007, 08:40 AM
It is a 23 year, $68 million contract.

Now only if we can sign Rowand to that kind of contract. :redneck

Fenway
10-23-2007, 10:19 AM
Fenway installed this in CF in 2001. Every park should have this info posted somewhere

http://web.mit.edu/smalpert/www/fenway_park/22.jpg

paciorek1983
10-23-2007, 05:49 PM
Instead of any auxillary boards, they should make a new centerfield board. It should be bigger and it could hold all of the information fans want. Centerfield is the only place that almost all of the fans can see without obstructions.

Do a new board and my idea of the arched window concourses, complete with ads of some kind that will make up for the loss of the billboards.:smile:

Foulke You
10-23-2007, 06:20 PM
Instead of any auxillary boards, they should make a new centerfield board. It should be bigger and it could hold all of the information fans want. Centerfield is the only place that almost all of the fans can see without obstructions.

Do a new board and my idea of the arched window concourses, complete with ads of some kind that will make up for the loss of the billboards.:smile:
I have to agree that a new, larger CF scoreboard is probably the only true fix to the problem. Since most of the renovations to our park were added after the ballpark was built, it compromised the viewing angles of some of the scoreboards. The fandeck blocks the view from outfield seats and the fundamentals area blocks views from a variety of seats as well.

I don't think the Sox will replace that CF beast anytime soon. It is probably one of the most expensive things in the ballpark to replace. They would probably try to augment the existing scoreboard before replacing it. I do agree with PHG though. It would be nice if they can "Veeck" it up a bit. Add more lights, lasers, fireworks, pyro, etc. to make our scoreboard the most outrageous, over the top scoreboard in baseball again. In addition to fireworks, I always thought some pyro flame torches on top of the pinwheels would be cool after a home run.

Frontman
10-23-2007, 06:46 PM
I have to agree that a new, larger CF scoreboard is probably the only true fix to the problem. Since most of the renovations to our park were added after the ballpark was built, it compromised the viewing angles of some of the scoreboards. The fandeck blocks the view from outfield seats and the fundamentals area blocks views from a variety of seats as well.

I don't think the Sox will replace that CF beast anytime soon. It is probably one of the most expensive things in the ballpark to replace. They would probably try to augment the existing scoreboard before replacing it. I do agree with PHG though. It would be nice if they can "Veeck" it up a bit. Add more lights, lasers, fireworks, pyro, etc. to make our scoreboard the most outrageous, over the top scoreboard in baseball again. In addition to fireworks, I always thought some pyro flame torches on top of the pinwheels would be cool after a home run.

Pyro work could possibly be far more expensive than using a laser show. I'd love to see them incorporate a few 21st century tech stuff into the exploding scoreboard. Heck, currently, the pinwheels go off late sometimes.

paciorek1983
10-23-2007, 07:36 PM
I have to agree that a new, larger CF scoreboard is probably the only true fix to the problem. Since most of the renovations to our park were added after the ballpark was built, it compromised the viewing angles of some of the scoreboards. The fandeck blocks the view from outfield seats and the fundamentals area blocks views from a variety of seats as well.

I don't think the Sox will replace that CF beast anytime soon. It is probably one of the most expensive things in the ballpark to replace. They would probably try to augment the existing scoreboard before replacing it. I do agree with PHG though. It would be nice if they can "Veeck" it up a bit. Add more lights, lasers, fireworks, pyro, etc. to make our scoreboard the most outrageous, over the top scoreboard in baseball again. In addition to fireworks, I always thought some pyro flame torches on top of the pinwheels would be cool after a home run.


Well yeah. They could probably add on to the currnet board. But I'd really like to see them design the board to look like the orginal with a video screen added as well as a few modern features.

Hitmen77
10-23-2007, 09:42 PM
Fenway installed this in CF in 2001. Every park should have this info posted somewhere....



That is NICE! I would love that at the Cell.

Hitmen77
10-23-2007, 09:49 PM
Instead of any auxillary boards, they should make a new centerfield board. It should be bigger and it could hold all of the information fans want. Centerfield is the only place that almost all of the fans can see without obstructions.

Do a new board and my idea of the arched window concourses, complete with ads of some kind that will make up for the loss of the billboards.:smile:

Didn't the Sox just put in a new CF scoreboard (a few years ago) as part of their U.S. Cellular renovations? IIRC, the old scoreboard had 2 screens - a video screen and a text/info screen and they went to just one larger video screen and moved the game info to a new aux scoreboard. The new CF screen is larger, but I don't know why they decided to remove just about all game info from CF. Plus, even with the new larger screen, it still looks smaller than the scoreboards in some other new parks.

hsnterprize
10-24-2007, 02:05 AM
I've written this in the past, but it bears repeating in this thread. First off...I think the current renovations to U.S. Cellular Field are nothing less than OUTSTANDING!!!! The White Sox have turned what many (including myself) thought was a modern-day eyesore to a really nice ballpark. It isn't a tourist attraction ballpark like that urine-infested dump on the north side, but it's not supposed to be. Anyway, here's what I'd like for the Sox to do to further improve the "U.S. Cellular Field Experience"...

Turn the left and right field scoreboards into full color, L.E.D. screens. The one in left can be dedicated to the in-game scores and stats, while the one in right can be used for out-of-town scores. I've read in this thread an idea to make parts of the outfield wall an out-of-town scoreboard like those in Toronto and Milwaukee. Good idea, but I like the walls at the Cell just like they are. I like the retired numbers/faces in left, and the chicken wire in right in front of the Bullpen Sports Bar. So, all that statistical stuff can go above the outfield concourses.

I would also decorate those scoreboards with framing to reflect the "exploding scoreboards of the past". In other words, the left-field scoreboard would have framing around it to look like the center-field scoreboard from Old Comiskey back in the 80's and 90's.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Old_comiskey_park.jpg

The right-field scoreboard would look like the exploding board from the 60's and 70's. Each would have working pinwheels that would light up along with the center field board's wheels after Sox homers.

http://www.majorleaguemodels.com/images/billveecks1960monsterin1967.gif

As far as the center-field board is concerned, I'd either expand the TV screen to compete with other teams' boards, or completely tear the center-field board down and rebuild it from scratch. A good chunk of the bottom of the board couldn't be used for a screen because the center field Fan Deck blocks the view. Still...you can get a good sized video screen up there, say from all the way from the left to the right of the current structure, and from the top of where that Motorola sign is to right underneath the circle where the McDonald's ad is. Or...better yet...make the Motorola ad digital, and just make that part of the screen.

Or if building a new board is the choice, then make is as big from side to side as the scoreboard in Cleveland. I like that big scoreboard.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Jacobs_Field_scoreboard.jpg/800px-

I'm not too crazy about all the ads around the screens, but the screens themselves are pretty impressive. Imagine a Comiskey Park-style motif around those babies!!!!!

One other thing...I saw others post this, but I'd put some short L.E.D. boards on the club-level facade near home plate...especially on the 1st base side so people sitting in left field can get a line score of the game just like everyone else seeing the scoreboard. The small scoreboards on the upper deck corners are okay, but there's better technology out there, and I think the Sox should take advantage of it.

IlliniSox4Life
10-24-2007, 03:07 AM
post

So you want 3 giant scoreboards?

That's a little bit much IMO...

anewman35
10-24-2007, 07:18 AM
So you want 3 giant scoreboards?

That's a little bit much IMO...

Why? Lots of other parks are moving in that direction. And it's not like the boards have to be all video all the time, it would just give them a lot of flexability they don't have now. There's tons of things they should be doing with the scoreboards that they just aren't - our scoreboards, except for minor changes, are basically a setup from 1991. Things have changed a lot since then.

SoxFan78
10-24-2007, 09:17 AM
I only have two renovations/suggestions for next season.

1. No matter if it's day or night, everytime a Sox player hits a HR, play Nancy's Na na na na, hey hey hey, good bye.

2. After every Sox win play "Sweet Home Chicago". I cringed when at the Sox games I attended last year I heard Bon Jovi's "Have a nice day".

Red Barchetta
10-24-2007, 11:06 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Old_comiskey_park.jpg
Wow! What game was this picture taken from? It looks like the SOX are wearing their "new" silver/black unis from the last season in Old Comiskey, however I had thought they sold out those last few games. Not by the looks of this crowd. It might be their older script White Sox unis however.

Regardless, I really miss the outfield upper decks. I know they are never coming back to the Cell, however I can still wish for that downtown south loop ball park. Imagine this shot with the Sears tower and Chicago skyline looming in the background. Especially at night.

Fenway
10-24-2007, 11:15 AM
That is NICE! I would love that at the Cell.

They put it in straight away CF and it gives you everything. Pitch count, Radar speed and type of pitch and batter history against pitcher plus the scoring of the previous play.

I miss the old days with Sherm Feller doing the PA. He also ran the ball and strikes lights and would also announce Hits and errors. Sherm was a ham and when he announced a hit a bell would ring but for an error he installed a game show buzzer

BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Error 3B Boggs

The players association compained :tongue:

Lip Man 1
10-24-2007, 01:24 PM
Red:

Me thinks the picture you are talking about took place in the late 80's. Those appear to be the red-white-blue uniforms of that period.

#24 in the on deck circle looks like the late Carlos Martinez. The hitter with that crouch looks like maybe Dan Pasqua?

Lip

Foulke You
10-24-2007, 03:14 PM
Red:

Me thinks the picture you are talking about took place in the late 80's. Those appear to be the red-white-blue uniforms of that period.

#24 in the on deck circle looks like the late Carlos Martinez. The hitter with that crouch looks like maybe Dan Pasqua?

Lip
I think you might be right about the time period but I don't think that is Pasqua in the batters box. If memory serves, Pasqua was a lefty.

Foulke You
10-24-2007, 03:17 PM
Pyro work could possibly be far more expensive than using a laser show. I'd love to see them incorporate a few 21st century tech stuff into the exploding scoreboard. Heck, currently, the pinwheels go off late sometimes.
I'm not so sure it is as expensive as you might think. The Wolves AHL hockey team at the Allstate Arena uses 4 pyro flame torches on top of their scoreboard as well as sparking fireworks that come out of the bottom of the scoreboard. They use these as part of their starting lineups show and when a Wolves player scores a goal. If a minor league hockey team in Rosemont can afford the pyro, the Sox certainly could as well.

tebman
10-24-2007, 03:18 PM
I have to agree that a new, larger CF scoreboard is probably the only true fix to the problem. Since most of the renovations to our park were added after the ballpark was built, it compromised the viewing angles of some of the scoreboards. The fandeck blocks the view from outfield seats and the fundamentals area blocks views from a variety of seats as well.

I don't think the Sox will replace that CF beast anytime soon. It is probably one of the most expensive things in the ballpark to replace. They would probably try to augment the existing scoreboard before replacing it. I do agree with PHG though. It would be nice if they can "Veeck" it up a bit. Add more lights, lasers, fireworks, pyro, etc. to make our scoreboard the most outrageous, over the top scoreboard in baseball again. In addition to fireworks, I always thought some pyro flame torches on top of the pinwheels would be cool after a home run.
"Veecking it up" is a perfect way to describe what the board needs. Pyro torches are a great idea too.

When the Sox announced that Veeck's original board was going to be replaced (1982?), I wrote a letter to Eddie Einhorn, who was then the front man for the Sox ownership (JR was the green-eyeshade guy in the back office then). I was worried that the spirit of Veeck's board might be lost if it were rebuilt, and urged them not to lose the fireworks or the raucous quality. Geek that I am, I had some very specific suggestions as to what they could do to take advantage of current (1982) technology while keeping it silly during home run celebrations.

Einhorn wrote a nice letter in reply thanking me for my thoughts. It probably had zero influence on them, but I felt better. When the new board was unveiled I was underwhelmed. It was tame compared to its predescessor and served mostly as a frame for the video screen.

That's what's there now: a frame for the (bigger and sharper) video screen, with the lights and fireworks as almost an afterthought. In Veeck's book he described how he came up with the idea for the board in 1960 and how it paid for itself from the billboard revenue. One of the features he was proudest of was its unpredictability -- the pattern of the lights that chased and flashed in and around the board was controlled by a tape, which in 1960 was probably a punched-paper spool. It assured that the sequence and pattern of lights, sound and sparks was never the same twice.

Technology is generations further ahead now. There's so much it could do, including more and better game information. I just don't understand why the Sox haven't done more with their raffish legacy.

Foulke You
10-24-2007, 03:46 PM
Technology is generations further ahead now. There's so much it could do, including more and better game information. I just don't understand why the Sox haven't done more with their raffish legacy.
The biggest flaw of the White Sox organization is admitting when their wrong about something. They tend to be a stubborn bunch at times. Look how long Reinsdorf said there was nothing wrong with our ballpark before they finally realized the park needed a face lift. There are countless other examples of the Sox not heeding to the critiques from fans.

I can't fathom why the CF scoreboard hasn't been given more attention other than the new video board (which MLB made them do as part of the necessary improvements for the 2003 All Star Game). Other than the light up pinwheels, there isn't much that honors the past. Don't get me wrong, I still love it but there is just so much more they should do with it. Perhaps it is an ego thing with the Reinsdorf regime? The loud, crazy, and unpredictable exploding scoreboard of the old park was not their brainchild or part of their regime. It was the legacy of Bill Veeck. Perhaps they are just trying to distance themselves from that?

dickallen15
10-24-2007, 03:48 PM
Red:

Me thinks the picture you are talking about took place in the late 80's. Those appear to be the red-white-blue uniforms of that period.

#24 in the on deck circle looks like the late Carlos Martinez. The hitter with that crouch looks like maybe Dan Pasqua?

Lip
The hitter is Carlton Fisk.

skobabe8
10-24-2007, 07:30 PM
The hitter is Carlton Fisk.

It's definately Fisk.

If a ballpark could be placed in the south loop, where would you put it? The possibilities are endless....

paciorek1983
10-24-2007, 07:55 PM
My q&a with Brooks about renovations:




I was wondering about a few things. At the beginning of the year, Comcast ran a story about all the renovations the park has gone through. They mentioned that there are still plans for more renovations. is that true?

We have a new brick plaza being installed at the corner of 35th and Shields by gate 4. There will be a monument in the middle. It will be very cool. There are a couple of other things we are considering that I think will happen but me discussing it would be premature.



I noticed that down the left field line where there were unfinished suites that there looked like there was some counter-style seating being installed. Did I see correctly, and what is going on with those unused suites?

There are unfinished suites down the left field line. That area is used for post season media overflow. We are thinking about renovating that area, but nothing is concrete for 2008. I think it would be safe to assume that something happens with that area before too long.



I was also wondering if there are any plans to beautify the side of the ballpark that faces the expressway. Quite honestly, that side of the park doesn't look very good and that's the side seen by so many people. Not a great way to show off a ballpark. I have an idea if you guys don't know what to do.

Nothing in the works or in discussions right now to develop that area. Maybe down the road but we have other priorities at this time.



One more thing. do you have any information on a Metra stop that is supposedly being built for the ballpark?

My understanding is that it is supposed to be built and operational by next summer. I really hope it gets done, but I is a “believe-it-when-I-see-it” scenario for me.






:smile:

skobabe8
10-24-2007, 09:53 PM
At least he's honest concerning the Metra stop. If we only had the same honesty about the Nancy situation...

hsnterprize
10-25-2007, 04:46 AM
So you want 3 giant scoreboards?

That's a little bit much IMO...They don't have to be "giant" scoreboards. The middle one would be the biggest, but the ones on the side would be shaped like the scoreboards of the past.

Not to mention, wasn't one of the Old Comiskey Park's attributes a larger-than-life center field scoreboard? You can take those ad boards out, and just use the L.E.D./videoboards for advertising.

The Dude
10-25-2007, 08:51 AM
I'm sure most Sox fans would agree (I see Hitman already has) that we need a much better out-of-town scoreboard. It's decent for now, I mean I'm usually paying attention to the game at hand, but it is still a major eyesore along with the fact that it's slow changing and never seems to be updated or you'll be at one inning for about 45 minutes then all of a sudden you've jumped ahead 5 innings.

That is the only flaw with this stadium. I've been preaching this for the last few years. It doesn't fit the current scheme at all and should be upgraded.
I think the manual scoreboard is quicker to update at Wrigley compared to our garbage in right field. :o::tongue:

rdivaldi
10-25-2007, 10:33 AM
It's definately Fisk.

If a ballpark could be placed in the south loop, where would you put it? The possibilities are endless....

There's nowhere in the south loop to put a baseball stadium, every inch of land is pretty much taken.

Fenway
10-25-2007, 10:40 AM
There's nowhere in the south loop to put a baseball stadium, every inch of land is pretty much taken.

20 years ago they could have ( and should have ) built it there.

I think the biggest mistake with USCF was deciding the field should face south instead of north like it was in the old park. Then you would have the skyline view behind the bleachers.

itsnotrequired
10-25-2007, 10:43 AM
There's nowhere in the south loop to put a baseball stadium, every inch of land is pretty much taken.

Along Clark, between Roosevelt and 16th. Parking lot size would be cut in half but you could squeeze one in there.

DumpJerry
10-25-2007, 10:50 AM
Along Clark, between Roosevelt and 16th. Parking lot size would be cut in half but you could squeeze one in there.
:hawk
Where would he play? I mean, where would the railroad tracks go?
How would we make up the loss revenue from a 50% cut in parking? Charge $40 to park? Where is the nearest train station? How did this thread go from renovations of the current ballpark to moving it to an inconvient location (less transportation options, closer to homes which means NO MORE FIREWORKS)?

itsnotrequired
10-25-2007, 10:56 AM
:hawk
Where would he play? I mean, where would the railroad tracks go?
How would we make up the loss revenue from a 50% cut in parking? Charge $40 to park? Where is the nearest train station? How did this thread go from renovations of the current ballpark to moving it to an inconvient location (less transportation options, closer to homes which means NO MORE FIREWORKS)?

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/5296/mapchicagodcds2ksrv1383eg7.jpg

Hey, we're just talking fantasy here.

Position home plate near the river and 15th, facing the city. You could have player/premium parking south of the stadium off of 18th St. General lots would run from 14th St. to Roosevelt. Additional parking (i.e. a parking garage) could be north of Roosevelt (where the Whole Foods complex is going) or near the rail yard across the river. Build decrotive fencing to keep people off the tracks.

You got the Roosevelt station which serves the Red, Green AND Orange lines just a couple blocks away. Depending on how density develops, a stop could be added at 16th. Buses already serve Clark and Roosevelt. Bus service could be expanded down Canal on game days. Metra stations are a short walk (or cab ride) away. Union/Ogilvie would be well served on the Canal bus route, LaSalle station well served by the Clark. The northern rail bridge on the river is not in service. There is a ramp leading from Canal so the bridge could be made into a pedestrian bridge to get to the park from the west.

Rocky Soprano
10-25-2007, 12:12 PM
At least he's honest concerning the Metra stop. If we only had the same honesty about the Nancy situation...

When have they lied?
From what I understand Nancy herself has confirmed what we heard from the Sox.

TornLabrum
10-25-2007, 06:54 PM
When have they lied?
From what I understand Nancy herself has confirmed what we heard from the Sox.

Here is what Nancy told me before she even signed her last contract (December 2005): She wanted to cut down on her load so she proposed to the Sox that she only work day games. This was confirmed to me by Brooks Boyer. So you're right. No one from the Sox has lied.

Brian26
10-25-2007, 07:53 PM
20 years ago they could have ( and should have ) built it there.

Although a south loop stadium would be picturesque, there are several reasons why it could not have happened.

Twenty years ago, the White Sox could not afford to privately fund their own stadium. The Sox tried to broker a deal that would bring McCaskey into a partnership for a multi-purpose stadium. The City wouldn't commit to any funding unless the Bears were involved. McCaskey wouldn't play ball with Reinsdorf and Einhorn because there was hurt feelings about Einhorn trying to bring a USFL team to Comiskey Park a few years earlier. McCaskey didn't want to share a stadium with a baseball team, and if he did it would be the Cubs.

The infrastructure costs for the Sox to privately fund a baseball-only stadium at the time were insane. It wasn't just about building the facility, but they were looking at traffic studies suggesting major roadway widenings, new ramps onto the Dan Ryan, parking garages, city utilities needing to be upgraded. It was going to be a major undertaking.

Times have changed. It's easy to look at this from a 2007 point-of-view where publically financed stadiums are the rule, as opposed to the exception. This wasn't the case in 1986. The City wasn't going to give the Sox a dime for a baseball-only stadium in the South Loop.

Thank god Jim Thompson went to Northwestern University with Reinsdorf and Einhorn.

skobabe8
10-25-2007, 08:14 PM
Here is what Nancy told me before she even signed her last contract (December 2005): She wanted to cut down on her load so she proposed to the Sox that she only work day games. This was confirmed to me by Brooks Boyer. So you're right. No one from the Sox has lied.


Whenever a Nancy thread comes up there are always contradicting stories on what actually happened or is happening. Funny thing is, some people that talk to Nancy claim she says it was her choice to cut back on games, others who talk to her say it wasn't her choice. Its hard to know what to believe.

skobabe8
10-25-2007, 08:18 PM
http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/5296/mapchicagodcds2ksrv1383eg7.jpg

Hey, we're just talking fantasy here.

Position home plate near the river and 15th, facing the city. You could have player/premium parking south of the stadium off of 18th St. General lots would run from 14th St. to Roosevelt. Additional parking (i.e. a parking garage) could be north of Roosevelt (where the Whole Foods complex is going) or near the rail yard across the river. Build decrotive fencing to keep people off the tracks.

You got the Roosevelt station which serves the Red, Green AND Orange lines just a couple blocks away. Depending on how density develops, a stop could be added at 16th. Buses already serve Clark and Roosevelt. Bus service could be expanded down Canal on game days. Metra stations are a short walk (or cab ride) away. Union/Ogilvie would be well served on the Canal bus route, LaSalle station well served by the Clark. The northern rail bridge on the river is not in service. There is a ramp leading from Canal so the bridge could be made into a pedestrian bridge to get to the park from the west.

Like itsnotrequired said, its just a fantasy and fun to think about. I know it was never possible. But imagining it today with all thats going on in the south loop makes me drool somewhat.

By the way, INR, thats the exact location that I thought about too, between Roosevelt and 16th. Probably because it's vacant.

EDIT: I just noticed....if this was reality, would the Sox really have an address on CLARK??? :o: Blasphemy!!!

Brian26
10-25-2007, 08:26 PM
Like itsnotrequired said, its just a fantasy and fun to think about. I know it was never possible. But imagining it today with all thats going on in the south loop makes me drool somewhat.

What's frustrating is that it would probably be more economically viable today than twenty years ago. The infrastructure problems are still there, but the political obstacles have probably receded.

TornLabrum
10-25-2007, 10:07 PM
Whenever a Nancy thread comes up there are always contradicting stories on what actually happened or is happening. Funny thing is, some people that talk to Nancy claim she says it was her choice to cut back on games, others who talk to her say it wasn't her choice. Its hard to know what to believe.

All I can do is relate exactly what Nancy told me weeks before she even signed a contract. That SHE made the suggestion to the Sox that she cut back and that the grind was getting to her. She talked about the long commute late and night and how it was getting to be tough to do. I don't recall the exact date, but it was sometime between December 1 and December 8, 2005.

She didn't say word one about the Sox imposing this on her. In fact she made it quite clear that it was SHE who brought it up. Period. End of story.

skobabe8
10-26-2007, 10:14 AM
All I can do is relate exactly what Nancy told me weeks before she even signed a contract. That SHE made the suggestion to the Sox that she cut back and that the grind was getting to her. She talked about the long commute late and night and how it was getting to be tough to do. I don't recall the exact date, but it was sometime between December 1 and December 8, 2005.

She didn't say word one about the Sox imposing this on her. In fact she made it quite clear that it was SHE who brought it up. Period. End of story.

Fair enough. Like I said, I have heard this before. I just wonder if there was anything that could have been done (offered her more money) to get her to change her mind. Then again, its obvious the organization wants to move away from the organ so that was probably never even considered.

Red Barchetta
10-26-2007, 01:17 PM
Although a south loop stadium would be picturesque, there are several reasons why it could not have happened.

Twenty years ago, the White Sox could not afford to privately fund their own stadium. The Sox tried to broker a deal that would bring McCaskey into a partnership for a multi-purpose stadium. The City wouldn't commit to any funding unless the Bears were involved. McCaskey wouldn't play ball with Reinsdorf and Einhorn because there was hurt feelings about Einhorn trying to bring a USFL team to Comiskey Park a few years earlier. McCaskey didn't want to share a stadium with a baseball team, and if he did it would be the Cubs.

The infrastructure costs for the Sox to privately fund a baseball-only stadium at the time were insane. It wasn't just about building the facility, but they were looking at traffic studies suggesting major roadway widenings, new ramps onto the Dan Ryan, parking garages, city utilities needing to be upgraded. It was going to be a major undertaking.

Times have changed. It's easy to look at this from a 2007 point-of-view where publically financed stadiums are the rule, as opposed to the exception. This wasn't the case in 1986. The City wasn't going to give the Sox a dime for a baseball-only stadium in the South Loop.

Thank god Jim Thompson went to Northwestern University with Reinsdorf and Einhorn.

That is true. However, I can't help but wonder if the Sox had only waited a few more years two major events would have occurred - (1) Richard (Sox fan) Daly would have replaced Harold Washington as Mayor and (2) the ownership and city would have had Camden Yards, Jacob's Field, Coors Field and Safeco among others to model and look at.

As mentioned, I'm happy with the results of the US Cellular funding, however I really wish the ballpark showcased the skyline and was located near the loop. If built near the United Center or McCormick place or somewhere in between, (remember, this is close to twenty years ago), we wouldn't automatically concede the business clients and Skybox revenue to Wrigley.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-26-2007, 07:10 PM
This is all a bit silly.

The ORIGINAL proposal to move the Sox to the South Loop was back when the neighborhood was dilapidated and filled with transient hotels and abandoned rail yards. Sox owner ART ALLYN proposed moving the Sox to a site where the original Dearborn Park now stands back in the MID/LATE-60'S.

The notion that the South Loop neighborhood would ever look like it does today with a 60's-vintage donut stadium plopped down in the middle is preposterous. I lived there (Dearborn Park) as late as 1994 and the neighborhood still lacked even the most basic amenities like a full-service supermarket. To get my car serviced I was practically taking my life in my hands to walk the 1/2 mile past all the abandoned warehouses from 14th and Wabash back to my condo at 9th & State. There were panhandlers and derelicts everywhere.

The crazy real estate boom around there has only taken place in the last 10-12 years. And the notion that baseball parks should have a "view" of the skyline didn't really become vogue until the 1990's.

The South Loop is doing just fine without the Sox and the Sox appear to be doing just fine playing ball at 35th and Shields for what has now been 98 straight seasons. Let's leave it that way.

hsnterprize
10-27-2007, 08:33 AM
This is all a bit silly.

The crazy real estate boom around there has only taken place in the last 10-12 years. And the notion that baseball parks should have a "view" of the skyline didn't really become vogue until the 1990's.

The South Loop is doing just fine without the Sox and the Sox appear to be doing just fine playing ball at 35th and Shields for what has now been 98 straight seasons. Let's leave it that way.

I agree with PHG on this one. Although I'm too young to remember life in the South Loop back in the 60's, I do know that this "trend" of ballparks facing the downtown area of it's city didn't really start until the 90's. And in fact, if I remember correctly...a lot of those places, like Cleveland and Baltimore, were trying to "revive" their downtown areas for tourism. Chicago doesn't have to do that...there's more than enough things to do in this town that a baseball stadium, albeit a nice addition, didn't need to be built near a lot of the other attractions this city has to offer. I even remember Mayor Daley saying that Chicago didn't need a revival, and I for one agreed with his both then and now.

Besides...I don't remember any complaints about "which direction the stadium is facing" in regards to places like Wrigley Field, Yankee Stadium, and even Fenway Park to some regards. I haven't heard anyone in L.A. complain about Dodger Stadium not facing the city, Rangers Ballpark (or whatever the place is called now) facing downtown Dallas, or Miller Park facing downtown Milwaukee. Bottom line is that U.S. Cellular Field is fine. Granted, I admit it would be nice if the Cell were facing the Loop, but that's not a "requirement" for a ballpark to be a good place. It's a "requirement" to bring in the tourists from across the country, but it's not one for building a good baseball team. Besides, I've talked to people from across the country whose "tourist attraction ballparks" aren't selling out like they used to, and they all say one thing...the team isn't too good. Even in Baltimore's storied Camden Yards...the ballpark that started the 90's ballpark boom, isn't filled up unless either the Yankees or Red Sox are in town. And from what I've seen and heard...most of the fans in attendance are cheering for the visitors.

"Tourist Attraction Ballparks", or TAB's as I like to call them, are NOT what make a team great. However, great teams make ballparks great. Look how many people were WANTING to come to U.S. Cellular Field after the Sox' success. People who swore up and down they'd stay away from the place suddenly found it within themselves to give the place either their first chance, or another chance...and most people say they like it. I'm on another board where I started a thread about the Cell, and other than some moron from Detroit who hates all new ballparks (including Comerica Park in his hometown), most people say after they've seen the pictures me and others posted, they're liking the place more and more. Here's a link to it if you want to see the reactions for yourself. (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=69308)

skobabe8
10-27-2007, 11:40 AM
I agree with PHG on this one. Although I'm too young to remember life in the South Loop back in the 60's, I do know that this "trend" of ballparks facing the downtown area of it's city didn't really start until the 90's. And in fact, if I remember correctly...a lot of those places, like Cleveland and Baltimore, were trying to "revive" their downtown areas for tourism. Chicago doesn't have to do that...there's more than enough things to do in this town that a baseball stadium, albeit a nice addition, didn't need to be built near a lot of the other attractions this city has to offer. I even remember Mayor Daley saying that Chicago didn't need a revival, and I for one agreed with his both then and now.

Besides...I don't remember any complaints about "which direction the stadium is facing" in regards to places like Wrigley Field, Yankee Stadium, and even Fenway Park to some regards. I haven't heard anyone in L.A. complain about Dodger Stadium not facing the city, Rangers Ballpark (or whatever the place is called now) facing downtown Dallas, or Miller Park facing downtown Milwaukee. Bottom line is that U.S. Cellular Field is fine. Granted, I admit it would be nice if the Cell were facing the Loop, but that's not a "requirement" for a ballpark to be a good place. It's a "requirement" to bring in the tourists from across the country, but it's not one for building a good baseball team. Besides, I've talked to people from across the country whose "tourist attraction ballparks" aren't selling out like they used to, and they all say one thing...the team isn't too good. Even in Baltimore's storied Camden Yards...the ballpark that started the 90's ballpark boom, isn't filled up unless either the Yankees or Red Sox are in town. And from what I've seen and heard...most of the fans in attendance are cheering for the visitors.

"Tourist Attraction Ballparks", or TAB's as I like to call them, are NOT what make a team great. However, great teams make ballparks great. Look how many people were WANTING to come to U.S. Cellular Field after the Sox' success. People who swore up and down they'd stay away from the place suddenly found it within themselves to give the place either their first chance, or another chance...and most people say they like it. I'm on another board where I started a thread about the Cell, and other than some moron from Detroit who hates all new ballparks (including Comerica Park in his hometown), most people say after they've seen the pictures me and others posted, they're liking the place more and more. Here's a link to it if you want to see the reactions for yourself. (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=69308)



LOL. This could get interesting.