PDA

View Full Version : Talking to Cubs fans last week


Fenway
02-02-2008, 11:44 AM
I talked to quite a few Cubs fans when I was in Chicago last week.

Every single one agreed that Wrigley Field is a dangerous dump and all blame the cheapness of the Tribune ( and hiding behind the landmark status of the park )

Every one I talked to said that would not mind going to 35th St for a year or two if Wrigley could be replaced and all said Sox Park was a fine place to watch a game.

These were for the most part fans over 30.

They are well aware of what the Red Sox have done to improve Fenway Park and see no reason why it hasn't been done at Wrigley.

Several dream of Mark Cuban but know that Selig will never let that happen.

johnr1note
02-02-2008, 12:04 PM
I talked to quite a few Cubs fans when I was in Chicago last week.

Every single one agreed that Wrigley Field is a dangerous dump and all blame the cheapness of the Tribune ( and hiding behind the landmark status of the park )

Every one I talked to said that would not mind going to 35th St for a year or two if Wrigley could be replaced and all said Sox Park was a fine place to watch a game.

These were for the most part fans over 30.

They are well aware of what the Red Sox have done to improve Fenway Park and see no reason why it hasn't been done at Wrigley.

Several dream of Mark Cuban but know that Selig will never let that happen.

Interesting. Most of the Cubs fans who are my friends are blind to the deterioration at Wrigley, and view it as some kind of Holy relic. Some even object to the current renovations as violative of the traditional "ambiance."

DSpivack
02-02-2008, 12:05 PM
Interesting. Most of the Cubs fans who are my friends are blind to the deterioration at Wrigley, and view it as some kind of Holy relic. Some even object to the current renovations as violative of the traditional "ambiance."

Yeah, who Fens talked to doesn't sound like the average Chad or Trixie who views it as a shrine, not a deteriorating baseball park.

I say the Cubs will be playing somewhere else within 25 years.

eastchicagosoxfan
02-02-2008, 12:09 PM
I have friends that are Cub fans, and they would like to have a new, or at least renovated stadium. As one put it, " They're tearing down Yankee Stadium, which has a tad bit more history than Wrigley Field. They wouldn't mind moving out for a season to completely renovate the stadium.

jcw218
02-02-2008, 12:11 PM
I say the Cubs will be playing somewhere else within 25 years.

I'll bet that the Cubs are playing somewhere else within 15 years.

Fenway
02-02-2008, 12:16 PM
Yeah, who Fens talked to doesn't sound like the average Chad or Trixie who views it as a shrine, not a deteriorating baseball park.

I say the Cubs will be playing somewhere else within 25 years.

I said these were people who live in Lakeview who are over 30.

Just a guess on my part but fans who grew up with Brickhouse are real baseball fans.

Harry changed the culture and WGN Superstation gave them national attention. I think one other factor plays into it....

This kid discovers Wrigley Field
http://images.google.com/url?q=http://assets.espn.go.com/i/magazine/new/ferris_cubs.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHXCFpE6XneN2IQFWqjCCaKR3hCWg

This movie had an impact on millions of teens across the US and it made Wrigley represent party NOT baseball.

DSpivack
02-02-2008, 12:19 PM
I said these were people who live in Lakeview who are over 30.

Just a guess on my part but fans who grew up with Brickhouse are real baseball fans.

Harry changed the culture and WGN Superstation gave them national attention. I think one other factor plays into it....

This kid discovers Wrigley Field
http://images.google.com/url?q=http://assets.espn.go.com/i/magazine/new/ferris_cubs.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHXCFpE6XneN2IQFWqjCCaKR3hCWg

This movie had an impact on millions of teens across the US and it made Wrigley represent party NOT baseball.

People in Lakeview over 30? There can't be many. :tongue:

I would think WGN and Harry were most of the impact, the scene in Ferris Bueller was rather short.

tebman
02-02-2008, 12:22 PM
I'll bet that the Cubs are playing somewhere else within 15 years.
They might not have a choice. Either they move to a new park or completely gut and rebuild the old one, which would mean that the Cubs would play at USCF or Milwaukee for at least a year.

The place is 90+ years old -- the falling concrete is Exhibit A showing that it needs fundamental rebuilding or replacement. It simply won't be safe.

The new owner, whoever it is, is going to have to deal with it. If the state takes ownership through the ISFA, then the circus will really have come to town as the state haggles with the new team owner over who pays for what.

Not a pretty picture no matter how you look at it.

TomBradley72
02-02-2008, 12:33 PM
Who cares? Really...who cares?

skobabe8
02-02-2008, 01:44 PM
My sample size is a couple of family members over 50 and a bunch of buddies in their mid 20s and I dont know anyone who wants wrigley messed with.

Chicken Dinner
02-02-2008, 01:57 PM
They should go to Champaign like the Bears did!:D:

johnr1note
02-02-2008, 03:00 PM
They might not have a choice. Either they move to a new park or completely gut and rebuild the old one, which would mean that the Cubs would play at USCF or Milwaukee for at least a year.

The place is 90+ years old -- the falling concrete is Exhibit A showing that it needs fundamental rebuilding or replacement. It simply won't be safe.

The new owner, whoever it is, is going to have to deal with it. If the state takes ownership through the ISFA, then the circus will really have come to town as the state haggles with the new team owner over who pays for what.

Not a pretty picture no matter how you look at it.

If the Cubs are really going to renovate Wrigley, and not just patch it up and/or add seats, they will need to do what the Yankees did in the mid to late 70s. They shut down Yankee Stadium for something like 2 full seasons, and played home games at Shea. If the Cubs truly did that kind of renovation (and I can't see Wrigley lasting much longer than 4 or 5 more years if they don't), I can't imagine the Cubs would play anyplace else but at the Cell. Home games in Milwaukee won't work -- (too remote for about half of the local fan base), and the other baseball facilities in the area (college or minor league) don't seat enough. The only other solution would be to retro-fit Soldier Field the way the Dodgers did at the Coliseum. Come to think of it, that might be interesting.

turners56
02-02-2008, 03:09 PM
Every Cubs fan I know thinks of the Cell as a piece of crap and Wrigley as the god of all major league ball parks. But then again, all the Cubs fans I talk to have no baseball knowledge and are just bandwagon Cubs fans from 2003...not baseball fans in general. So yes, the extreme amount of ignorance and arrogance is overwhelming. Me trying to explain anything is like trying to talk to a deaf person. In addition, all of them are under 30.

WSox597
02-02-2008, 03:29 PM
I've always found it difficult to talk with Cubs fans about baseball. Everything they say is colored by their blind obsession about the Cubs.

I actually had one Cub fan I work with, whose baseball opinion up to that point I valued, say how great it was that they filled Wrigley no matter how bad the team was playing. "Now those are great fans!" he said.

I was stunned that a baseball fan could say something that stupid. It's obvious that if fans don't demand change, there will be no change. And filling the park for dog teams sends the wrong message to owners. The only thing most owners pay attention to is their pocketbook. When the park's empty it gets their attention.

I wouldn't want the Cubs, or their fans, in US Cellular Field while Wrigley was being renovated or bulldozed. Let them go to Milwaukee.

chisox77
02-02-2008, 03:34 PM
Remember Daley's response to the Cubs in 2004, when chunks of concrete were falling, and the Tribune tried to bury the incident?

"Get a team!"

(Daley also threatened to close Wrigley, though it was nothing more than a usual temper burst)

Fenway
02-02-2008, 03:37 PM
I can think of one guy who was a real Cubs fan and look what happened to him..:angry:

http://www.gotwinlakes.com/images/Bartman.jpg

Lip Man 1
02-02-2008, 04:01 PM
It is my understanding based on a past possibility that the White Sox would not allow the Cubs to use U.S. Cellular Field.

I can't recall the exact place where I saw the comments, they were years ago and were stated after the Cubs had a shot to get to the World Series (sans lights) in 1984.

I think JR made the statement. Now granted the Sox could be 'overruled' by Proud To Be Your Bud on this.

Lip

RTI_SoxFan
02-02-2008, 04:02 PM
Interesting. Most of the Cubs fans who are my friends are blind to the deterioration at Wrigley, and view it as some kind of Holy relic. Some even object to the current renovations as violative of the traditional "ambiance."

Agreed - none of my friends have EVER mentioned this... Wrigley is the ONLY shrine!

I'm having my bachelor party at the Cell and the majority of the men (35) in attendance are going to be Cubs fans. Of course, all of them are busting out the "bullet proof vest" jokes and ripping on how awful of a stadium it is.

Whitesox029
02-02-2008, 04:02 PM
Several dream of Mark Cuban but know that Selig will never let that happen.
Neither will Reinsdorf. JR wanted to keep him out of the NBA too.

Cuck the Fubs
02-02-2008, 04:28 PM
Agreed - none of my friends have EVER mentioned this... Wrigley is the ONLY shrine!

I'm having my bachelor party at the Cell and the majority of the men (35) in attendance are going to be Cubs fans. Of course, all of them are busting out the "bullet proof vest" jokes and ripping on how awful of a stadium it is.

Be sure to file your post party report after they change their tune about the Cell and the area surrounding it.:smile:

Martinigirl
02-02-2008, 04:31 PM
I talked to quite a few Cubs fans when I was in Chicago last week.

Every single one agreed that Wrigley Field is a dangerous dump and all blame the cheapness of the Tribune ( and hiding behind the landmark status of the park )

Every one I talked to said that would not mind going to 35th St for a year or two if Wrigley could be replaced and all said Sox Park was a fine place to watch a game.

These were for the most part fans over 30.

They are well aware of what the Red Sox have done to improve Fenway Park and see no reason why it hasn't been done at Wrigley.

Several dream of Mark Cuban but know that Selig will never let that happen.

The vast majority of Cub "fans" that I know would never say a bad word about Wrigley and would think it was blasphemy if they had to leave Lakeview and go to the scary Cell for a game.

And I don't know too many Sox fans that would be happy with the idea of sharing our stadium with the Cubs.

Frater Perdurabo
02-02-2008, 04:47 PM
Let them play in Des Moines.

Or, because the Tribune said they are the most popular team on the planet, they could become MLB's version of the Harlem Globetrotters and travel around the country for 162 games. Of course, with their record of futility, the more apt analogy would be the Washington Generals.

DSpivack
02-02-2008, 05:13 PM
It is my understanding based on a past possibility that the White Sox would not allow the Cubs to use U.S. Cellular Field.

I can't recall the exact place where I saw the comments, they were years ago and were stated after the Cubs had a shot to get to the World Series (sans lights) in 1984.

I think JR made the statement. Now granted the Sox could be 'overruled' by Proud To Be Your Bud on this.

Lip

Wasn't there something crazy about playing World Series games in St. Louis? I know I've read that here before.

Brian26
02-02-2008, 05:19 PM
Wasn't there something crazy about playing World Series games in St. Louis? I know I've read that here before.

You have a good memory. I believe Dallas Green made the comment that he wouldn't let the Cubs play at Comiskey because they weren't familiar with the playing surface (supposedly a disadvantage, as the AL team in the World Series (the Tigers or Royals) would have some familiarity with Comiskey from the regular season). Green said the Cubs would play their home games, if need be, in St. Louis on the rug.

kevin57
02-02-2008, 05:27 PM
I too have never heard a Cub fan utter a word of praise about USCF, not a word. Everything at the Shrine is better: the food, the fans, the atmosphere...every day of every season.

I also don't hear them talk much about the need for major renovations, but that comment will sometimes quietly slip from their mouths in hushed tones after a few brews.

What's absolutely incredible, though, is how many--and it is a sizable number--honestly would not trade a new ballpark for a WS. They'd actually pick to keep the Urinal. :rolleyes:

pierzynski07
02-02-2008, 05:32 PM
What's absolutely incredible, though, is how many--and it is a sizable number--honestly would not trade a new ballpark for a WS. They'd actually pick to keep the Urinal. :rolleyes:

Everyone keeps saying that, but no one I talked to has that mindset. Plus there's the myth that a new stadium strongly increases the chance of a world championship. I should give Discovery Channel a call.

TommyJohn
02-02-2008, 07:03 PM
Wasn't there something crazy about playing World Series games in St. Louis? I know I've read that here before.

If memory serves, I believe that Peter Ueberroth forced the lights issue
back then by announcing that if the Cubs made the postseason in
1985, they would have to play their home games in the closest NL city,
which at the time was St. Louis. Of course, the Cubs didn't make it, but
the issue stayed in the forefront. I could be wrong, I am only going off
what I read 22-odd years ago.

TommyJohn
02-02-2008, 07:05 PM
I can think of one guy who was a real Cubs fan and look what happened to him..:angry:

http://www.gotwinlakes.com/images/Bartman.jpg

He doesn't count, because he wasn't a "sophisticated" Cub fan.

Fenway
02-02-2008, 08:11 PM
Everyone keeps saying that, but no one I talked to has that mindset. Plus there's the myth that a new stadium strongly increases the chance of a world championship. I should give Discovery Channel a call.

http://www.celebrateboston.com/images/attractions/fenwaypark.jpg

kba
02-02-2008, 09:15 PM
They are well aware of what the Red Sox have done to improve Fenway Park and see no reason why it hasn't been done at Wrigley.

How does the present condition of Wrigley compare to Fenway's condition before the renovation? I'm asking because the Red Sox obviously didn't need to vacate Fenway while the re-construction work took place. Is it a foregone conclusion that the Cubs will need to find a temporary home if Wrigley is renovated?

Fenway
02-02-2008, 09:38 PM
How does the present condition of Wrigley compare to Fenway's condition before the renovation? I'm asking because the Red Sox obviously didn't need to vacate Fenway while the re-construction work took place. Is it a foregone conclusion that the Cubs will need to find a temporary home if Wrigley is renovated?

John Harrington allowed Fenway to become rundown in the late 1990's as he wanted a new park. They announced the plans in 1999 for a new park across the street but they didn't own the land so it fell through. He then sold the club.

While in need of a paint job Fenway was not in danger of falling down. There has never been a case of concrete crashing into the seats below. It also never looked as dangerous as Tiger Stadium and for that matter Comiskey had become.

Wrigley has a net under the upper deck to catch concrete falling....that indicates major problems.

cwsfannick
02-02-2008, 09:50 PM
My personal gripe with Wrigley is how long it takes to get out of the place after a game. I think they have 4 exits and only 1 is in the infield.

PalehosePlanet
02-02-2008, 10:06 PM
It is my understanding based on a past possibility that the White Sox would not allow the Cubs to use U.S. Cellular Field.

I can't recall the exact place where I saw the comments, they were years ago and were stated after the Cubs had a shot to get to the World Series (sans lights) in 1984.

I think JR made the statement. Now granted the Sox could be 'overruled' by Proud To Be Your Bud on this.

Lip

Lip, back then JR & co. owned old Comiskey. Would we still have a say in the matter now since the state owns USCF?

cards press box
02-02-2008, 10:49 PM
It is my understanding based on a past possibility that the White Sox would not allow the Cubs to use U.S. Cellular Field.

I can't recall the exact place where I saw the comments, they were years ago and were stated after the Cubs had a shot to get to the World Series (sans lights) in 1984.

I think JR made the statement. Now granted the Sox could be 'overruled' by Proud To Be Your Bud on this.

Lip

I imagine that the Illinois Sports Authority might have something to say about this, too. Some people have speculated that the Cubs might play in Milwaukee but if the ISA purchases the Shrine (as is rumored), I imagine that any number of Illinois politicians would pressure the Cubs to play in Illinois (and preferably Chicago) to keep tax revenue, economic benefits for neighboring businesses, etc. in Illinois as opposed to Wisconsin.

Soldier Field would be wild, reminiscent to the L.A. Colosseum in the late '50's. When it is all said and done, the Cubs might play at USCF for a couple of years. If that happens, the Sox would benefit from the influx of casual fans who have never been south of Madison St. discovering just what a great park it is.

DumpJerry
02-02-2008, 11:05 PM
Lip, back then JR & co. owned old Comiskey. Would we still have a say in the matter now since the state owns USCF?

I imagine that the Illinois Sports Authority might have something to say about this, too.
The White Sox' lease with the ISPA gives the White Sox complete control over the ballpark. I know a lawyer/police officer who was asked by his superiors at the Chicago Police Department back when new Comiskey was set to open to review the lease to see what, if anything, the police can or should do about alcohol in the parking lots. Since the lease gave the Sox complete control over the park and parking lots, he told the bosses that it was up to the Sox whether or not alcohol may be consumed in the lots. The city had control over the sidewalks. This is why we're allowed to tailgate at Comiskey.

I know a lot (several dozen) of Cub fans who have come to Comiskey to experience real baseball. All of them have come away raving at how great the park is for the entire experience-sightlines, food, fan atmosphere, etc. They really can't find anything negative to say.

LongLiveFisk
02-02-2008, 11:18 PM
If memory serves, I believe that Peter Ueberroth forced the lights issue
back then by announcing that if the Cubs made the postseason in
1985, they would have to play their home games in the closest NL city,
which at the time was St. Louis. Of course, the Cubs didn't make it, but
the issue stayed in the forefront. I could be wrong, I am only going off
what I read 22-odd years ago.

That's interesting, because I read somewhere here on WSI that had the Cubs made the World Series in 1984, they would have had to play their games at Comiskey Park due to the lights issue. Can anyone confirm this?

Lip Man 1
02-03-2008, 12:08 AM
I remember on Chicago Tribune Live! a few months ago this came up. Apparently Ueberroth made a statement along those lines. Paul Sullivan said that was a lie, that the Cubs were never told they'd have to play at Comiskey Park. They would play in a National League field.

Lip

TommyJohn
02-03-2008, 10:37 AM
I remember on Chicago Tribune Live! a few months ago this came up. Apparently Ueberroth made a statement along those lines. Paul Sullivan said that was a lie, that the Cubs were never told they'd have to play at Comiskey Park. They would play in a National League field.

Lip

That's interesting, because I read somewhere here on WSI that had the Cubs made the World Series in 1984, they would have had to play their games at Comiskey Park due to the lights issue. Can anyone confirm this?

I hope "Rain Grobber" sees this so he can confirm, but the plan for the 1984
World Series was to switch the ballparks. Games 1,2,6 and 7 were scheduled
for the NL ballpark, games 3,4 and 5 for the AL. When it appeared that the
Cubs might play in the series, Commissioner (I want to say at this point it
was still Kuhn) gave in to the network's cry and switched them around-
Games 3,4 and 5 would be in Wrigley, Games 1,2,6 and 7 in the AL park.
That was the ruling, that is what was reported in 1984, and that is the way
it was going to be. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong (Ueberroth, don't
know why he even pulled that whopper about Comiskey Park out of his ass)
or too lazy to look up the damn truth (Sullivan).

southside rocks
02-03-2008, 10:57 AM
I remember on Chicago Tribune Live! a few months ago this came up. Apparently Ueberroth made a statement along those lines. Paul Sullivan said that was a lie, that the Cubs were never told they'd have to play at Comiskey Park. They would play in a National League field.

Lip

Miller Park in Milwaukee, perhaps.

Hitmen77
02-03-2008, 03:10 PM
I said these were people who live in Lakeview who are over 30.

Just a guess on my part but fans who grew up with Brickhouse are real baseball fans.

Harry changed the culture and WGN Superstation gave them national attention. I think one other factor plays into it....

This kid discovers Wrigley Field
http://images.google.com/url?q=http://assets.espn.go.com/i/magazine/new/ferris_cubs.jpg&usg=AFQjCNHXCFpE6XneN2IQFWqjCCaKR3hCWg

This movie had an impact on millions of teens across the US and it made Wrigley represent party NOT baseball.

I doubt that movie had that much of an impact on the Cubs popularity. The movie was yet another nice promo for them but it didn't change much - the Cubs and Wrigley would have become just as popular even if this movie was never made.

As far as what Cub fans think - I can think of only ONE Cub fan I know who would admit there are any negatives about Wrigley or that there is anything good about the Cell. The rest of them are totally sold on the "everything Wrigley is wonderful, everything at the Cell is bland or dangerous (neighborhood)" propaganda.

To be honest, I really don't care what they think or what they want to do with Wrigley. All I want is for the Sox to get back to the postseason again and to make a run off successive winning seasons. Ultimately, this is what will give the Sox a more decent market share in Chicago and beat back the Cubs dominance in this town. 2005 gave our team a stunning boost in popularity and we really blew it in '07 as far as keeping the momentum going. Looking at this year forward, I just want us to win games!

soxfan21
02-03-2008, 03:40 PM
I went to Wrigley once last season because one of my better buddies, who is a cubs fan, got us tickets to go because he wanted to show me what I was "missing" at a ballgame. I had taken him to a number of sox games before that, and told him that I would not pay for anything at this stadium (not cause I am cheap, I just don't support the cubs in any way, shape, or form). After going there I realized how spoiled we all are when we go to games at the cell. It is so sweet to have a scoreboard that has a jumbotron on it so that we could see the cool pregame montage, and some highlights. It is also sweet that we do not have to "relieve" ourselves in troughs, and are allowed our personal space. It is also nice to basically have a view of the field no matter where you are when you walk on the 100 level at the Cell. When we were at Wrigley we sat in the bleachers, and in order to get any food or beverage, to had to go behind and below the stands to get it which did not allow you to see the action that was going on, on the field. I do not see what is so special about Wrigley, and when they do tear it down or renovate it I hope that the cubs play those games up north in Milwaukee rather than come to the Cell and invade our home.

chisoxfanatic
02-03-2008, 03:56 PM
It is also nice to basically have a view of the field no matter where you are when you walk on the 100 level at the Cell. When we were at Wrigley we sat in the bleachers, and in order to get any food or beverage, to had to go behind and below the stands to get it which did not allow you to see the action that was going on, on the field.

My dad took me to Wrigley in September of '99. The Cubs lost to the Pirates 8-5. Nancy Kerrigan sang the 7th Inning Stretch. Anyways, for my personal experiences, the physical feel of the seats were ok; but, that's just about it. Our seats were about where 3rd base was, but we were way up at the top of the lower deck, underneath the upper deck. I could not see the scoreboard, large portions of the field were obstructed due to the metal beams, and even the upper portion of the right field wall was hidden. They had televisions hanging from the upper deck overhang, which just included the score and the inning. You'd NEVER get that poor of a view at Comiskey!

When I had to use the restroom, it took a long while to even get to it--the concourse was incredibly narrow! The stench from the restrooms is able to be smelled from the concourse! Of course, the lines at the concession stands (which had horrible selections compared to what we have at Comiskey) don't make things any easier. You have to be Moses to get through that concourse.

I don't get why Wrigley is so glorified either. To get a COMFORTABLE baseball experience in Chicago, you MUST head to the south side.

Grzegorz
02-03-2008, 06:29 PM
I don't get why Wrigley is so glorified either.

It's the intimacy of the park, the ivy, and the history. Before Wrigley became the "in" place that ballpark was a great place to see some great NL ball.

Usually the great play was by the opposition. :cool:

GlassSox
02-03-2008, 07:03 PM
The Cubs could sell commemorative 5,000psi concrete by the cubic yard and rebar. They could offer to write your name in the concrete or bury some bleacher bum in it at no additional charge.

I'm sure a lot of Cubs fans would jump on this deal.

RadioheadRocks
02-03-2008, 07:52 PM
I remember on Chicago Tribune Live! a few months ago this came up. Apparently Ueberroth made a statement along those lines. Paul Sullivan said that was a lie, that the Cubs were never told they'd have to play at Comiskey Park. They would play in a National League field.

Lip

County Stadium in Milwaukee, perhaps.


Fixed it.

DrCrawdad
02-03-2008, 07:56 PM
Agreed - none of my friends have EVER mentioned this... Wrigley is the ONLY shrine!

I'm having my bachelor party at the Cell and the majority of the men (35) in attendance are going to be Cubs fans. Of course, all of them are busting out the "bullet proof vest" jokes and ripping on how awful of a stadium it is.

These same Cubbie fans who love to make the racist tinged "jokes" about The Cell often recoil in horror if you respond with a comment about The Shrine being in the seat of "Boystown."

voodoochile
02-03-2008, 09:31 PM
These same Cubbie fans who love to make the racist tinged "jokes" about The Cell often recoil in horror if you respond with a comment about The Shrine being in the seat of "Boystown."

Way to get the thread closed, DrC. Funny, no one mentioned that stuff except for you...:?: