Thread: Rosemont Cubs?
View Single Post
  #155  
Old 04-04-2013, 08:20 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 53,777
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LITTLE NELL View Post
Here's a question; if old Comiskey was still with us would it be the tourist attraction that Wrigley is? I will say maybe a little but it all comes down to location, location, location.
On it's own, it's hard to say for sure, we all know one of the big draws about Wrigley is also the atmosphere around the park and even Old Comiskey would still be right next to a 16-lane superhighway, surrounded by parking lots, and still would have spent 40 years just a few blocks away from a relatively notorious high rise project... Not exactly any kind of welcoming environment, even compared to Wrigleyville at it's nadir prior to the Tribune Hype Machine.

Buuuuuuuuuut... If the Sox still had Old Comiskey and the Cubs have Wrigley, I definitely think you'd get a LOT more tourist element coming to Chicago to see both our Jewelbox era ballparks. Right now the Sox capture what? MAYBE 5% of the tourist market in the city and that's almost entirely reliant on Yankees and Red Sox fans coming to Chicago to see their own teams. I think with Old Comiskey you'd see a lot more tourists.
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-4

LAST GAME: May 31 - Padres 4, Sox 2
NEXT GAME: Sunday, August 4 - vs. Twins
Reply With Quote