Rosemont Cubs?

[Mr. Jinx]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

I just don't see it as an untapped resource. I would venture a guess that the Cubs attendance as it has been since 1984 is made up of a lot of suburbanites who come into the city for games, as well as a huge number of tourists who flock to Wrigley Field. There is no magical untapped suburban market out there; there is a good reason why pretty much every team who has built a new ballpark in the last 25 years has done so in a city center location.

I know a lot of suburbanites that follow the Cubs religiously but only go to 1-2 games a year because they don't want to drive into the city and deal with parking.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx

I know a lot of suburbanites that follow the Cubs religiously but only go to 1-2 games a year because they don't want to drive into the city and deal with parking.

That's nice. I'm sure the number of people for whom that is the case are dwarfed by the number of tourists who flock to Chicago every year to see Wrigley Field, as well as the number of permanently drunk bros who live within walking distance of the park and attend who knows how many games each season.

[Mr. Jinx]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

That's nice. I'm sure the number of people for whom that is the case are dwarfed by the number of tourists who flock to Chicago every year to see Wrigley Field, as well as the number of permanently drunk bros who live within walking distance of the park and attend who knows how many games each season.

You're right, clearly there are more bros living in Lincoln Park and Wrigleyville then there are families in suburban Chicago.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx

You're right, clearly there are more bros living in Lincoln Park and Wrigleyville then there are families in suburban Chicago.

That's not what I said. I said combining that crowd with the number of tourists who flock to Wrigley Field each season greatly outweighs the families who would probably go to no more than a handful of games each season.

If suburban families were a huge untapped market waiting to be exploited, why has pretty much every new ballpark in the last 25 years been built in a city center?

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx

You're right, clearly there are more bros living in Lincoln Park and Wrigleyville then there are families in suburban Chicago.

Well first, yes, if you were to do a head count of people within a reasonable distance of a fixed point, a count centered on Wrigley Field would probably have a higher number than any point in Rosemont, any other suburb, or probably just about any place in the country between New York and San Francisco.

Second, you're convienently lopping off the tourist draw, which is the golden goose in this conversation. The Sox built a park that in every way caters to the suburban crowd; more central location, right next to a 16-lane superhighway, within walking distance of 3 train lines, all of which are closer to downtown than the trek up the Red Line to Wrigley... and the Cubs trounce us in attendance nowadays because of the Wrigley Field factor. It's a pretty sizable gamble to roll the dice on losing a cash cow tourist trap in favor of the traditionally fickle suburban family demographic.

And third, any sensible person can read the writing on the wall... Poverty in the suburbs (especially the inner ring suburbs like, say, Rosemont and its immediate neighbors) is increasing while population has been falling, fuel costs are increasing, people are driving less, etc... Even if you remove the whole "Shrine" element that they'd be throwing away, this would be a catastrophically short-sighted move that would go down as one of the worst in professional sports history.

[Mr. Jinx]

Originally Posted by doublem23

Well first, yes, if you were to do a head count of people within a reasonable distance of a fixed point, a count centered on Wrigley Field would probably have a higher number than any point in Rosemont, any other suburb, or probably just about any place in the country between New York and San Francisco.

Second, you're convienently lopping off the tourist draw, which is the golden goose in this conversation. The Sox built a park that in every way caters to the suburban crowd; more central location, right next to a 16-lane superhighway, within walking distance of 3 train lines, all of which are closer to downtown than the trek up the Red Line to Wrigley... and the Cubs trounce us in attendance nowadays because of the Wrigley Field factor. It's a pretty sizable gamble to roll the dice on losing a cash cow tourist trap in favor of the traditionally fickle suburban family demographic.

And third, any sensible person can read the writing on the wall... Poverty in the suburbs (especially the inner ring suburbs like, say, Rosemont and its immediate neighbors) is increasing while population has been falling, fuel costs are increasing, people are driving less, etc... Even if you remove the whole "Shrine" element that they'd be throwing away, this would be a catastrophically short-sighted move that would go down as one of the worst in professional sports history.

I'm not suggesting that it would make financial sense to move to the suburbs at all, just that I think people are discounting the amount of people that would prefer the ballpark not be in the city as a minor number. Also, if you are going to mention poverty in the suburbs, the city hasn't exactly been doing all that well the past few years either.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx

I'm not suggesting that it would make financial sense to move to the suburbs at all, just that I think people are discounting the amount of people that would prefer the ballpark not be in the city as a minor number. Also, if you are going to mention poverty in the suburbs, the city hasn't exactly been doing all that well the past few years either.

It is a minor number, though, compared to what you lose. Nobody in their right mind is trying to build anything to appeal solely to Mr. and Mrs. Suburb and their 2.5 kids; for the same reason that many companies in the area have abandoned their suburban office parks to move back downtown; I'm not saying the city or the burbs are better or worse for day-to-day living, that's all personal preference, of course, I'm just saying, if you're object is to try to attract 3 million people to a specific location over the course of several months, limiting the overall accessibility of your location by moving it 20 miles away from the center of this very centrally-focused transporation infrastructure would be simply foolish.

[C-Dawg]

Originally Posted by Mr. Jinx

I know a lot of suburbanites that follow the Cubs religiously but only go to 1-2 games a year because they don't want to drive into the city and deal with parking.

Maybe the Cubs could hit the storied 4-million mark if they'd just move to the suburbs!

[Frontman]

I do love how some of the Cubs faithful in the Chicago media basically say, "Don't they get that its the area around the park, the bars, walking to the train, that's what the fans go to see/experience?"

Yeah, we get it. Team=secondary concern. Ricketts better wake up and realize he's bought a money pit. Might make money for May/June; but unless he really puts a strong winning team together, that ballpark is going to be half empty after July 1.

[WhiteSox5187]

Originally Posted by Viva Medias B's

We'll keep political angles out of this, of course, but the Sun-Times is reporting that Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) is proposing Wrigley Field's hand-operated scoreboard be replaced by a video scoreboard. IIRC, that scoreboard was installed by Bill Veeck in 1937.

Link

That's another bad idea for the Cubs. The "Wrigley Field experience" includes the hand operated scoreboard and the ivy on the walls. It would be like Fenway removing the green monster.

[Nellie_Fox]

Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187

That's another bad idea for the Cubs. The "Wrigley Field experience" includes the hand operated scoreboard and the ivy on the walls. It would be like Fenway removing the green monster.

They've already dropped the idea.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by Nellie_Fox

They've already dropped the idea.

That was quick. Maybe that particular idea was just by Tunney and rooftop owners, though, as has been said.

[Viva Medias B's]

Last night on WTTW's "Chicago Tonight," Rosemont Mayor Brad Stevens was interviewed by Carol Marin on this matter.

Link

[Nellie_Fox]

Just because it hasn't been brought out for a while:

:

[slavko]

Lordy, the Tribune is beating this angle to death. Who says they still don't have a vested interest in the Cubbies? Chances of the Cubbies going to Rosemont are slim and none and Slim just left by the side door.


Mod edit to remove political statement.