White Sox Interactive Forums
What's The Score?

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > What's The Score?
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old 04-06-2013, 09:44 PM
Hitmen77 Hitmen77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,122
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2662 View Post
Some people are never going to get it. 20,000 aren't just going to wake up and flock to the ballpark. If advanced ticket sales are very low, you aren't going to get a lot of people.

There was a game in early April on a Sunday a coupe of years ago. There was no lake breeze, either. 23K was the announced attendance. Sure, the nice day attracted SOME people (like myself and wife), but the park wasn't magically going to be full. In 2007, the Sox lost 90 games, but drew 2.7K. Those tickets were sold in advance. It's really not that hard to grasp. Since Sox tickets are so easy to get, I have no motivation to buy tickets in advance.
.....and yet, this will assuredly keep coming up here again and again: "Hey, the Sox were winning last year and the fans still didn't show up! What else do you want the Sox to do!" One playoff appearance (and one lone playoff win) in the last 7 seasons since the 2006 attendance high point and people stubbornly want to keep clinging to the falsehood that Sox fans won't even support a winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Because the team hasn't been nearly as good since, either.
Yep, a bunch of seasons in a row where the Sox get hot in June and July before finally finishing in 2nd or 3rd isn't going to make them more competitive at the ticket window. At least they showed heart and stuck around in 1st until September last year, but it still isn't a good way to win over the Chicago market.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 04-07-2013, 08:12 AM
Dan H Dan H is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Highland
Posts: 1,941
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitmen77 View Post
Yep, a bunch of seasons in a row where the Sox get hot in June and July before finally finishing in 2nd or 3rd isn't going to make them more competitive at the ticket window. At least they showed heart and stuck around in 1st until September last year, but it still isn't a good way to win over the Chicago market.
This is true. Playing well in the middle of summer only to fade in September doesn't cut it especially when it happens season after season. This only shows the team isn't good enough to weather a 162-game season.

After 2005, many of us fans thought the Sox got over the hump and would really establish a sustained, winning tradition. Unfortunately that didn't happen. What is frustrating is that team-fan relations are still not good. More frustatiing is that the club has the ability to put a decent product on the field but not a great one. So the Sox can put up win totals in the mid-80's like they will this year, but can't break into the playoffs even with an additional wild card slot. And with only five playoff appearances in almost 45 years of divisional play, that gets old.
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 04-10-2013, 10:40 AM
Hitmen77 Hitmen77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,122
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan H View Post
This is true. Playing well in the middle of summer only to fade in September doesn't cut it especially when it happens season after season. This only shows the team isn't good enough to weather a 162-game season.

After 2005, many of us fans thought the Sox got over the hump and would really establish a sustained, winning tradition. Unfortunately that didn't happen. What is frustrating is that team-fan relations are still not good. More frustrating is that the club has the ability to put a decent product on the field but not a great one. So the Sox can put up win totals in the mid-80's like they will this year, but can't break into the playoffs even with an additional wild card slot. And with only five playoff appearances in almost 45 years of divisional play, that gets old.
This is the heart of the team's problem. It's not Sox fans' lack of loyalty or ugliness of the ballpark.

Unfortunately, the Sox have been squandering a golden opportunity the last 5 years to really make significant, lasting gains in the Chicago market with the Cubs continuing to flounder on the field and frustration building with fans of the team up North.

IMO, the Sox need to become a consistent playoff team before the Cubs get Wrigley renovations done and climb out their current mess. Sure, I can easily see the Cubs continuing on with more failed promises on the field and Theo just becoming the next in a line of failures (McPhail, Hendry, etc.). But, if the Sox are operating their team as if they can just assume the Cubs will continue to suck forever, then shame on the Sox.
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 04-10-2013, 11:29 AM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 26,312
Default

Hitmen:

You and Dan make some great points but remember again that when talking about the Cubs, the Sox do not feel and haven't since the current owners took over that they are in competitition with them for the Chicago market. (Can you imagine either JR or EE calling the Tribune for example and complaining to the editor about the number of column inches the Sox were getting as Bill Veeck did??)

To me that explains a lot of what they have done in the past and why. They honestly feel they are in a 'one team town' in the sense that they are to use Einhorn's exact quote "Chicago's American League team..."

That philosophy has lasted over 30 years now. I don't understand it myself but I never claimed to be a businessman.

Lip
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 04-10-2013, 01:41 PM
Red Barchetta Red Barchetta is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Hitmen:

You and Dan make some great points but remember again that when talking about the Cubs, the Sox do not feel and haven't since the current owners took over that they are in competitition with them for the Chicago market. (Can you imagine either JR or EE calling the Tribune for example and complaining to the editor about the number of column inches the Sox were getting as Bill Veeck did??)

To me that explains a lot of what they have done in the past and why. They honestly feel they are in a 'one team town' in the sense that they are to use Einhorn's exact quote "Chicago's American League team..."

That philosophy has lasted over 30 years now. I don't understand it myself but I never claimed to be a businessman.

Lip
I agree. In contrast to the SOX, due to the brilliant (Yes it was!) marketing of Wrigley Field by the Tribune, the Cubs now have the luxury of attracting 3M fans" per season while not re-investing into the on field talent. This allows them to continue to focus on building their brand (Wrigley Field, neighborhood, tourist attraction, hotels, etc.) while they hide behind another rebuilding effort on-field.

I believe Theo will eventually get them back to the playoffs, however I really don't think they are in a hurry and probably enjoy the fact that they can get their prize possession renovated during the process.
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 04-10-2013, 03:20 PM
SI1020 SI1020 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie
Posts: 4,238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Barchetta View Post
I agree. In contrast to the SOX, due to the brilliant (Yes it was!) marketing of Wrigley Field by the Tribune, the Cubs now have the luxury of attracting 3M fans" per season while not re-investing into the on field talent. This allows them to continue to focus on building their brand (Wrigley Field, neighborhood, tourist attraction, hotels, etc.) while they hide behind another rebuilding effort on-field.

I believe Theo will eventually get them back to the playoffs, however I really don't think they are in a hurry and probably enjoy the fact that they can get their prize possession renovated during the process.
Great post. Also good work by Lip Man, Dan H and Hitmen 77.
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 04-10-2013, 03:36 PM
Noneck Noneck is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nw Side
Posts: 6,743
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lip Man 1 View Post
Hitmen:

You and Dan make some great points but remember again that when talking about the Cubs, the Sox do not feel and haven't since the current owners took over that they are in competitition with them for the Chicago market. (Can you imagine either JR or EE calling the Tribune for example and complaining to the editor about the number of column inches the Sox were getting as Bill Veeck did??)

To me that explains a lot of what they have done in the past and why. They honestly feel they are in a 'one team town' in the sense that they are to use Einhorn's exact quote "Chicago's American League team..."

That philosophy has lasted over 30 years now. I don't understand it myself but I never claimed to be a businessman.

Lip

Lip,

This ownership has always had "pigs get fat, hogs go to market" philosophy. Why take a chance when you got a sure stream of money rolling in. I think their pocketbooks can attest to that.
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 04-15-2013, 08:10 AM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 52,975
Blog Entries: 5
Default

It is official official... Cubs and city agree to $500 million Wrigley renovation deal

http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-...enovation-deal

Still not 100% sure how the rooftop owners will respond to this.
__________________
2014 Obligatory Attendance & Record Tracker

0-2

LAST GAME: April 16 - Boston 6, Sox 4 (14)
NEXT GAME: April 26 vs. Tampa Bay
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 04-15-2013, 08:28 AM
jdm2662 jdm2662 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 7,581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
It is official official... Cubs and city agree to $500 million Wrigley renovation deal

http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-...enovation-deal

Still not 100% sure how the rooftop owners will respond to this.
From what I understand, there is still 11 years left on the agreement they made with the Trib company so many years ago. So, if they feel the agreement is not being met, they could sue the team. After the 11 years is up, and the Cubs don't want to renew, they really can't do anything.
__________________
4-time WSI NFL Pick 'em vs Spread Champion
2009 2010 2011 2013
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 04-15-2013, 09:56 AM
The Immigrant The Immigrant is online now
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Old Irving Park
Posts: 4,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Still not 100% sure how the rooftop owners will respond to this.
They'll have a tough time arguing that the Cubs are breaching the contract if the video board blocks the views from the right field rooftops. The contract provides that "any expansion of Wrigley Field approved by governmental authorities shall not be a violation" of the deal.
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 04-15-2013, 10:12 AM
Golden Sox Golden Sox is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oswego, Illinois
Posts: 691
Default The Bad Guys

I have always been of the belief that it has to be tough to walk away from a goldmine. Still, I think it's crazy to spend upwards of $300 million dollars on a dump like Wrigley Field. Most of the Cubs fans I talk to would welcome a brand new stadium in Rosemont, especially when Rosemont is giving you the land for nothing. The only other city that gave a baseball team land to build their stadium was LA, where the Dodgers built their stadium. Some people have made comments that Boston fixed up Fenway Park a few years ago. I read an article last year with one of the executives of the Red Sox, and he said if they had to do it all over again, they would of built a new stadium. Even though Fenway Park has been rehabbed it's still an old building with some of the same issues it had before. I know the White Sox lease runs through 2026, but I still think they will start looking for a new stadium in another 10 years or so. I would think if Rosemont or some other near the city suburb offers the White Sox land to build a stadium on, they will jump at the opportunity.
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 04-15-2013, 10:46 AM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 17,798
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Sox View Post
I have always been of the belief that it has to be tough to walk away from a goldmine. Still, I think it's crazy to spend upwards of $300 million dollars on a dump like Wrigley Field. Most of the Cubs fans I talk to would welcome a brand new stadium in Rosemont, especially when Rosemont is giving you the land for nothing. The only other city that gave a baseball team land to build their stadium was LA, where the Dodgers built their stadium. Some people have made comments that Boston fixed up Fenway Park a few years ago. I read an article last year with one of the executives of the Red Sox, and he said if they had to do it all over again, they would of built a new stadium. Even though Fenway Park has been rehabbed it's still an old building with some of the same issues it had before. I know the White Sox lease runs through 2026, but I still think they will start looking for a new stadium in another 10 years or so. I would think if Rosemont or some other near the city suburb offers the White Sox land to build a stadium on, they will jump at the opportunity.
I honestly think revenue goes down and ticket sales suffer with a new stadium, unless it is built exactly where Wrigley is. Even then, who knows. The sheer number of people who go there regardless of the teams playing is huge. There are more Wrigley Field fans than Cubs fans, or at least as many.
__________________
Ridiculousness across all sports:

(1) "You have no valid opinion because you never played the game."
(2) "Stats are irrelevant. This guy just doesn't know how to win."
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 04-15-2013, 01:34 PM
Hitmen77 Hitmen77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,122
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
It is official official... Cubs and city agree to $500 million Wrigley renovation deal

http://www.csnchicago.com/blog/cubs-...enovation-deal

Still not 100% sure how the rooftop owners will respond to this.
Where exactly is the $500M coming from? The article says it won't be taxpayer-funded and that Ricketts will "seek to open new revenue streams outside the stadium".
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 04-15-2013, 01:55 PM
jdm2662 jdm2662 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 7,581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitmen77 View Post
Where exactly is the $500M coming from? The article says it won't be taxpayer-funded and that Ricketts will "seek to open new revenue streams outside the stadium".
IT's what credit is for.
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 04-15-2013, 02:42 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 26,312
Default

The thing is though the last I read Ricketts was up to his neck in debt already because of overpaying for the franchise...Zell / Tribune took him to the cleaners.

Lip
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.