White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
GO SOX! DSNB!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 06-04-2018, 12:13 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 27,614
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2662 View Post
The Blackhawks are a prime example of this. They were far more irrelevant than the Sox are today. Once they started winning, the fans flocked back and many new fans joined in. And, how many of those people didn't even know what the blue line was??
Comparing apples and automobiles. The Blackhawks got on television full time when they started winning. That was an addition variable on what brought back the fans.
__________________


2020....2020.....2020....2020....2020.....
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-04-2018, 12:20 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,755
Blog Entries: 384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2662 View Post
The Blackhawks are a prime example of this. They were far more irrelevant than the Sox are today. Once they started winning, the fans flocked back and many new fans joined in. And, how many of those people didn't even know what the blue line was??
Quote:
Originally Posted by kittle42 View Post
100 percent. That team - hell, the whole sport - was *completely* irrelevant in this town, and the fanbase was aging and not drawing in youth. Then, sustained winning, and bang - look what happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post
Comparing apples and automobiles. The Blackhawks got on television full time when they started winning. That was an addition variable on what brought back the fans.
One thing that nobody is taking into consideration-a lot of those bandwagon-hopping Hawks fans were Cubs fans. Look at how many people flooded in front of Wrigley Field wearing their red Hawks sweaters after 2015, as if it was also a win for the Cubs. The Sox will not get those people if they start winning again, at least I don't think so.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-04-2018, 12:31 PM
jcw218 jcw218 is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Darien, IL
Posts: 1,179
Default

I get that the Blackhawks and the sport of hockey in general had been an afterthought in Chicago. The Hawks are the only option in town for NHL level hockey. The closest other option in the sport was probably St Louis on the NHL level.

As far as the White Sox are concerned, their closest competition in terms of fans in the stands is aprox 8 miles north of them. Ever since the Tribune became the owner of Chicago's national league team, they haven't lacked for the want of buts in the seats. Yes, in the past White Sox fans have shown that if they put a winning product on the field, the fans will support it. With the prolonged success of said national league team, and i don't see them decllining anytime soon, the White Sox will have a tough battle ahead of them. There's nothing to say they can't overcome the odds, but it won't be easy. The White Sox need to do a better job of marketing the team, in my opinion. To me, their marketing has become stale, with the last memorable campaigns being the "Grinder Rules" and "Us vs Them". Nothing else has stood out. I think it's time to overhaul the marketing department, and if that means getting rid of Brooks, then so be it.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-04-2018, 12:43 PM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 22,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyJohn View Post
One thing that nobody is taking into consideration-a lot of those bandwagon-hopping Hawks fans were Cubs fans. Look at how many people flooded in front of Wrigley Field wearing their red Hawks sweaters after 2015, as if it was also a win for the Cubs. The Sox will not get those people if they start winning again, at least I don't think so.
I think we overestimate how many people who come to games are really *fans* of a team (fans in the way we are). The good majority of people at games are casuals.
__________________
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
  #35  
Old 06-04-2018, 01:25 PM
kobo kobo is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lake in the Hills
Posts: 5,468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
Like the Sox, the Astros had several bad years prior to their rebuild.
Luhnow was hired in December 2011. They were terrible in 2012, 2013, and 2014 (improving 19 games from 2013). They made the playoffs in 2015.
The Sox started rebuilding in July 2016. On the Astros timetable, the Sox would suck in 2017, 2018 and 2019, and make the playoffs in 2020. And that even gives the Sox an extra 1/2 year or so over the Astros.
How so? What did they do in July of 2016 that signaled the start of the rebuild?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-04-2018, 01:30 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 9,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg
The rebuild is approaching its two year mark. It didn't get going hot and heavy until December of 2016, but it started in July, after the disaster that was June. If significant progress isn't made next year, then they really need to get a new group of professionals into the front office to rescue it. By progress, I don't mean a winning team. More in the 70-75 win range built on young players (not going out early and getting veterans). But the Sox can't have an incessant rolling timetable.
The Astros and Cubs had 3 years each of suckage, once they started rebuilding. Brewers had 2. This is year 2 for the Sox.
The Sox should still win in the low-mid 60s this season if they can get some of these guys back off of the DL. On the other hand, they still need to trade most of these veterans, so that might pull them back down.
Yes, this is technically Year Two of the rebuild, but his team was still tearing down at the 2017 trade deadline, and they still should be tearing down at the 2018 trade deadline. There were still Quintana, Robertson, and Frazier trades that had to be made last year, and there is still an Abreu trade that needs to be made this year. Add a massive bullpen exodus to that equation, and presto: bad baseball team.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and let’s fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-04-2018, 01:49 PM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 14,924
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
Yes, this is technically Year Two of the rebuild, but his team was still tearing down at the 2017 trade deadline, and they still should be tearing down at the 2018 trade deadline. There were still Quintana, Robertson, and Frazier trades that had to be made last year, and there is still an Abreu trade that needs to be made this year. Add a massive bullpen exodus to that equation, and presto: bad baseball team.
Yall are quibbling over my start date of July, 2016*, but it's inarguable that it began in December of 2016. The first year of play was 2017. This is year 2, not just technically, but in reality. Yes, Q was traded 11 months ago - what difference would it have made had they traded him for Jimenez in December instead of July? He would be at the same point.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-04-2018, 02:30 PM
I_Liked_Manuel I_Liked_Manuel is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: downers ****ing grove
Posts: 1,483
Default

Isn't Shields on year 2 of player options that he exercised in order to stay with the Sox? Seems like there's something higher on the priority list for Shields than winning
__________________
Teacher Says, Every Time Brian Anderson Gets A Hit, An Angel Gets Its Wings.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-04-2018, 05:04 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 27,614
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Liked_Manuel View Post
Isn't Shields on year 2 of player options that he exercised in order to stay with the Sox? Seems like there's something higher on the priority list for Shields than winning
One year option-2019. Club option. Per Cot's.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-04-2018, 06:27 PM
I_Liked_Manuel I_Liked_Manuel is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: downers ****ing grove
Posts: 1,483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpJerry View Post
One year option-2019. Club option. Per Cot's.
He could have opted out of the contract prior to last year but after his stellar 19 loss campaign, chose to remain under contract with the Sox and be part of the rebuild rather than take less money to be on a winner. Either way, great that he's focusing on pitching now that 2019 is a club option and not his
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-04-2018, 06:34 PM
MISoxfan MISoxfan is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
So true, to think otherwise is foolish.


It's too bad that the Chicago media has pounded attendance as a relevant "issue" into Chicago fan collective's brain. Twenty years ago I don't think I would have heard, "We have more fans than you" as a talking point. Now, it seems to be more important than wins and losses to a large group of "fans".
I most certainly heard that 20 years ago when I was in high school.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-04-2018, 07:11 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 3,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
It's too bad that the Chicago media has pounded attendance as a relevant "issue" into Chicago fan collective's brain. Twenty years ago I don't think I would have heard, "We have more fans than you" as a talking point. Now, it seems to be more important than wins and losses to a large group of "fans".

1st point: The Chicago media is terrible.


2nd point: At one time more people believed that the earth was flat than believed otherwise.
__________________
“There were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. George’s great strength was he didn’t overcoach. There’s no place for panic on the mound.” - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger “Arms and the man,” Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-04-2018, 07:30 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is online now
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 54,892
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grzegorz View Post
1st point: The Chicago media is terrible.


2nd point: At one time more people believed that the earth was flat than believed otherwise.
And hey the second belief is making a resurgence (not to get political so please don't run with this), so there's a chance the Sox will return to favor too...
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-04-2018, 07:38 PM
kittle42 kittle42 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lakeview
Posts: 22,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Liked_Manuel View Post
He could have opted out of the contract prior to last year but after his stellar 19 loss campaign, chose to remain under contract with the Sox and be part of the rebuild rather than take less money to be on a winner. Either way, great that he's focusing on pitching now that 2019 is a club option and not his
You're really stretching here.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-04-2018, 08:45 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 9,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Liked_Manuel
He could have opted out of the contract prior to last year but after his stellar 19 loss campaign, chose to remain under contract with the Sox and be part of the rebuild rather than take less money to be on a winner. Either way, great that he's focusing on pitching now that 2019 is a club option and not his
“Less money?” Shields would have been walking away from $44 million guaranteed and walking into the unemployment line. The idea of a player giving up salary to play for a contender only works if a contender actually wants the player.
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 02:31 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.