White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
Congratulations on winning the AL ROTY award unanimously, Jose!

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 06-18-2014, 05:51 PM
jdm2662 jdm2662 is online now
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lombard, IL
Posts: 7,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
That's because Los Angeles has basically has the public transportation system equal to that of a small town in the third world.
After driving a night in LA traffic and experiencing LAX, I will never complain about Chicago traffic or OHare ever again...
__________________
4-time WSI NFL Pick 'em vs Spread Champion
2009 2010 2011 2013
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-18-2014, 05:51 PM
LITTLE NELL LITTLE NELL is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sebring Florida
Posts: 7,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
That's because Los Angeles has basically has the public transportation system equal to that of a small town in the third world.
Not quite that bad, in fact I saw more buses on last weeks trip than ever before.
Have to mention that besides seeing my son and the grandkids we got to eat Italian Beef at Portillo's in Buena Park, a great treat.
__________________
Coming up to bat for our White Sox is the Mighty Mite, Nelson Fox.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-18-2014, 05:55 PM
Golden Sox Golden Sox is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oswego, Illinois
Posts: 789
Default Addison

We're never going to find out but looking back at a White Sox move to Addison Illinois, I think it would of been a BIG mistake to move there. There is absolutely no public transportation in that neck of the woods. I've read were 20% of White Sox fans use public transportation to go to the games. The only reason that I can think of as to why JR wanted to move to Addison is simply because he would of owned the property and the stadium. I wish they would of built there stadium in the South Loop.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-18-2014, 06:05 PM
LITTLE NELL LITTLE NELL is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sebring Florida
Posts: 7,903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Sox View Post
We're never going to find out but looking back at a White Sox move to Addison Illinois, I think it would of been a BIG mistake to move there. There is absolutely no public transportation in that neck of the woods. I've read were 20% of White Sox fans use public transportation to go to the games. The only reason that I can think of as to why JR wanted to move to Addison is simply because he would of owned the property and the stadium. I wish they would of built there stadium in the South Loop.
IIRC, Reinsdorf and Co did extensive research on a move to the burbs and the results said the Addison area was the best spot for the majority of Sox fans.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 06-18-2014, 06:06 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 29,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
That's because Los Angeles has basically has the public transportation system equal to that of a small town in the third world.
LA will likely always have a very car-dependent culture, but they've done a very good job in the last couple decades of building out their mass transit system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomBradley72 View Post
Not really working for the Chicago Fire- I'm convinced their attendance would be higher if they had built in the city- downtown Chicago is a great destination- and I think it adds value to anyone looking to go to a sporting event (whether with family or friends).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2662 View Post
As someone who followed the team hard core during their hey day, the media attention the Fire got never was that great to begin with. They got about the same attention when they were playing in Naperville when SF was being rebuilt. I honestly didn't see much difference when they moved back to SF and then moved to Bridgeview. The Fire stopped being an elite team around the same time the Blackhawks became one. The stadium itself is only a mile or so from the city limits. It's not like it's in St. Charles (but I'm fully aware it's not close to the loop). The team simply hasn't been good in a while. The team was doing just fine when they were making the playoffs AND had marketable players like Blanco and Brian McBride. They also blew chances by not winning the title in 2000 and 2003. If they still played in the city, they would still be getting the same treatment they do today.
As for the Fire, Toyota Park is annoying to get to from a lot of the Chicago area and the public transportation options are non-existent (though they do run those $10 buses from a half dozen bars or so). Comparing the Fire now to their history I agree that lack of success is probably their biggest problem right now. Put some investment back into the team, and there is no reason they shouldn't start succeeding again. That said, when comparing the Fire to the rest of the league, the game has grown since the league's inception in 1997. Besides building their own stadium, as nearly every other team has done, they haven't really grown their brand in what admittedly is a very difficult market for sports (much moreso than Portland or Seattle, for that matter). Like their one-time rivals DC United, what were once model organizations sitting at or near the top of the league every year seem to have stagnated and seen the rest of the league, including a number of new teams, pass them by.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LITTLE NELL View Post
That's why I used Angel Stadium as an example of a team doing very well away from the city. I've been to about 5 games out there in the last 12 years and see many families and they all drive to get there. Even though Dodger Stadium is only a few miles from downtown LA just about everyone drives there also.
I know it's a different culture out there ( just got back from there on Monday) as people think nothing of a 50 mile drive to work but I still think the Sox would have been much better off in the burbs than at the present location.
The Angels only started really drawing well when they completely renovated the park and had a billionaire owner spend a ton of money on payroll. I think that's the biggest reason for their attendance success. Although Orange County is not LA; you could put the stadium anywhere in the large, populous county and call it the suburbs, but it's also a huge area containing a lot of people. I don't think it's quite analogous to a suburban Chicago location.
__________________
Attendance records:
09 : 3-2.
10 : 2-3.
11: 0-1.
12: 2-1.
14: 2-3.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-18-2014, 06:26 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 29,475
Blog Entries: 52
Default

Putting a stadium out in the suburbs would bury the franchise with the Chicago media, in addition to making it a less attractive place for players who live downtown.
__________________
2014 Attendance Record: 4-5; 0.444
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-18-2014, 06:36 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 29,475
Blog Entries: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSpivack View Post
The Angels only started really drawing well when they completely renovated the park and had a billionaire owner spend a ton of money on payroll. I think that's the biggest reason for their attendance success. Although Orange County is not LA; you could put the stadium anywhere in the large, populous county and call it the suburbs, but it's also a huge area containing a lot of people. I don't think it's quite analogous to a suburban Chicago location.
Exactly. It is nowhere close to the same situation. The comparison between Orange County and Disneyland to DuPage County is comical.


This is a classic grass-is-greener argument. The Sox need to remain within the City limits. Moving farther away from the downtown area would be a disastrous move.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-18-2014, 06:55 PM
DSpivack DSpivack is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Evanston
Posts: 29,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
Exactly. It is nowhere close to the same situation. The comparison between Orange County and Disneyland to DuPage County is comical.


This is a classic grass-is-greener argument. The Sox need to remain within the City limits. Moving farther away from the downtown area would be a disastrous move.
Also, I think it's kind of cool that the Sox have played in the same neighborhood for so long. I'm not sure how many other teams can claim that (I think the Pirates, for one).
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-18-2014, 07:18 PM
Golden Sox Golden Sox is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oswego, Illinois
Posts: 789
Default Little Nell :

JR also did extensive research that showed White Sox fans would buy Sportsvision in 1982. Sportsvision might of worked if the Chicagoland area had been wired for cable. The area wasn't wired for cable and it flopped. There's not only no public transportation in the Addison area, alot of the White Sox fans that are in Oak Lawn, Orland Park, Tinley Park and other Southern suburbs are not exactly close to Addison. The entire perception of the White Sox would of been different with a South Loop ballpark. The White Sox would of been viewed as a Chicago team as opposed to a South Side team. The owners of the bad guys on the northside have said over and over that 40% of their attendance comes from out of state. Those people don't want to come to the Southside of Chicago. We would of drawn alot more out of towners with a South Loop location.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-18-2014, 07:29 PM
TommyJohn TommyJohn is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,113
Blog Entries: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
Putting a stadium out in the suburbs would bury the franchise with the Chicago media, in addition to making it a less attractive place for players who live downtown.
You mean it isn't buried already?

But I think you're right. The media sneers at the Sox enough as it is.
__________________
I am Dabuiek
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-18-2014, 07:39 PM
roylestillman's Avatar
roylestillman roylestillman is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Morgan Park
Posts: 2,076
Default

The window is starting to close on a South Loop site for a new ballpark. The only large parcel left is the old rail yards south of Roosevelt to 18th, the River to the Rock Island (Metra) tracks on the east. Given the recent late blooming success of the Roosevelt Collection, I can't believe it will be long before that parcel is sold and developed. The Ryan, Stevenson and Kennedy can all feed into that site easily, and the announced Wells Street Connection will be an easy route from the Loop. The distance from the Loop is no different than the United Center, which does OK.

I think the drum beat for a new park will begin soon. The Cell is either the 8th or 9th oldest park in the MLB. I wouldn't doubt that losses from bad weather start a retractable dome discussion. The appetite for public funding is just not there, but a new owner with deep pockets may make a privately funded stadium feasible.
__________________
Final 2014 Home Attendance Record 5-11.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-18-2014, 07:47 PM
Hitmen77 Hitmen77 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,467
Default

The question to me isn't whether the Sox would have drawn better at a suburban location (the answer to that is no). It's whether they would have drawn better if they built at a South Loop location.

Since USCF is so easy to get to from the Loop, why would the Sox have been any better at a South Loop location? Sure, everyone agrees that the skyline view from a South Loop park could have been pretty cool. But, would that location make the Sox that much better off than at 35th St?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian26 View Post
Putting a stadium out in the suburbs would bury the franchise with the Chicago media, in addition to making it a less attractive place for players who live downtown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyJohn View Post
You mean it isn't buried already?

But I think you're right. The media sneers at the Sox enough as it is.
Agreed. It's already bad enough with the media (especially before 2005) acting as if the Cubs are the "real" Chicago sports team and the Sox are irrelevant. It would have been 100x worse if the Sox had moved to Addison.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-18-2014, 07:52 PM
LITTLE NELL LITTLE NELL is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sebring Florida
Posts: 7,903
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden Sox View Post
JR also did extensive research that showed White Sox fans would buy Sportsvision in 1982. Sportsvision might of worked if the Chicagoland area had been wired for cable. The area wasn't wired for cable and it flopped. There's not only no public transportation in the Addison area, alot of the White Sox fans that are in Oak Lawn, Orland Park, Tinley Park and other Southern suburbs are not exactly close to Addison. The entire perception of the White Sox would of been different with a South Loop ballpark. The White Sox would of been viewed as a Chicago team as opposed to a South Side team. The owners of the bad guys on the northside have said over and over that 40% of their attendance comes from out of state. Those people don't want to come to the Southside of Chicago. We would of drawn alot more out of towners with a South Loop location.
I'm not so sure about any extensive research on Sportsvision, I think that was all Einhorn's idea and because he was a TV sports genius he thought Sportvision would fly. Horrible idea but because I was a die hard I was one of the idiots that bought into it.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-18-2014, 08:05 PM
doublem23's Avatar
doublem23 doublem23 is offline
MMXXIII
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Roscoe Village
Posts: 54,244
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LITTLE NELL View Post
IIRC, Reinsdorf and Co did extensive research on a move to the burbs and the results said the Addison area was the best spot for the majority of Sox fans.
Yeah, and their backup plan was to move to Tampa Bay and look what a disaster that's been.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-18-2014, 08:25 PM
Brian26's Avatar
Brian26 Brian26 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 29,475
Blog Entries: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doublem23 View Post
Yeah, and their backup plan was to move to Tampa Bay and look what a disaster that's been.
Also of note, their research in the mid 80s would be irrelevant to the current day circumstances, whereas downtown Chicago in the mid 80s was a ghost-town after 6pm. The development, both residential and commercial, in the past 15 years was unforeseen. I know there are studies stating that there has been a population decline in the city, but the core city center has seen nothing but growth which would support a new stadium.

I'm not sold on the traffic being any better. For a family to get there from Naperville, 95% of the trip is going to be the same. In fact it might be worse. That Roosevelt Corridor is a zoo around 6pm.
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 09:28 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.