Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Tommy Boy
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=87000
Page 1 of 2

Author:  bigfan [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:12 am ]
Post subject:  Tommy Boy

Congrats on finding your middle finger!

http://view.ed4.net/v/86S09Y/3VHZSR/ZZQW51P/P1745/MAILACTION=1&FORMAT=H?partnerId=ed-8221307-704524963

Author:  Hussra [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Image

Author:  Kirkwood [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Quote:
fter months of nowhere negotiations, the Cubs declared an impasse with rooftop club owners Wednesday and essentially declared war — with a new proposal to build seven outfield signs, including a second video scoreboard, 300 new seats and new outfield lights.

The decision to ask Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his handpicked Commission on Chicago Landmarks to dramatically enhance the already generous package approved last summer is aimed at provoking a lawsuit by the rooftops that’s been years in the making.

Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts acknowledged just that in a carefully crafted “video message” to Cub nation.

“During the political process to accommodate rooftop owners, we tapered the plan to move forward with a sign in right field and a video board in left. But in the months since, the rooftop owners have made clear that, despite the city approval and our clear contractual rights, they plan to file lawsuit to try and stop our renovation and expansion plan,” Ricketts said.

“We’ve spent endless hours in negotiations with rooftop businesses. We’ve gotten nowhere in our talks with them to settle this dispute. It has to end. It’s time to move forward. I have to put the team and the fans first,” he said. “So today, we are going forward with our original plan. We are proposing a master plan to expand Wrigley Field and to have several signs in the ballpark.”

Ricketts did not explain details of the new doozy of a request that will be presented to the Landmarks Commission on June 5. It includes:

• A second video scoreboard in right field — in addition to the already approved jumbo screen in left field that will now be reduced to 3,990 square feet.

• Four more LED signs throughout the outfield, each up to 650 square feet.

• 300 additional seats in the “Budweiser Bleachers” and 300 additional standing room positions to reclaim capacity lost to prior renovation plans.

• New outfield light standards inside the ballpark, rising 92 feet, so that fly balls will be lit from both the front and back; the intent is to reduce notorious shadows that have made fly balls an adventure for outfielders.

• A 30,000-square-foot clubhouse beneath the new outdoor plaza, up from 19,000 square feet in the original plan.

• Relocating both home and visiting bullpens from the foul lines to a protected area under the expanded bleachers.

In an emailed statement, Ryan McLaughlin, a spokesman for rooftop club owners, whose revenue-sharing agreement has 10 more years to run, noted that Cubs President Crane Kenney and legal counsel Mike Lufrano negotiated the contract with the Wrigleyville Rooftops Association over a decade ago.

“The Ricketts family’s decision to unilaterally end negotiations with their contractual partners is another refusal to accept any of the proposed win-win solutions that could have funded the modernization of Wrigley Field and enhance the team’s competitiveness,” the statement said. “In fact, it appears their zeal to block rooftop owners who pay them millions of dollars a year in royalties knows no bounds. Unfortunately, this decision by the Ricketts family will now result in this matter being resolved in a court of law.”

Ricketts defended the revised request in his message to Cub fans.

“We need to press ahead with the expansion. We cannot delay any longer. The time to build a winner is now. Our plan will provide more revenue for Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer to invest in building a championship ballclub. Our plan will provide more revenue for our business operation to expand and preserve the greatest ballpark in baseball,” Ricketts said.

“I know this plan is in the best interest of our fans and our players,” he said. “We hoped to avoid heading to the court house. But the most important thing is we want to exercise our right to preserve and expand the ballpark we all know and love.”

Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), the mayor’s City Council floor leader, tried desperately to forge a deal with the Cubs and rooftop club owners who share 17 percent of their revenues with the team.

At one point, he thought he had a deal to move the scripted sign in right field to the top of one of the rooftop buildings. But, when the rooftops made a similar demand about the video board in left field, the talks fell apart and O’Connor was never able to put them back together.

“At one point in time, everybody thought we were there. And it turned out we were wrong. There’s so many individuals and disparate interests, it just became apparent it wasn’t gonna move any further,” O’Connor said.

The revised proposal may appear to be so big as to invite rejection by Emanuel’s appointees on the Landmarks Commission. They are the final arbiter, since the City Council has already approved a “master plan” for new signs and will not get a second chance to vote on it.

But, O’Connor said, “My impression is, this is a very real proposal. They made an effort to try and resolve this for the short term and basically have been unsuccessful. I would think if it conforms to the landmark ordinance, they have a right to it — and my impression is, it conforms. There’s a very good possibility” it will be approved.

Emanuel would dearly love to break ground on the revenue- and job-creating Wrigley project before the Feb. 24 mayoral election. That’s apparently why City Hall struck a similar tone.

“Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn’t want to wait for next year and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall — and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it — it’s worth taking a look at,” Sarah Hamilton, the mayor’s communications director, said in an emailed statement.

Ald. Tom Tunney (44th), whose ward includes Wrigley, lamented the collapse of the negotiations with rooftop club owners, who are among his most reliable campaign contributors.

“They’ve got to work out some kind of arrangement with the rooftops for the duration of their contract. That’s not new. I oppose the additional ask. That’s all I can say. I’ve been opposed to this additional signage from the beginning. It’s a violation of their agreement with the rooftops,” Tunney said.

“I can’t postulate what their motives are. They want to have as little regulation as possible. I don’t agree with that. Government is there for a reason,” Tunney said. “We’ve been very generous. We have approved a lot of things and a lot of signs as part of the planned development. I believe signage is a critical part of the money needed for the renovation. They have a right to ask for as much as they can get. It doesn’t mean it’s gonna get approved or that it will solve the potential litigation with rooftop partners.”

Apparently referring to the protracted battle that preceded the installation of lights at the century-old ballpark, Tunney said, “If it goes to court, it goes to court. In the history of Wrigley Field, there have been a lot of court battles.”

Last year, the City Council approved Ricketts’ $500 million plan to renovate Wrigley and develop the land around it, including two massive outfield signs needed to bankroll the project without a public subsidy.

Until now, Ricketts had refused to proceed with construction without a guarantee that the rooftops would not file suit to block the project.

Author:  Hussra [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Image

Author:  Hussra [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Image

Author:  good dolphin [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Late 2015 to early 2016 at the earliest. Plan approval in 2016. Maybe things are built and revenue streaming in 2017. That means your first big free agent is 2018, probably later.

Author:  JORR [ Thu May 22, 2014 7:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.

Author:  Curious Hair [ Thu May 22, 2014 7:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Quote:
“I can’t postulate what their motives are. They want to have as little regulation as possible. I don’t agree with that. Government is there for a reason,” Tunney said.

You mean it's not there to give Jerry Reinsdorf whatever he wants? Egad!

Quote:
The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms.

Essence of the problem right here.

Author:  conns7901 [ Thu May 22, 2014 8:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.


Getting rid of day baseball and soon to be completely leaving WGN will do more long term harm to the Cub brand than leaving Wrigley would.

Author:  JORR [ Thu May 22, 2014 8:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

conns7901 wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.


Getting rid of day baseball and soon to be completely leaving WGN will do more long term harm to the Cub brand than leaving Wrigley would.


I agree. A night game at Wrigley just isn't the same. There are few things more fun than a day game at Wrigley. And that's coming from a Sox fan. But soon most of the day games will be gone and they'll play a schedule similar to everyone else. Obviously, the night games have to do with TV revenue and the huge deal they expect to get with their own regional network. In their rush to get the things everyone else has, they are willing to abandon the advantages only they have.

Author:  bigfan [ Thu May 22, 2014 11:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

What I would have done different is no video, just a simple letter of "thank you for your time, but we will proceed as what we think is best". And that is the end of the communication with the roofies.

Author:  Scorehead [ Thu May 22, 2014 12:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.


How did the NY Yankees & all the other professional sports teams do who moved to new stadiums?

Author:  Chus [ Thu May 22, 2014 1:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Were these two separated at birth?

Image

Image

Author:  Frank Coztansa [ Thu May 22, 2014 1:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Scorehead wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.


How did the NY Yankees & all the other professional sports teams do who moved to new stadiums?
The Cardinals, Giants, White Sox, Phillies, and Yankees have all won a World Series since moving into their new ballpark.....but so have the Red Sox and Dodgers.

Author:  Don Tiny [ Thu May 22, 2014 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Hi, I'm Tom Ricketts ... I'm making this video because I would personally like to show you... my ass.

Author:  JORR [ Thu May 22, 2014 1:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Scorehead wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
This has been the problem with this thing all along. The Cubs ask for something, get it, and then change the terms. I really hope they do move to Rosemont. And then we'll see how they do without the ballpark that separates them from everyone else.


How did the NY Yankees & all the other professional sports teams do who moved to new stadiums?


None of those teams built their success based upon an antique park and "baseball the way it used to be".

Author:  Curious Hair [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Chus wrote:
Were these two separated at birth?


OH CRAP. I knew the Omaha rube looked like someone, I just couldn't think of whom. I don't know which one is the bigger douchebag.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Because there was nothing historic about Yankee Stadium.

JORR your rooftop posts make Biggies Obama posts look reasonable.

Author:  JORR [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Baby McNown wrote:
Because there was nothing historic about Yankee Stadium.

JORR your rooftop posts make Biggies Obama posts look reasonable.


What are you talking about? The Cubs have used the rooftops in their marketing for thirty years. Ricketts actually invested in a rooftop himself. The Cubs created a fake "rooftop" at the spring training park. And now the rooftops are archvillains because they don't want Ricketts to just do whatever he wants?

http://baseball.answers.com/mlb/fan-fri ... ll#slide=1

"The stadium is distinctly identified by the ivy that covers the outfield walls, and by groups of fans that gather atop or within nearby buildings to watch the games."

What the fuck is unreasonable about any of my thoughts on the matter?

Author:  Curious Hair [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Yankee fans swear that the renovated Yankee Stadium was never the real Stadium because home plate wasn't exactly where it was for Babe Ruth and the frieze (it's not a façade) moved from the grandstand to the outfield, and thus nothing of value was lost by tearing it down. I never agreed with this, but hey, it's their team, their park.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Because Ricketts could rebuild an exact Wrigley replica down to your precious ivy, give every roofie 20 million and would be evil if they asked to put up one sign in your mind.

Author:  JORR [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Baby McNown wrote:
Because Ricketts could rebuild an exact Wrigley replica down to your precious ivy, give every roofie 20 million and would be evil if they asked to put up one sign in your mind.



You don't read too well, do you?

Author:  Brick [ Thu May 22, 2014 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Because Ricketts could rebuild an exact Wrigley replica down to your precious ivy, give every roofie 20 million and would be evil if they asked to put up one sign in your mind.



You don't read too well, do you?
:lol:

Author:  Baby McNown [ Thu May 22, 2014 4:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Quite well.

Oh look. BRick showed up. Blow me.

Author:  Seacrest [ Thu May 22, 2014 5:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Because Ricketts could rebuild an exact Wrigley replica down to your precious ivy, give every roofie 20 million and would be evil if they asked to put up one sign in your mind.



You don't read too well, do you?



Pre conceive an argument. Even when basis or premise for one doesn't exist.

Open up CSFMB

Read Topic

Apply pre conceived notion regardless of actual posts or relevant facts

Connect bigan and Obama posts to any argument

Get called out by responding poster for repeatedly not reading actual threads

Call poster names or invite them to engage in sex acts

Log off CSFMB






Log on again and repeat cycle

Author:  Baby McNown [ Thu May 22, 2014 6:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Just because you got your ass handed to you by me in a theological discussion is no reason to be bitter Seacrest.

Author:  bigfan [ Thu May 22, 2014 8:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Baby McNown wrote:
Because there was nothing historic about Yankee Stadium.

JORR your rooftop posts make Biggies Obama posts look reasonable.

I would make better posts , if the others would let me, but they won't, so I can't do my job. So I am going to go golf or play hoops.

Author:  Baby McNown [ Thu May 22, 2014 9:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

bigfan wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Because there was nothing historic about Yankee Stadium.

JORR your rooftop posts make Biggies Obama posts look reasonable.

I would make better posts , if the others would let me, but they won't, so I can't do my job. So I am going to go golf or play hoops.

I see what you did there.

Author:  SomeGuy [ Thu May 22, 2014 9:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

bigfan wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Because there was nothing historic about Yankee Stadium.

JORR your rooftop posts make Biggies Obama posts look reasonable.

I would make better posts , if the others would let me, but they won't, so I can't do my job. So I am going to go golf or play hoops.


I just found out about his today and I'm as mad and upset as you are.

Author:  Seacrest [ Thu May 22, 2014 11:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tommy Boy

Baby McNown wrote:
Just because you got your ass handed to you by me in a theological discussion is no reason to be bitter Seacrest.


Case in point.

The fact that you would refer to anyone else as bitter is just another example of your lack of any rational sort self awareness.

You are so angry and bitter you are unable to even grasp the simplest posts made by others when they disagree with your increasingly negative world view.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/