It is currently Fri Nov 15, 2024 4:49 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 200 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Phil McCracken wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Rebuild Wrigley in its current location.



I have never understood why they don't do this.

Cause it's a landmark and you can't destroy it without city permission which is the whole point of this back and forth between Ricketts and Tunney

That's oversimplifying it a bit.

It could be technically renovation to maintain landmark status, but still be a complete rebuild


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 14018
Location: Underneath the Grace of Timothy Richard Tebow
pizza_Place: ------
rogers park bryan wrote:
Phil McCracken wrote:
pittmike wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Rebuild Wrigley in its current location.



I have never understood why they don't do this.

Cause it's a landmark and you can't destroy it without city permission which is the whole point of this back and forth between Ricketts and Tunney

That's oversimplifying it a bit.

It could be technically renovation to maintain landmark status, but still be a complete rebuild

I don't think them tearing down the building completely and rebuilding it from the ground up would fly as a "renovation" from the cities perspective.

_________________
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rpb is wrong. Phil McCracken is useful.

Chus wrote:
RPB is right. You suck. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Phil McCracken wrote:
I don't think them tearing down the building completely and rebuilding it from the ground up would fly as a "renovation" from the cities perspective.

Arent they already approved to renovate?

Im just saying GO ALL THE WAY with renovation. Keep the scoreboard, keep the ivy, and keep the buildings in the outfield view. Thats all anyone cares about anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 14018
Location: Underneath the Grace of Timothy Richard Tebow
pizza_Place: ------
rogers park bryan wrote:
Phil McCracken wrote:
I don't think them tearing down the building completely and rebuilding it from the ground up would fly as a "renovation" from the cities perspective.

Arent they already approved to renovate?

Im just saying GO ALL THE WAY with renovation. Keep the scoreboard, keep the ivy, and keep the buildings in the outfield view. Thats all anyone cares about anyway

I don't disagree with you, but I know there are a ton of regulations that go into anything involved with a building with landmark status and since Ricketts has been contentious with the city on everything involving this plan I would imagine it would lead to more of the same posturing.

_________________
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rpb is wrong. Phil McCracken is useful.

Chus wrote:
RPB is right. You suck. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:09 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
That and cold beer.


You could build a brand new state of the art park in the burbs, and still have the Cubs play like 20 home games at Wrigley.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43552
How fast would the Sox move into Wrigley if the Cubs bolted to a new park in Rosemont?

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Yeah, I guess were past the idealistic phase

Here's Rick Reilly killing the rooftop owners....


Holy Cow! What a mess!

The Cubs won't win unless they're allowed to trim back Wrigley's traditions
Updated: March 15, 2013, 3:19 PM ET

Wrigley Field loses about $30 million a year because it isn't allowed to put advertising along its outer walls like other stadiums because it might block rooftop watchers outside the ballpark.
For the 98th straight season, the Chicago Cubs will attempt baseball this season in Wrigley Field. It's historic, magical and covered in vegetation. Then again, so is Machu Picchu and nobody's trying to win baseball games there.

I love Wrigley Field. But I'm not a Cubs fan. If I were a Cubs fan, I would despise Wrigley. I'd want Wrigley laid flatter than Wrigley gum.



There's a reason the Cubs have never won a World Series at Wrigley. There's a reason they're 0-for-the-last-67 pennant races at Wrigley. The reason IS Wrigley.

Wrigley isn't just the old family dog that needs to be put down. It's an old family dog that probably costs the Cubs about $73 million a year. That's three Prince Fielders!

Where do I get $73 million? Start from the outside-in -- with the money-sucking rooftop mini-stadiums that metastasize outside the ballpark.

The owners of these annoying watchtowers sell tickets as though they were the Cubs themselves. They even sell season tickets! The city continues to protect these leeches, who pass themselves off as mom and pop entrepreneurs, but actually rake in an estimated $24 million a year, according to the club.

Of that, the Cubs get a paltry 17 percent, or $4 million a year. Any fair deal would give them at least half. (There's $8 million they don't get.)

Inside, the Cubs are prohibited from putting up advertising signs that could make them up to $30 million more a year (that would be $38 million) because the signs would block the views of the precious rooftop oglers and the city can't have that.

You talk about a business being in your business. Can you imagine this happening to any other business?

Hey, H&R Block! We're not going to pay you for your tax advice, but we ARE going to pocket the cash people give us to sit outside your window and listen to it!

If all this seems insane to you, you should talk to Bruce Springsteen. In the middle of a recent concert at Wrigley, he stopped, turned toward the rooftops and said, with a smirk, "Everybody up on the roof! Who'd you pay?"

You say, "Well, the Cubs aren't really a business. They're a city treasure, a kind of living museum."

Fine, if they're a city treasure, then the city should help support them, the way it did for this summer's 30th anniversary of the Chicago Blues Festival, which received a $15,000 grant.

The Cubs pay 12 percent city "amusement" tax on every ticket (about $17 million a year -- we're up to $55 million), and yet the city doesn't give them a dime. Very unamusing.

[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh
Owner Tom Ricketts needs to run Wrigley Field like a business, not a historic landmark, if the Cubs ever want to win a pennant.
There's more. You can open the doors of your business pretty much whenever you want, but the Cubs can't. They're allowed to play only 30 night games a year. And they can't even pick the nights. When owner Tom Ricketts inquired if they might play a few Saturday night games this season, the local restaurants fumed, "It'll kill our dinner business!"

Got it. Everybody gets to compete for customers except the Cubs.

Any idea how much more the Cubs could get for a TV package with 55 night games, which is what many teams play and when most fans watch? Me neither, but let's guess $5 million. (We're up to $60 million.)

God forbid they'd want to put up a decent video replay board, which is ad gold for most teams and, by the way, a place where Cubs fans could actually tell the score of the game without having to do the inning-by-inning math themselves, as they do now on the old hand-lettered relic in center. ($7 million? Total so far: $67 million.)

Plus, can you imagine the frogs that would rain down if they tried to sell the name of the stadium? They could never do what the White Sox did, which is to sell Comiskey to U.S. Cellular for $68 million over 20 years. The Cubs could probably get $100 million. There's another $5 million a year. (That's $72 million.)

And forget about how long it takes you to get up and get a hot dog at Wrigley (two innings sometimes), or get to the restroom and back (often three). Hell, by the third inning, the Cubs are on their third reliever. No wonder so many people sneak food in. What's that total in lost concessions? A million? (We're at $73 million.)

And that's just the money they don't get. Imagine the players they don't get -- because of their weird start times, their rotting training facilities, their wimpy weight room, their nonexistent in-game batting cage, their backachingly small clubhouse and their 104-year ringless streak.

Can you imagine what a genius like Cubs GM Theo Epstein could do with another $73 million a year? He'd be Theo, Unchained. He'd have the fourth-highest payroll in MLB instead of the 15th (2012). One of the biggest draws in sports shouldn't be 15th in anything.

The Red Sox finally stopped treating their little neighborhood park like it was a Faberge egg. They started putting up signs everywhere at Fenway, maxed out revenue anywhere they could, and won two of the past 9 World Series. You hear Boston fans complaining?

And yet Ricketts doesn't want to raze Wrigley. He was practically raised on Wrigley. He lives close enough that he takes the "L" to most games. And because he loves it, he has offered to pour $500 million of the family's money into renovating Wrigley -- $300 million for fixing the joint and the rest into a proposed hotel/fitness club across the street.

And what does Ricketts want for plowing no government cheese into the Wrigley rat trap? Not a dime. He just wants the city to relax some of the restrictions that make the Cubs a kind of crippled Carnival cruise ship with foul poles. And STILL aldermen such as Thomas Tunney are gumming it all up. Tunney wants more parking, more cops and to extend the sleazy rooftops deal, all of which he doesn't want to pay for. "You're talking about one of the richest families in America," Tunney told reporters the other day.

Not at this rate.

Epstein really didn't want any part of this column, but he did email to say, "We're focused on doing everything we can with what we have available to us now to make the baseball operation as healthy and successful as possible."

Too bad there's so little available.

It's simple, Chicago. You can either have your creaky, quaint, vine-covered crypt, or you can win. But you can't have both.

Do the math. You're used to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
That and cold beer.

Like every other pro team

Frank Coztansa wrote:
You could build a brand new state of the art park in the burbs, and still have the Cubs play like 20 home games at Wrigley.

I never went in for that jazz.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:38 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
"The Cubs lose $___________ because of Wrigley" is a canard. They might lose some money because of a lack of signage and skyboxes, but they gain way more than that from the never ending supply of tourists and the turnover of frat boys with disposable cash in the neighborhood every year.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
"The Cubs lose $___________ because of Wrigley" is a canard. They might lose some money because of a lack of signage and skyboxes, but they gain way more than that from the never ending supply of tourists and the turnover of frat boys with disposable cash in the neighborhood every year.

You cant use that argument for the god awful facilities though and the night games


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:49 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
"The Cubs lose $___________ because of Wrigley" is a canard. They might lose some money because of a lack of signage and skyboxes, but they gain way more than that from the never ending supply of tourists and the turnover of frat boys with disposable cash in the neighborhood every year.

You cant use that argument for the god awful facilities though and the night games


Do you really think they're going to draw 35,000 a game if they build a deluxe stadium in Rosemont or Arlington Heights? After the novelty wears off in a couple seasons they'll be drawing 20,000 a game. That won't be offset by signs and skyboxes. Now, if they win, they'll fill anything anywhere. But counting on winning is a bad business model. Especially for the Cubs.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
"The Cubs lose $___________ because of Wrigley" is a canard. They might lose some money because of a lack of signage and skyboxes, but they gain way more than that from the never ending supply of tourists and the turnover of frat boys with disposable cash in the neighborhood every year.

You cant use that argument for the god awful facilities though and the night games


Do you really think they're going to draw 35,000 a game if they build a deluxe stadium in Rosemont or Arlington Heights? After the novelty wears off in a couple seasons they'll be drawing 20,000 a game. That won't be offset by signs and skyboxes. Now, if they win, they'll fill anything anywhere. But counting on winning is a bad business model. Especially for the Cubs.

Im not saying they should. I think Wrigley should be updated to say....1985 technology.

And the whole night game thing has absolutely hindered them in player acquisition. How can you argue with that?

Oh and btw, Wrigley isnt even selling out anymore.

And that last line is garbage. Unless you believe in curses.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:55 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
"The Cubs lose $___________ because of Wrigley" is a canard. They might lose some money because of a lack of signage and skyboxes, but they gain way more than that from the never ending supply of tourists and the turnover of frat boys with disposable cash in the neighborhood every year.

You cant use that argument for the god awful facilities though and the night games


Do you really think they're going to draw 35,000 a game if they build a deluxe stadium in Rosemont or Arlington Heights? After the novelty wears off in a couple seasons they'll be drawing 20,000 a game. That won't be offset by signs and skyboxes. Now, if they win, they'll fill anything anywhere. But counting on winning is a bad business model. Especially for the Cubs.

Im not saying they should. I think Wrigley should be updated to say....1985 technology.

And the whole night game thing has absolutely hindered them in player acquisition. How can you argue with that?

Oh and btw, Wrigley isnt even selling out anymore.

And that last line is garbage. Unless you believe in curses.


I don't believe in curses. I just haven't seen any consistent winning from the Cubs in my lifetime and they ran the guy who came closest out of town. I don't think any team can count on winning, least of all this one.

And I think you've got it backward about the day games. Guys want to play day games at Wrigley. Some of them have taken way less than market value to do so.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Wrigley is inconvenient to get to and a very outdated stadium. And yet, if they move it to Rosemont or wherever in the burbs, I would be sad. I'd definitely go to less game. There is something about that neighborhood and the atmosphere that make paying money to watch a crappy team a little easier to tolerate.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And I think you've got it backward about the day games. Guys want to play day games at Wrigley. Some of them have taken way less than market value to do so.

No way.

For every one Andre Dawson, ten guys laugh at the notion.

Every other team tells you to be at the park around 2pm-ish for most of their games. One team says be here at 9am.

Baseball, especially MLB is a young man's game. Young rich men usually like to go out at night. Especially when they work on a college campus called Wrigleyville.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
denisdman wrote:
Wrigley is inconvenient to get to and a very outdated stadium. And yet, if they move it to Rosemont or wherever in the burbs, I would be sad. I'd definitely go to less game. There is something about that neighborhood and the atmosphere that make paying money to watch a crappy team a little easier to tolerate.


It's not inconvenient for me to get to.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:03 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
:lol: You aren't a Cubs fan

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And I think you've got it backward about the day games. Guys want to play day games at Wrigley. Some of them have taken way less than market value to do so.

No way.

For every one Andre Dawson, ten guys laugh at the notion.

Every other team tells you to be at the park around 2pm-ish for most of their games. One team says be here at 9am.

Baseball, especially MLB is a young man's game. Young rich men usually like to go out at night. Especially when they work on a college campus called Wrigleyville.


A lot of these guys like to party. Young men can easily drink until four and get up to be at work at nine. If you're saying they might not be at their best that way, I'll agree. But I don't think it's actually cost them any players they wanted to pay.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57199
The Cubs have not won the WS because of Wrigley?

That is stupid.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:05 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
RFDC wrote:
The Cubs have not won the WS because of Wrigley?

That is stupid.


I'm not sure if it's had that effect or not, but it isn't that stupid. You're asking guys to work on a different clock half the time. I do think that's a disadvantage.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And I think you've got it backward about the day games. Guys want to play day games at Wrigley. Some of them have taken way less than market value to do so.

No way.

For every one Andre Dawson, ten guys laugh at the notion.

Every other team tells you to be at the park around 2pm-ish for most of their games. One team says be here at 9am.

Baseball, especially MLB is a young man's game. Young rich men usually like to go out at night. Especially when they work on a college campus called Wrigleyville.


A lot of these guys like to party. Young men can easily drink until four and get up to be at work at nine. If you're saying they might not be at their best that way, I'll agree. But I don't think it's actually cost them any players they wanted to pay.

If they had to pay them more its just as bad.

Im pretty sure certain guys have flat out said "No, I dont want to play day games"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
RFDC wrote:
The Cubs have not won the WS because of Wrigley?

That is stupid.

Its not that cut n dry, but I definitely believe some of the down parts of Wrigley have hindered the chance at winning.


The day games alone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:08 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And I think you've got it backward about the day games. Guys want to play day games at Wrigley. Some of them have taken way less than market value to do so.

No way.

For every one Andre Dawson, ten guys laugh at the notion.

Every other team tells you to be at the park around 2pm-ish for most of their games. One team says be here at 9am.

Baseball, especially MLB is a young man's game. Young rich men usually like to go out at night. Especially when they work on a college campus called Wrigleyville.


A lot of these guys like to party. Young men can easily drink until four and get up to be at work at nine. If you're saying they might not be at their best that way, I'll agree. But I don't think it's actually cost them any players they wanted to pay.

If they had to pay them more its just as bad.

Im pretty sure certain guys have flat out said "No, I dont want to play day games"


Maybe a few have, but I'd bet more of them wanted to play the day games. I can't think of the guys who said no, but I can tell you Dawson, Wood, and lots of other guys you don't even think about wanted to play at "special" Wrigley.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57199
I guess I could buy a little if we just had all these really good teams that failed and there needed to be a reason why.

but come on, the day games and wrigley had nothing to do with getting swept by the Dodgers and Dbacks. It has nothing to do with losing to the Marlins in 03.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
RFDC wrote:
I guess I could buy a little if we just had all these really good teams that failed and there needed to be a reason why.

but come on, the day games and wrigley had nothing to do with getting swept by the Dodgers and Dbacks. It has nothing to do with losing to the Marlins in 03.

How bout the years they were a handful of games out of the playoffs? Day games affect that?

And, I think having a fucked up body clock is pretty severe, especially when your job is so physical.

Its not THE reason, but it certainly doesnt help.

JORR, Kerry Wood himself has said the day games are a problem and Dawson was more drawn to the natural grass (my guy!) than the day games.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
RFDC wrote:
I guess I could buy a little if we just had all these really good teams that failed and there needed to be a reason why.

but come on, the day games and wrigley had nothing to do with getting swept by the Dodgers and Dbacks. It has nothing to do with losing to the Marlins in 03.


Outside of the Yankees and Cardinals, five WS titles is respectable for a long time franchise. I would agree with your premise regarding those last two teams that got swept, but over the years, I think some good teams may have worn down. Especially the Durocher teams where he ran the same lineup out there everyday. If the Cubs win in '69 and again '84 which was a good team, they aren't a loser at all. They're a regular team with a normal amount of championships.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
denisdman wrote:
Wrigley is inconvenient to get to and a very outdated stadium. And yet, if they move it to Rosemont or wherever in the burbs, I would be sad. I'd definitely go to less game. There is something about that neighborhood and the atmosphere that make paying money to watch a crappy team a little easier to tolerate.


It's not inconvenient for me to get to.


3M people in the city and about 6M in the burbs. The only way it is convenient is if you can walk or are on an El line. I'll be going to Moran's for the NCAA deal they have this Friday. It'll take me 20 minutes to get to the train station that goes to Irving, about 50 on the train, and another 30 or so on the bus, and then a several block walk down to the park. It cost me $20 round trip and is a major pain. I still have to drive home drinky from Barrington to the Elgin area. The last leg from I-90 to the stadium is an absolute pain.....Rosemont would be under 30 minutes.

In any case, my prior comments stand, I will go to less games if they move.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
RFDC wrote:
I guess I could buy a little if we just had all these really good teams that failed and there needed to be a reason why.

but come on, the day games and wrigley had nothing to do with getting swept by the Dodgers and Dbacks. It has nothing to do with losing to the Marlins in 03.


This is what I was thinking.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57199
rogers park bryan wrote:
RFDC wrote:
I guess I could buy a little if we just had all these really good teams that failed and there needed to be a reason why.

but come on, the day games and wrigley had nothing to do with getting swept by the Dodgers and Dbacks. It has nothing to do with losing to the Marlins in 03.

How bout the years they were a handful of games out of the playoffs? Day games affect that?

And, I think having a fucked up body clock is pretty severe, especially when your job is so physical.

Its not THE reason, but it certainly doesnt help.

JORR, Kerry Wood himself has said the day games are a problem and Dawson was more drawn to the natural grass (my guy!) than the day games.

Just seems like excuse making to me.

You are a professional ball player. If they want you to play at 10am then play at 10am.

Have there really been many seasons where they were just a handful of games out?

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:16 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79458
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:

JORR, Kerry Wood himself has said the day games are a problem


I'm not saying the day games help. I just don't think they stopped anyone from signing here. They certainly didn't stop Wood from taking less dough.

_________________
Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?
Can you tell me where he's gone?
I thought I saw him walkin' up to The Hill
With Matthew, Tulsi, and Don


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 200 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group