It is currently Fri Nov 15, 2024 3:31 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 200 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:19 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57199
It's cool JORR just yanking yer chain a little.

_________________
"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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
I think you underestimate how popular the Cubs are.


My absolutist statement is no more silly than yours that the Cubs are only popular because of the ballpark.



And I think you oversteimate it. That guy from Seattle taking his picture next to the Harry statue likely isn't there because of the Cubs.

And I've never said the Cubs are "only popular because of the ballpark". They have the park which is a HUGE advantage. And they've used it very well to sell a team that has been mostly shitty.

This is the comment I was referring to

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
They are only dominant because of a special park and their location. Believe me, Tom Ricketts understands that.


There seems to be a lot missing there from the bag of what makes the Cubs dominant


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:21 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79455
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
rogers park bryan wrote:
This is the comment I was referring to

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
They are only dominant because of a special park and their location. Believe me, Tom Ricketts understands that.


There seems to be a lot missing there from the bag of what makes the Cubs dominant



Well, okay, what do you think makes them "dominant"? It's obviously not anything the players do on the field, right? What is it? Do people like the uniform? The logo? What do you think it is?

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
This is the comment I was referring to

Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
They are only dominant because of a special park and their location. Believe me, Tom Ricketts understands that.


There seems to be a lot missing there from the bag of what makes the Cubs dominant



Well, okay, what do you think makes them "dominant"? It's obviously not anything the players do on the field, right? What is it? Do people like the uniform? The logo? What do you think it is?

Part of it is history.

Anyone who was born after 1984 knows the Cubs are the team in Chicago, then there is also the White Sox.
Because ESPN plays all their games.
Because every move they make is put under a microscope.
Because they are a pop culture staple (How many movies/tv shows/ songs have mentioned the Cubs and their history of losing?)
Because every sport has a handful of teams that are landmark teams (Cowboys, Packers, Bears, Raiders, Lakers, Celtics, etc )and the Cubs are one of them. These teams usually stay as the landmark teams.

Also, the White Sox constant P.R. mistakes play a big role.


Also, the park and neighborhood play a role.

You think that would all fade without the park and neighborhood. I dont.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:52 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
That is mostly correct, except that from 1990 thru the Strike, there was one team in Chicago-- the White Sox. During the 'Good Guys Wear Black' era they were one of the most popular teams in baseball. The Cubs were barely an afterthought.

Then the strike, the white flag trade, and clown shoes manager happened, while Sammy Sosa started jacking HRs and the tables turned.

And ESPN doesn't play nearly as many Cubs games as they did from 03-08 because they are very bad right now.

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
That is mostly correct, except that from 1990 thru the Strike, there was one team in Chicago-- the White Sox. During the 'Good Guys Wear Black' era they were one of the most popular teams in baseball. The Cubs were barely an afterthought.

This is wildly inaccurate. The Cubs were never an afterthought.

Ill bet ESPN showed more of their games in that period than the White Sox.

Good Guys Were Black was not an ERA.

The Sox were good then, and they probably closed the gap a bit, but to say the Sox were more popular is just not true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:57 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
No, actually its true. New Stadium, one of the best right handed hitters ever, a Cy Young winning pitcher, and a playoff appearance were things the Cubs simply could not compete with in the early 90s. It only lasted 3-4 seasons, but still. 93-94 was the closest the Sox had come to taking over Chicago. Maybe even more so than in 2005.

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
No, actually its true. New Stadium, one of the best right handed hitters ever, a Cy Young winning pitcher, and a playoff appearance were things the Cubs simply could not compete with in the early 90s. It only lasted 3-4 seasons, but still. 93-94 was the closest the Sox had come to taking over Chicago. Maybe even more so than in 2005.

Not really

They maybe moved from 20% of the city to 30%

It hasnt been close since 84

Oh and the Cubs went to the playoffs in 89 and they had a Cy young in the early 90's who was better than the Sox guy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:02 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Yes really.

Higher than 30% in 1993. ALCS, Bo Jackson, Frank Thomas, Ventura, Black Jack...

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:12 pm
Posts: 2865
pizza_Place: maciano's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
No, actually its true. New Stadium, one of the best right handed hitters ever, a Cy Young winning pitcher, and a playoff appearance were things the Cubs simply could not compete with in the early 90s. It only lasted 3-4 seasons, but still. 93-94 was the closest the Sox had come to taking over Chicago. Maybe even more so than in 2005.


Very good point here, I grew up in the quad cities as a Cub fan. But during this 3 year stretch as an early teenager, I followed both teams. Frank Thomas was legit and was my favorite player during my youth.

BUT... the popularity growth of the white sox here wasn't about crossover. I think most of the following during this time like both teams. At least for me it was. I never rooted against the Cubs, just for the sox.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Yes really.

Higher than 30% in 1993. ALCS, Bo Jackson, Frank Thomas, Ventura, Black Jack...

Frank, its just not true.

The White Sox have not been more popular than the Cubs in our lives.

Nobody cared about Frank Thomas. More people disliked him than anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
The Cubs outdrew the Contending Powerhouse Cy Young MVP loaded new stadium White Sox in 1993 with about 10,000 less seats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:08 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
You didn't care about Frank Thomas because you were a Cubs fan. I'm sorry if you can't recognize that there was a very brief time in the early 90s (and in 2005) where the White Sox were THE team in Chicago. For the other 80% of my lifetime, its been the Cubs.

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
You didn't care about Frank Thomas because you were a Cubs fan. I'm sorry if you can't recognize that there was a very brief time in the early 90s (and in 2005) where the White Sox were THE team in Chicago. For the other 80% of my lifetime, its been the Cubs.

I loved Frank Thomas and followed his career very closely

It doesnt matter how many times you say it, its just not true.


You listed a million reasons why they SHOULD HAVE been more popular, but they werent.

Which is why the Cubs outdrew them every year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55840
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
I don't remember kids wearing White Sox stuff in 1993. I do remember Cubs stuff.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 23752
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
rogers park bryan wrote:
The Cubs outdrew the Contending Powerhouse Cy Young MVP loaded new stadium White Sox in 1993 with about 10,000 less seats.

And also outdrew the best team in baseball White Sox in 1994


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79455
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Bryan is right in that the Cubs have always been more popular since 1984. They Sox may have drawn more in the first year in the new park but I'm not even sure about that.

That's the whole point, the Cub success isn't based on winning or good teams. It's based on other ancillary things like that ballpark.

If they move out of the city that all changes. I'm sure some guys here have out-of-town clients who come in on business and want to see a game at Wrigley. Not a Cub game, mind you, but a game at Wrigley. The Cubs just happen to play there. Now why would a downtown businessman buy a skybox in a comfortable but unspecial ballpark in Rosemont when he can buy one probably cheaper a couple miles away in another comfortable and less than special park? Those clients aren't going to be dying to get to Rosemont.

_________________
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: Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 23752
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Bryan is right in that the Cubs have always been more popular since 1984. They Sox may have drawn more in the first year in the new park but I'm not even sure about that.

They outdrew the Cubs in 91 and 92. Then they stupidly won the division in 93 so the fans were pissed and went to Cub's games instead that year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2013 7:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55840
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Those clients aren't going to be dying to get to Rosemont.

DAT'S EXACTLY WRONG! Dey got a Gibson's an stuff!

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91923
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
If they move out of the city that all changes. I'm sure some guys here have out-of-town clients who come in on business and want to see a game at Wrigley. Not a Cub game, mind you, but a game at Wrigley. The Cubs just happen to play there. Now why would a downtown businessman buy a skybox in a comfortable but unspecial ballpark in Rosemont when he can buy one probably cheaper a couple miles away in another comfortable and less than special park? Those clients aren't going to be dying to get to Rosemont.
I'm starting to get the impression that you think that nothing exists out of the Chicago city limits. If being in Chicago was this gold mine of customers the White Sox wouldn't have such poor attendance.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55840
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
It's not that severe, but I believe that to flee to the suburbs at this point in time would be to be on the wrong side of history. People in my generation (probably yours, too; we're near-ish the same age) want to live in cities -- not just for a spell in their twenties, but in the long term. Maybe they won't live booze-soaked existences in Wrigleyville forever, but they'll be closer to the Loop than to New Lenox.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:28 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79455
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
If they move out of the city that all changes. I'm sure some guys here have out-of-town clients who come in on business and want to see a game at Wrigley. Not a Cub game, mind you, but a game at Wrigley. The Cubs just happen to play there. Now why would a downtown businessman buy a skybox in a comfortable but unspecial ballpark in Rosemont when he can buy one probably cheaper a couple miles away in another comfortable and less than special park? Those clients aren't going to be dying to get to Rosemont.
I'm starting to get the impression that you think that nothing exists out of the Chicago city limits. If being in Chicago was this gold mine of customers the White Sox wouldn't have such poor attendance.


The Sox are their own worst enemy. They've created their own suburb within Bridgeport and tried to separate themselves from their neighborhood rather than incorporating themselves into it. Their goal is to get you onto their property and off of it and back onto a highway with as little hassle as possible.

That's why it's so laughable when someone talks about the park being in a "bad area". Even if we talk about the "projects" that are still lingering nearby, most fans will never interact with anyone who lives there. It would be like saying Disneyworld is in a bad area because when you get in the swamps outside the park there are some toothless hillbillies that look like they're on the road crew from Deliverance living there.

Finally, there's a reason why you can buy a four bedroom house in Gurnee for less than it costs for a studio apartment downtown.

_________________
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 Apr 02, 2013 6:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91923
Location: To the left of my post
Curious Hair wrote:
It's not that severe, but I believe that to flee to the suburbs at this point in time would be to be on the wrong side of history. People in my generation (probably yours, too; we're near-ish the same age) want to live in cities -- not just for a spell in their twenties, but in the long term. Maybe they won't live booze-soaked existences in Wrigleyville forever, but they'll be closer to the Loop than to New Lenox.
I'm not convinced that is true. The suburbs popped up in massive numbers for a reason. Those reasons didn't suddenly change. It's currently quite popular to move to certain parts of Chicago. However, I doubt when those people have 3 kids they'll be so inclined to stay.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55840
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
You'll still have people moving out to the burbs, yes, but fewer, and not quite so far. It's hard to live in the McMansion badlands of Will County with $4.10 gas.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91923
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Finally, there's a reason why you can buy a four bedroom house in Gurnee for less than it costs for a studio apartment downtown.
If you are going to pick one of the most expensive areas in the city you should pick one of the most expensive suburbs.

There is a reason why the trains are packed with people and the expressways are packed with people driving into the city to work and then heading back to the suburbs too.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:56 pm
Posts: 37807
Location: ...
yeah it's called overpopulation.

nobody needs to move from the city to the suburbs. they all procreate after graduating college of dupage and load up barleycorn's in schaumberg every weekend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:44 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79455
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Finally, there's a reason why you can buy a four bedroom house in Gurnee for less than it costs for a studio apartment downtown.
If you are going to pick one of the most expensive areas in the city you should pick one of the most expensive suburbs.

There is a reason why the trains are packed with people and the expressways are packed with people driving into the city to work and then heading back to the suburbs too.


The mentality is to move to the suburbs to get a fourth bedroom in that McMansion in Bloomingdale for the same money you'd spend to get three in a Portage Park bungalow so you can fill it with junk.

_________________
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 Apr 02, 2013 6:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91923
Location: To the left of my post
Curious Hair wrote:
You'll still have people moving out to the burbs, yes, but fewer, and not quite so far. It's hard to live in the McMansion badlands of Will County with $4.10 gas.
What has changed though? For a long time, people were leaving cities. Currently, the trend is that people are moving back into certain neighborhoods. In a few years, that will change again. It's all cyclical.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 91923
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The mentality is to move to the suburbs to get a fourth bedroom in that McMansion in Bloomingdale for the same money you'd spend to get three in a Portage Park bungalow so you can fill it with junk.
...or it's to have the option of sending your kid to public school rather than paying tens of thousands of dollars, or it's to let your kid run in a backyard, or it's to be able to park your car in a driveway and then drive it to a grocery store, or it's to not have to take an elevator downstairs to let the dog out.

Oh, and if you want to do stuff in the city, drive 5 minutes to the train station and take the train in, or drive in and park for $20, or if you've got enough cash to afford a nice condo in downtown buy it as a second home and spend the weekend there when you want.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:54 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 79455
Location: Ravenswood Manor
pizza_Place: Pete's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
...or it's to have the option of sending your kid to public school rather than paying tens of thousands of dollars


Good point. The most successful CSFMB members hail from Conant.

#fasttrack

_________________
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 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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