Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   Looks like Wrigley Field might get renovated after all   ( espn.go.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1473 clicks; posted to Sports » on 22 May 2014 at 1:36 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-05-22 11:57:41 AM  
In a video published early Thursday morning on the team's website, Ricketts told fans he needed to move forward with his $500 million privately funded mission to revitalize the 100-year-old ballpark and the surrounding area in order to see the fruits of the revenue generators his counterparts enjoy. The video strongly connects the Cubs' lack of competitiveness in recent years with the inability to produce the revenue others teams are seeing.

Yes I'm certain the Cubs suck at playing baseball because of salaries and not because your team is managed by a bunch of incompetent boobs. With exception of this year, the Cubs have long been in the top 50% of payrolls, including being top 3 in 2009 when they went an amazing 75-87.
 
2014-05-22 12:14:05 PM  
Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.
 
2014-05-22 01:43:54 PM  
Yeah I don't think polishing the brass rails will raise the titanic either.
 
2014-05-22 01:45:24 PM  
Renovate Wrigley Field with a tactical nuke and then it can be said that genuine progress to the ballpark and the team is being made.
 
2014-05-22 01:46:37 PM  
Uecker says Wrigley's press box is full of spiders.
 
2014-05-22 01:48:33 PM  

someonelse: Uecker says Wrigley's press box is full of spiders.


He also says "Juuuuuuuust a bit outside."
 
2014-05-22 01:54:00 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.


The lowest cost seat on the "lower" tiered games is $8.96.

That's .96 cents more than a Bud Light at the game.
 
2014-05-22 01:56:39 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.



1.  Cubs have been in the top 5 of MLB in terms of revenue as well as overall profit.  The pleas for revenue are driven by the debt the owner's took on to purchase the team and the expense covenants that were in those financing agreements that are putting pressure on the team finances.  The financing arrangements were intended to act as a liability shield for the Rickett's family fortune.

2.  The Cubs essentially want to abrogate the contract they have with the Rooftop Clubs.  Which is fine, but the Cubs want something for nothing, since they have not offered to compensate the Clubs for breaching the Contract (e.g. as a flat payment or a share of the Ad revenue).  Likewise the Cubs refuse to mount the signs on the buildings themselves, saying it would drastically impact ad rates, even though the signs would at most be 30 feet (or less now that the Cubs got to expand the park for free) from the stadium outer wall.

So overall I'm not sure how the Rooftops are the bad guys in this scenario.
 
2014-05-22 01:59:23 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.


Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.
 
2014-05-22 02:00:18 PM  
The problem with the Cubs (life long fan) has never been revenue.  They packed Wrigley everyday regardless of record for 20-30 years.  The Trib Co was notoriously cheap.  Remember, this is the same team that let Greg Maddux walk out the door b/c they didn't want to pay him and Sandburg. They didn't pay Dawson market value, etc.  The list is long.

They have failed on multiple accounts to draft well and have never really used their big market status to buy tons of free agents.  Once in my lifetime they want out and got the best free agent (Soriano), which they only did b/c the previous owners knew they wouldn't have to pay the whole contract.  But still, they have never thrown their money around consistently and efficiently like the other big market clubs.

The renovations are sorely needed, especially on the main concourse, but any additional revenue will be handed right to lawyers figthing the contractual obligations to the roof top owners.  It's pretty sad.

Also, the reason they've lost the last few years is b/c that is the plan.  They've said as much.  Many times.  They want the top 3 pick to help upgrade the minor leagues.  Idk wth Ricketts is even saying anymore, and I never agreed with the awful plan in the first place.
 
2014-05-22 02:02:43 PM  

ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.


It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!
 
2014-05-22 02:03:14 PM  
The Cubs will sweep Miami in the World Series next year. Book it. Done.
 
2014-05-22 02:05:22 PM  

maweimer9: The renovations are sorely needed, especially on the main concourse, but any additional revenue will be handed right to lawyers fighting the contractual obligations to the roof top owners.  It's pretty sad.



Honestly, if the Rickett's offered release the Rooftops from the revenue share requirement and paid them a flat fee based on the degree of impairment for that property they'd probably take it.

Instead, they want a promise not to sue while taking steps that impair the value of those ongoing concerns.  Hell, at this point it sounds like the Rooftop owners expect that their businesses won't be viable once the contract is up so what they need now is cash to get out from under the mortgages they took on to make improvements to their properties pursuant to the Contract they signed with the Cubs in 2006 (that established the revenue share).
 
2014-05-22 02:07:56 PM  

maweimer9: It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!



Joe (the father) is technically the owner with his son (Tom) acting as Chairman of the Cub's board of directors and the other three children as directors on the board.
 
2014-05-22 02:10:09 PM  

maweimer9: ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.

It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!


Ok you are right about the amount, for some reason I thought it was around 200 million, but the father Joe is still the owner. Tom is the Chairman of the Board.
 
2014-05-22 02:18:17 PM  

ongbok: maweimer9: ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.

It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!

Ok you are right about the amount, for some reason I thought it was around 200 million, but the father Joe is still the owner. Tom is the Chairman of the Board.


Yea, that makes sense.  I know Tom was the one working with Rahm on getting public funds.  They probably all were, but this is the Cubs so nothing goes the right way.

The third largest market sells it's fans on losing in order to get good.  All while the billionares who own the club pine for more money so they can make the club "sustain success."  It's so sad.  It really is.  Baseball is built for big market clubs more than any other sport and they still lose.  And this time it's on purpose.
 
2014-05-22 02:18:51 PM  

Milk D: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

The lowest cost seat on the "lower" tiered games is $8.96.

That's .96 cents more than a Bud Light at the game.


Even cheaper on stub hub.
 
2014-05-22 02:20:07 PM  

maweimer9: ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.

It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!


Stealing product is a risky business model.
 
2014-05-22 02:28:58 PM  

LarryDan43: maweimer9: ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.

It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!

Stealing product is a risky business model.


I'm not sure I understand this argument either.  How are they stealing the product?  The consumers pay for the seats.  The owners of the rooftops pay the Cubs 17%.  I think I just heard the roof top owners paid the Cubs over $3 million in 2013, which is more than any one vendor paid the Cubs.

The Cubs stupidly entered into a contract with the roof top owners and now they're mad about it.  They can't do what they want contractually, which is why they're just going to do it.  And as I said before a great deal of this "new" revenue coming in will be handed straight to lawyers.
 
2014-05-22 02:29:16 PM  
I know they are rebuilding the farm system but at some point you need to sign one of your good players. The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy. You are paying the roster almost next to nothing. You need 1 good pitcher to build your MLB roster around. Oh well...keep sucking Cubs


/brewers fan
 
2014-05-22 02:30:10 PM  
Honestly, since these rooftops have become basically "suites across the streets" themselves, I don't know that I have as much empathy for the issue... it is all a business now out there.  They have their "deal" with the Cubs, but, if the Cubs want to bring it all "in house", they have the right.  

Although, why the Cubs don't just "buy" all of the rooftops outright as "Rooftop Suites" anyway, instead of just making an "agreement" with the building owners... seems like that would be the easier way out of that.

When it was a bunch of people who lived in the buildings and set up lawn chairs, a 6-in portable TV,  and a cooler, and WGN would put the camera on them and Harry would say something semi-witty and they'd wave... if they were going to do something like this I'd feel like "aww, why can't you just let them have that".   Now, ehhh, whatever.

/also I guess part of it being that I've fallen out of caring about baseball slowly over the past 10-15 years
//probably easier when you were a Cubs fan
///and you moved away from Chicago
 
2014-05-22 02:30:21 PM  

maweimer9: ongbok: maweimer9: ongbok: Lando Lincoln: Considering the ticket prices they're charging for games, I'm not really buying the whole "Oh we're so poor we need more money to be competitive" schtick.

On the one hand, I really hate the idea of one of those ungodly jumbotrons in left field. On the other hand, the rooftop owners can rot in Hell.

"Dollar Bill" Wirtz is alive and well.

Remember this is the guy that had the city of Chicago ready to foot the bill for the renovation until he proudly and arrogantly announced that he was personally funding a PAC with a few hundred million dollars to produce anti Obama attack ads. Hell if you can fund a PAC with a couple of hundred million of your own money, you don't need tax payer money to renovate your stadium.

It was $10 million (I believe) and it was his dad that said it.  But here's the thing, in such a political town as Chicago, you probably shouldn't let that news come out with, you know, Obama's ex chief of staff running the town!!

Ok you are right about the amount, for some reason I thought it was around 200 million, but the father Joe is still the owner. Tom is the Chairman of the Board.

Yea, that makes sense.  I know Tom was the one working with Rahm on getting public funds.  They probably all were, but this is the Cubs so nothing goes the right way.

The third largest market sells it's fans on losing in order to get good.  All while the billionares who own the club pine for more money so they can make the club "sustain success."  It's so sad.  It really is.  Baseball is built for big market clubs more than any other sport and they still lose.  And this time it's on purpose.


That's why the Cubs are Chicago's lovable losers. They may as well stop playing baseball there and turn the thing into a big bar with a $20 cover. That is all that it has been for the last few years.
 
2014-05-22 02:32:14 PM  

LarryDan43: Stealing product is a risky business model.



It's not and has never been "stealing."  A property owner has a right to their view and they can use it as they see fit.  Conversely, the Rooftop Clubs cannot force the Cubs to give them an unimpeded view of the stadium interior as of right.  However, the Cubs agreed to do so as a matter of contract.

Ergo, not stealing.
 
2014-05-22 02:37:02 PM  
Wrigley's facilities are an absolute dump compared to all other major league teams and even their own spring training facilities. They need to be allowed to make whatever renovations to the clubhouse and stadium that they feel necessary in order to retain talent. And I have no qualms with the Cubs ownership trying to generate extra revenue to help service the debt they took on when they purchased the team. We all know why college graduates aren't going out and buying houses or cars when they're trying desperately to get out from under a mountain of student debt. Why should it be the same for the Cubs when we wonder why they won't be able to retain their up-and-coming talent (Bryant, Almorra, Baez) in a few years (or acquire FA talent) when we know that their revenues are tied-up paying their debt from purchasing the team?

/most people keep holding on to some silly nostalgia that died with their grandfathers and Harry Caray
 
2014-05-22 02:39:27 PM  

maweimer9: The third largest market sells it's fans on losing in order to get good.  All while the billionares who own the club pine for more money so they can make the club "sustain success."  It's so sad.  It really is.  Baseball is built for big market clubs more than any other sport and they still lose.  And this time it's on purpose.


One thing to note is that the Cubs did do their recent TV deal before the sale (sucks for the new ownership) and before the local baseball TV rights went nuts.
 
2014-05-22 02:41:11 PM  

eagles95: The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy.


Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.
 
2014-05-22 02:42:49 PM  

ladodger34: maweimer9: The third largest market sells it's fans on losing in order to get good.  All while the billionares who own the club pine for more money so they can make the club "sustain success."  It's so sad.  It really is.  Baseball is built for big market clubs more than any other sport and they still lose.  And this time it's on purpose.

One thing to note is that the Cubs did do their recent TV deal before the sale (sucks for the new ownership) and before the local baseball TV rights went nuts.


That's correct, but I think that deal is coming up soon.  At least I've heard that b/c WGN won't be carrying games any longer (another huge mistake) starting either next year or in 2016.
 
2014-05-22 02:45:16 PM  

germ78: eagles95: The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy.

Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.


They have the money to resign him but they don't want to. They would rather trade him for prospects. But you are right that they can't resign him, not because of money, but because he wants to play for a team that is going to make an effort to win within his pitching career.
 
2014-05-22 02:45:32 PM  

germ78: They need to be allowed to make whatever renovations to the clubhouse and stadium that they feel necessary in order to retain talent.



Like building a Hotel across the street and setting up a rooftop party deck about ~25 feet from a line of residential buildings, or getting the city to pass a special ordinance for a "Sports Plaza" liquor license that will turn the triangle property adjacent to the stadium into an open air beer garden, or the tens of thousands of square feet of LED lit advertising that will cover the stadium (lights on till 11pm), or the increase from 30 to 43 night games plus an addition 8 flex dates for concerts, or 25 concerts or outdoor events for the Sports Plaza.

All of which would bring in more revenue, all of which is more or less approved, and none of which has anything to do with the Rooftops.
 
2014-05-22 02:48:11 PM  

maweimer9: That's correct, but I think that deal is coming up soon.  At least I've heard that b/c WGN won't be carrying games any longer (another huge mistake) starting either next year or in 2016.



Yeah, the deal is coming up for renewal, and the word is that the Rickett's plan on using the deal that the Dodgers struck as a guidepost for valuation.  It will likely be too rich for WGN.
 
2014-05-22 02:48:41 PM  

maweimer9: That's correct, but I think that deal is coming up soon.  At least I've heard that b/c WGN won't be carrying games any longer (another huge mistake) starting either next year or in 2016.


I read that the deal with CSN doesn't expire until 2019.  The WGN thing is a different deal.
 
2014-05-22 02:49:50 PM  
My disclaimers, I am a Sox fan but live just NW of Wrigleyville.

I am completely siding with the rooftop owners

1) They signed the contract
2) A great amount of the Cubs value is because of where they are and the charm of the park and it being in an actual neighborhood
3) The family knew the terms when they bought the team
4) I have seen what happened to Soldier Field

That said, Wrigley is a dump and it should be fixed up - Boston figured out how to do it without destroying the charm of the park. There are ways to work with the rooftop owners to make this work.

If the Cubs moved to the suburbs they would still be popular -  but the charm would be gone and you would lose a ton of city fans - you would see a lot of the bars becoming Sox bars, which I am cool with. (I mention that because that is always a threat, the move that is.)

Wrigleyville would still exist and would still be a popular place to live if the Cubs left - it would probably become more of a family neighborhood based on a lot of the surrounding areas becoming just that (Roscoe, NorthCenter, Lincoln Square/Ravenswood) - the hos and bros would move out, most of the bars would close, but knew things would move in. The neighborhood can handle it - the Cubs lose on that in the long run.
 
2014-05-22 02:52:16 PM  

bdub77: In a video published early Thursday morning on the team's website, Ricketts told fans he needed to move forward with his $500 million privately funded mission to revitalize the 100-year-old ballpark and the surrounding area in order to see the fruits of the revenue generators his counterparts enjoy. The video strongly connects the Cubs' lack of competitiveness in recent years with the inability to produce the revenue others teams are seeing.

Yes I'm certain the Cubs suck at playing baseball because of salaries and not because your team is managed by a bunch of incompetent boobs. With exception of this year, the Cubs have long been in the top 50% of payrolls, including being top 3 in 2009 when they went an amazing 75-87.


The Cubs are one of the most profitable farking teams in baseball. The problem is Ricketts bought a team he couldn't afford to run in the first place.
 
2014-05-22 02:52:18 PM  
The roof tops are part of the Historic Site in Chicago, Ricketts is in for a losing fight on that one.

Can he sell the team, maybe to Cuban?
 
2014-05-22 03:02:46 PM  

germ78: eagles95: The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy.

Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.


Thing is that most good teams know this game are purposely not even trying to trade for pitching at the all star break. Why lose good farm club players when you can just tough it out and make the playoffs and then sign them to a big offseason contract. I'm far from a Cubs fan but unless they are getting 3-4 can't miss high level prospects and a new ready to go starting pitcher they need to try and resign him. Just raise the beer price to $9. All the 20 somethings that go to be cool and drink beer at Cubs games will be able to pay off his contract in no time.
 
2014-05-22 03:15:08 PM  

JK47: germ78: They need to be allowed to make whatever renovations to the clubhouse and stadium that they feel necessary in order to retain talent.


Like building a Hotel across the street and setting up a rooftop party deck about ~25 feet from a line of residential buildings, or getting the city to pass a special ordinance for a "Sports Plaza" liquor license that will turn the triangle property adjacent to the stadium into an open air beer garden, or the tens of thousands of square feet of LED lit advertising that will cover the stadium (lights on till 11pm), or the increase from 30 to 43 night games plus an addition 8 flex dates for concerts, or 25 concerts or outdoor events for the Sports Plaza.

All of which would bring in more revenue, all of which is more or less approved, and none of which has anything to do with the Rooftops.


That's fine, but anyone who has moved into Wrigleyville in the past twenty years should have known that they're moving in near a Major League Ballpark and have little right to complain about it. It's like the people who buy a home on a golf course and biatch when they find golf balls in their yard. Plus the triangle is currently an empty gravel lot; I'm sure the city would rather have something there that's generating tax money.
 
2014-05-22 03:21:43 PM  

germ78: Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.


They have control of Spellcheck through 2015.

As for the rooftops, the Cubs signed the deal, and the current owners can't even claim that they had no hand in it at all since they kept Crane Kenney around, and he was involved in that deal.  I didn't feel sorry for the rooftop owners at all when the Cubs were putting up those screens to block the view when they just freeloaded on the Cubs, but now that they pay a negotiated amount to the team and made improvements in reliance of the deal, well, too bad for the Cubs.
 
2014-05-22 03:22:52 PM  

eagles95: germ78: eagles95: The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy.

Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.

Thing is that most good teams know this game are purposely not even trying to trade for pitching at the all star break. Why lose good farm club players when you can just tough it out and make the playoffs and then sign them to a big offseason contract. I'm far from a Cubs fan but unless they are getting 3-4 can't miss high level prospects and a new ready to go starting pitcher they need to try and resign him. Just raise the beer price to $9. All the 20 somethings that go to be cool and drink beer at Cubs games will be able to pay off his contract in no time.


The thing with Samardzija is that he won't be a free agent until after the 2015 season.  He wouldn't be just be a half season rental.  Plus, if you get him, his agent isn't Scott Boras so there is a good chance he would sign an extension.

If the Cubs played this right, they could get a nice haul for him given those factors.
 
2014-05-22 03:29:11 PM  

germ78: That's fine, but anyone who has moved into Wrigleyville in the past twenty years should have known that they're moving in near a Major League Ballpark and have little right to complain about it.It's like the people who buy a home on a golf course and biatch when they find golf balls in their yard.



Yeah no.  It's nothing like that.  Neighbors don't have issue with the fact that the baseball team is there nor do they have issues with the current uses of the property.  The issue is over the EXPANDED uses the owner is looking for.  All of which are, by default, new and certainly nothing anyone "in the past twenty years should have" expected.  Just because you live next to something doesn't mean that property owner has carte blanche to do anything imaginable that is even remotely related to the current use.  And honestly, building a party deck directly adjacent to a home (when you have a large lot a block long to work with) is a dick move.


Plus the triangle is currently an empty gravel lot; I'm sure the city would rather have something there that's generating tax money.


Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier but the changes I outlined were already approved without major objections from neighbors.  Hell, the meetings with neighborhood property owners were largely constructive as these things go.  The only item the Cubs really lost was the bridge over Clark because the Alderman believed that drunken patrons from the Triangle would likely throw things into street from the bridge.
 
2014-05-22 03:29:35 PM  

germ78: That's fine, but anyone who has moved into Wrigleyville in the past twenty years should have known that they're moving in near a Major League Ballpark and have little right to complain about it. It's like the people who buy a home on a golf course and biatch when they find golf balls in their yard. Plus the triangle is currently an empty gravel lot; I'm sure the city would rather have something there that's generating tax money.


Ummmm.... no. People bought in wrigley based on the current legal restrictions on the ballpark in place and based on the existing neighborhood, that is a lot more than Wrigley Field. Yes, it is the heart of the neighborhood - but it also has signed contracts and restrictions.

People who live here can't complain that a bro throws-up in their front yard or people are banging in the alley behind their house, because we know this is part of the neighborhood. The neighborhood accepts noise and a certain level of property crime, because we knew it coming in - but they bought into the historic charm of the neighborhood too.
 
2014-05-22 03:30:57 PM  

GQueue: As for the rooftops, the Cubs signed the deal, and the current owners can't even claim that they had no hand in it at all since they kept Crane Kenney around, and he was involved in that deal.  I didn't feel sorry for the rooftop owners at all when the Cubs were putting up those screens to block the view when they just freeloaded on the Cubs, but now that they pay a negotiated amount to the team and made improvements in reliance of the deal, well, too bad for the Cubs.



Yeah that's a pretty significant factor that's going to work against the Cubs.
 
2014-05-22 03:32:04 PM  

JK47: The only item the Cubs really lost was the bridge over Clark because the Alderman believed that drunken patrons from the Triangle would likely throw things into street from the bridge.


They could have fenced/netted it in and it would have been a revenue factory for the city for all the fines and arrests they'd hand out to drunks pissing off the bridge at night regardless of season.
 
2014-05-22 03:32:20 PM  
I have no problem with the Cubs renovating Wrigley. I do think the Rooftop owners should get some kind of compensation for breaking the contract, but in all fairness they profited for a long time off of the Cubs without compensating the team. I won't cry if they don't get anything.

Next up is leaving WGN behind and getting a modern TV deal. WGN was instrumental in making the Cubs popular for a long time, but that was back when TV options were much more limited than they are now, not to mention streaming options.

The neighborhood association can just FOAD. They've held up the team for decades. I'm one of the minority of Cubs fans who wouldn't mind seeing the team move Wrigley. One aspect of that is that I'd love to see about 10 years out when the property value steadily decreases after Wrigley leaves and all these whiny crybabies in Wrigleyville have no one to blame but themselves.

The day that the Cubs hired Epstein and declared the major rebuild, not just of the ML team, but also of the farm system, business office, international development, assets (like Wrigley), and media presentation I said "about farking time this team at least had a plan" and marked my competitiveness calendar for 2017-2018. Sucks for a few years, but that's how long it takes to draft guys and get them to the majors.
 
2014-05-22 03:35:28 PM  

GQueue: They could have fenced/netted it in and it would have been a revenue factory for the city for all the fines and arrests they'd hand out to drunks pissing off the bridge at night regardless of season.



True, though it would have to be automated like a red light camera since the cops from the local district aren't all that interested in wrangling drunks for public urination.  Most days they have their hands full just keeping people on the sidewalks along Clark.
 
2014-05-22 03:36:31 PM  

Orgasmatron138: The neighborhood association can just FOAD. They've held up the team for decades. I'm one of the minority of Cubs fans who wouldn't mind seeing the team move Wrigley. One aspect of that is that I'd love to see about 10 years out when the property value steadily decreases after Wrigley leaves and all these whiny crybabies in Wrigleyville have no one to blame but themselves.


I have to disagree with you on the property value. Wrigley actually is less expensive than most of the neighboring areas, outside of Uptown.

If the Cubs were gone a lot of the bar scene would move out and more families would move in - Wrigley actually has one of the best neighborhood schools in the city (k-8) - some of those bars would likely convert in to restaurants and you would have a more cost efficient Lincoln Park.
 
2014-05-22 03:37:01 PM  

ladodger34: eagles95: germ78: eagles95: The fact they are looking to trade Jeff Samardzija  is crazy.

Keeping a guy that you can't re-sign in the off-season (it's his final year of his deal, and he's due big bucks with how he's pitched) instead of moving him for top pitching prospects by the deadline I think is crazy.

Thing is that most good teams know this game are purposely not even trying to trade for pitching at the all star break. Why lose good farm club players when you can just tough it out and make the playoffs and then sign them to a big offseason contract. I'm far from a Cubs fan but unless they are getting 3-4 can't miss high level prospects and a new ready to go starting pitcher they need to try and resign him. Just raise the beer price to $9. All the 20 somethings that go to be cool and drink beer at Cubs games will be able to pay off his contract in no time.

The thing with Samardzija is that he won't be a free agent until after the 2015 season.  He wouldn't be just be a half season rental.  Plus, if you get him, his agent isn't Scott Boras so there is a good chance he would sign an extension.

If the Cubs played this right, they could get a nice haul for him given those factors.


Look at what the Cubs got for Garza last year, and he had a history of going on the DL.
 
2014-05-22 03:39:31 PM  

p the boiler: Orgasmatron138: The neighborhood association can just FOAD. They've held up the team for decades. I'm one of the minority of Cubs fans who wouldn't mind seeing the team move Wrigley. One aspect of that is that I'd love to see about 10 years out when the property value steadily decreases after Wrigley leaves and all these whiny crybabies in Wrigleyville have no one to blame but themselves.

I have to disagree with you on the property value. Wrigley actually is less expensive than most of the neighboring areas, outside of Uptown.

If the Cubs were gone a lot of the bar scene would move out and more families would move in - Wrigley actually has one of the best neighborhood schools in the city (k-8) - some of those bars would likely convert in to restaurants and you would have a more cost efficient Lincoln Park.


Haven't the values there fluctuated pretty wildly over the decades? For some reason I have it in my head that Wrigleyville used to actually not be that nice an area; I would bet a paycheck that the attraction of Wrigley field is what brought it back around. In the future there wouldn't be that known commodity. You may be right, though. The bars would certainly leave.
 
2014-05-22 03:43:03 PM  

GQueue: JK47: The only item the Cubs really lost was the bridge over Clark because the Alderman believed that drunken patrons from the Triangle would likely throw things into street from the bridge.

They could have fenced/netted it in and it would have been a revenue factory for the city for all the fines and arrests they'd hand out to drunks pissing off the bridge at night regardless of season.


We have a skybridge in our downtown area so people can cross one of the busiest streets in town (and conveniently end up at the casino). Ours has thick glass windows that work fine. It has flashy colored lights at night and also has REALLY LOUD music pumped through to keep the bums from sleeping in it. Looks great and probably has saved a few drunk lives.
 
2014-05-22 03:49:19 PM  

Orgasmatron138: The neighborhood association can just FOAD. They've held up the team for decades. I'm one of the minority of Cubs fans who wouldn't mind seeing the team move Wrigley. One aspect of that is that I'd love to see about 10 years out when the property value steadily decreases after Wrigley leaves and all these whiny crybabies in Wrigleyville have no one to blame but themselves.



Unlikely.  For the first fifty to seventy years that Wrigley was in the area the neighborhood was largely working class and the stadium was surrounded by factories and warehouses.  In fact the property across the street (where the hotel is proposed) was a Coal or Coke factory (I forget which).  The neighborhood went from Irish to Haitian and/or Puerto Rican before gentrification began in the late 80's and early 90's.

Point being, the improvement in the neighborhood is the result of many factors only one of which is the stadium.  At this point Lake View is well enough established that it's doubtful that the Cubs leaving would be devastating.  Hell, it would present a real development opportunity since that would be a huge property to work with in the middle of a valuable neighborhood.

Kind of off the cuff but it's also possible that we could replace the Cubs with another team on that site.  Maybe even another sport like the Chicago Fire from the MLS.
 
2014-05-22 03:59:50 PM  
Oh, that f**king d*ck! :O

Let it be known, to all of FARK, that from this day forth, Captain Steroid is a Mets fan!
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report