Wrigley Field is Not Beautiful From the Outside

In News And Rumors by aisle424161 Comments

I am one of the people who would be upset if the Cubs moved out of Wrigley Field.  As much as I bitch about the crowded walkways and the lack of decent concessions, I would be sad if they had to move.  I think that puts me in a minority in this particular corner of the Cubs blogosphere.

I enjoy having a minimum amount of ads smacking me in the face as I watch a baseball game.  I like not being told when to clap by a giant video scoreboard. I love the view from my seat of the surrounding neighborhood, and I think it is cool that people are so interested in what’s going on that they pay exhorbitant amounts to sit on rooftops across the street.

However, if there is one thing I could give a damn about in the current version of Wrigley Field is its exterior.  The exterior of Wrigley Field is ugly, and crumbling, and just plain disgusting.  There is nothing quaint about the chain-link fences surrounding the inner walkways.  There is no architectural wonder in the concrete slabs on the exterior with the occasional tiny window that look out onto the abandoned triangle parcel that serves as a makeshift parking lot.

With the exception of the iconic marquee, the beauty of Wrigley Field is entirely on the inside.  So this is why I don’t understand why people get upset when the Cubs try to improve the exterior.

I happened to catch a post over at The Wrigley Blog that shows the Cubs putting in LED lights above the ticket windows on Clark and Addison.

Wrigley-ticket-windows

It chaps my hide to report that they have added bright Red neon over each of the ticket windows. (Lord knows, they want you to really know that they are OPEN and have plenty of tickets available). And they have also added some sort of e-lectronic message board. My grandson tells me they are LEDs and let me tell ya, they are about 10 times as bright as the glorious neon lit Marquee.

Lord help us.

I just don’t get the angst.  So the Cubs want to improve customer service by putting up a system that gives them more options than signs that read simply “OPEN.” So what?  Does this distract anyone from enjoying the game? No.  There isn’t much short of a mortar attack that can make the exterior of Wrigley uglier, so I don’t see the problem.

From my perspective, if the aesthetics of the lights above the ticket windows were the biggest problem facing the Cubs, I would be thrilled to death.  I just don’t get it.


Share this Post

Comments

  1. mb21

    I would be sad if they had to move. I think that puts me in a minority in this particular corner of the Cubs blogosphere.

    I’m pretty sure you’re not in the minority, 424. I’d be shocked if we ran a poll if my opinions on Wrigley weren’t a part of the tiny minority that read this site. Even the people who regularly comment generally disagree with my opinions about Wrigley.

    I should also admit that I’d be sad to see Wrigley go too. It’s such an old ballpark and it’s rich in history. If they could somehow renovate Wrigley so that it looked the same, but had the amenities that all modern parks do I’d be thrilled. That would easily be the most ideal solution. I just don’t think the Cubs can do that where they currently are. Maybe it can be done though.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  2. Rice Cube

    There isn’t much short of a mortar attack that can make the exterior of Wrigley uglier, so I don’t see the problem.

    Might get a new ballpark faster if that happened.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  3. Rice Cube

    I think they’d have to buy up the actual streets along Waveland and Sheffield surrounding the park in order to expand the footprint. They’d have to also play at the Cell or Milwaukee for a year or two while they blow the park to smithereens and rebuild. I think they should save the marquee, the scoreboard, the ivy seeds and the flag behind the bleachers (heck, save the foul poles too) but everything else can pretty much be improved on.

    I just don’t think they’ll ever do it unless an asteroid destroys Wrigley Field.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  4. WenningtonsGorillaCock

    [quote name=Aisle 424]t chaps my hide to report that they have added bright Red neon over each of the ticket windows. (Lord knows, they want you to really know that they are OPEN and have plenty of tickets available). And they have also added some sort of e-lectronic message board. My grandson tells me they are LEDs and let me tell ya, they are about 10 times as bright as the glorious neon lit Marquee.

    Lord help us.[/quote]
    Get off my lawn!

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  5. Hector Villanueva

    I’m about as much of a traditionalist as there is when it comes to Wrigley Field, and even I don’t give a shit about LED lights above the ticket window. Good lord.

    As a side note, I would be perfectly willing to sacrifice a year playing in Milwaukee or the Cell if it was necessary to modernize Wrigley Field.

    I should also say that I would prefer not to see extensive advertising and a jumbotron be a part of that modernization.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  6. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]Pierson v. Post – Post, a fox hunter, was chasing a fox through a vacant lot when Pierson came across the fox and, knowing it was being chased by another, killed the fox and took it away. Post sued Pierson on an action for trespass on the case for damages against his possession of the fox. Post argued that he had ownership of the fox as giving chase to an animal in the course of hunting it was sufficient to establish possession.

    Discuss

    (dying laughing)[/quote]
    This case is no laughing matter, as it sets the precendent for pursuit not constituting possession of a wild animal. It’s based on the Tommy v. Timmy “Finders Keepers” Doctrine.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  7. Berselius

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]It’s based on the Tommy v. Timmy “Finders Keepers” Doctrine.[/quote]
    Nuh-uh!

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  8. mb21

    Even if that advertising brought the Cubs $30-40 million per year in additional revenue? That’s Pujols plus a league average player. It might even be Pujols + Zambrano. Paid for directly through those ads.

    If there wasn’t so much money involved I’d prefer no ballparks had that stuff, but the revenue teams can generate from advertising is ridiculous. I like to think we have a beautiful home where we live, but if someone paid me enough money I’d add a jumbotron, as many ads as possible and would even sell the naming rights. I might not think our home is as beautiful or even as comfortable as it once was, but I’m a huge fan of money. I use it all the time. I like to have some in my wallet.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  9. AndCounting

    I think the guys from the Wrigley Blog live in the neighborhood and tend to have a fonder attachment to all aspects of the place than most people do. That said, good God, the old ticket window signage was perfectly useless.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  10. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=Berselius]Nuh-uh![/quote]
    That was the defense mounted by Timmy. It proved futile.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  11. Aisle424

    I can deal with the walkways. It’s part of the price of watching baseball in a stadium of that age. I think if they ever get the Triangle Building completed so that they can move the administrative offices out of the main stadium, it would open up space for additional concessions, bigger concourse, etc.

    Their improvement plan looks good if someone could snap their fingers and make it work. The problem is that it would cost as much (or more) than to just build a new stadium. That seems silly since the improvements wouldn’t really address many of the superstructure problems that exist now, or will creep up in the coming years.

    So even if they get the funding to do all of those improvements, they’ll be sinking a ton more money into the stadium. As sad as it makes me, I just don’t think Wrigley is a viable stadium in current baseball economics.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  12. Aisle424

    That said, the ticket windows don’t even register on my radar until the hubbub starts up when something changes.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  13. Aisle424

    [quote name=AndCounting]I think the guys from the Wrigley Blog live in the neighborhood and tend to have a fonder attachment to all aspects of the place than most people do. That said, good God, the old ticket window signage was perfectly useless.[/quote]
    I get that, but this seems extreme. It doesn’t make it any less of a unique stadium to have signage that is useful and modern.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  14. mb21

    Yeah, the other issue I have about sticking around Wrigley is that there’s always going to be significant cost to keep it up. A new ballpark would cost a lot of money and now obviously isn’t the time to suggest the taxpayers pay a large portion of it. I think when the economy improves it should be done. Not that I agree with the taxpayers footing the bill. I don’t, but it’s a reality we need to face.

    I think when you factor in the additional streams of revenue that the Cubs would see a huge increase in profit with a new stadium over time.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  15. mb21

    Some people just want things to stay as they have been. Sometimes I think people don’t remember what Wrigley once looked like. If they did, they’d realize that it’s actually quite a bit different than it once was. Things have changed over the years and will continue to change. That’s not a bad thing. That’s precisely how the building has been able to stand to this day with the Cubs still playing in it.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  16. Hector Villanueva

    [quote name=mb21]Even if that advertising brought the Cubs $30-40 million per year in additional revenue? That’s Pujols plus a league average player. It might even be Pujols + Zambrano. Paid for directly through those ads.

    If there wasn’t so much money involved I’d prefer no ballparks had that stuff, but the revenue teams can generate from advertising is ridiculous. I like to think we have a beautiful home where we live, but if someone paid me enough money I’d add a jumbotron, as many ads as possible and would even sell the naming rights. I might not think our home is as beautiful or even as comfortable as it once was, but I’m a huge fan of money. I use it all the time. I like to have some in my wallet.[/quote]
    If I knew that (1) they were going to get $40 million in advertising and (2) that money would be pumped directly into payroll in a (3) competent manner? Of course.

    I have no confidence that Ricketts will execute on all 3. Instead we’d probably end up with ugly advertising in the most conspicuous places and get an extra middle reliever on a 4-year contract.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  17. GBTS

    Pierson v. Post was actually mentioned in the case determining the owner of Barry Bonds’ 73rd home run ball.

    /law fag

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  18. mb21

    Even if that’s all we got I’d still prefer the revenue be available for when someone wakes up and starts running this team like it should been run for the last 60 years. If they had that money and wasted it, it ends up being a lower percentage of the current revenue that is wasted. In the end, they still come out ahead. That’s if they put it back into payroll and that’s a big question for sure.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  19. AndCounting

    [quote name=Aisle424]I get that, but this seems extreme. It doesn’t make it any less of a unique stadium to have signage that is useful and modern.[/quote]Oh it’s definitely extreme. I’d be interested in seeing a poll on how much change to Wrigley people want to see, from wanting none of its holy visage altered to updates but no jumbotron to flatten the whole place and relocate.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  20. mb21

    [quote name=AndCounting]Oh it’s definitely extreme. I’d be interested in seeing a poll on how much change to Wrigley people want to see, from wanting none of its holy visage altered to updates but no jumbotron to flatten the whole place and relocate.[/quote]That sounds like something we could put together a survey for. A poll or series of polls would be difficult as it’s not really an all or nothing decision. I’m out for the afternoon, but I think it’s worth putting together. Thoughts?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  21. Hector Villanueva

    [quote name=AndCounting]Oh it’s definitely extreme. I’d be interested in seeing a poll on how much change to Wrigley people want to see, from wanting none of its holy visage altered to updates but no jumbotron to flatten the whole place and relocate.[/quote]
    I think this would be a useful poll. I have a feeling that the people that read this blog are less opposed to changes at Wrigley as the average fan that goes to the ballpark too.

    On a sidenote, I’m thinking about making my first trip to Wrigley on Friday. This winning road-trip and a Garza-Volquez matchup has me more excited for a game than I’ve been all season.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  22. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=GBTS]Pierson v. Post was actually mentioned in the case determining the owner of Barry Bonds’ 73rd home run ball.

    /law fag[/quote]
    Makes sense, although I’d argue that the ball was owned by MLB/the home team/whichever entity originally purchased/manufactured it.

    My objection to Pierson v. Post would be:

    A baseball ain’t a fuckin’ wild animal.
    — My father

    Fuck you, faget.
    — Ibid

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  23. GBTS

    Makes sense, although I’d argue that the ball was owned by MLB/the home team/whichever entity originally purchased/manufactured it.

    I read it a while ago, but I believe the court said that once the baseballs left the field of play, MLB had effectively abandoned them as a property interest.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  24. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=GBTS]I read it a while ago, but I believe the court said that once the baseballs left the field of play, MLB had effectively abandoned them as a property interest.[/quote]
    Then I would think Thunderdome rules would apply.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  25. Aisle424

    [quote name=mb21]That sounds like something we could put together a survey for. A poll or series of polls would be difficult as it’s not really an all or nothing decision. I’m out for the afternoon, but I think it’s worth putting together. Thoughts?[/quote]
    I’m also out and will only be around sporadically until I get back from vacation, but that sounds good to do sometime soon.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  26. Wayne Buckner

    Like you folks wrote:

    With the exception of the iconic marquee, the beauty of Wrigley Field is entirely on the inside.  So this is why I don’t understand why people get upset when the Cubs try to improve the exterior.

    We agree with everything you wrote: The red marquee is a definite beaut, and they should improve the exterior. In fact, Ricketts has done plenty to help the outside these last two years. The point of our post is that these new message boards stand to take away from the iconic marquee. It is fiddling with the one thing all Wrigley Field fans agree shouldn’t be fiddled with.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  27. ednickow

    [quote name=Aisle424]I get that, but this seems extreme. It doesn’t make it any less of a unique stadium to have signage that is useful and modern.[/quote]
    They added lights, “luxury” boxes, and a few advertising displays in the park and those incremental changes didn’t really change the character of the ballpark.

    What I can’t figure out is why, last year, they took down those huge player photos from the exterior a month or two into the season. It made the place look nicer, hiding the ugly concrete and fences. Hopefully they’ll stay around a little longer this year.

    The best idea I’ve heard for “fixing” the old ballpark is to keep the bleachers, ivy, scoreboard, etc., tear down the grandstands (what Ricketts calls “the bowl”) and rebuild with wider concourses and all the rest.

    It would be a worth a summer or two at Miller Park or … shudder … the Cell to see some improvement while maintaining the character of a classic ballpark.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  28. AndCounting

    Interesting point, Wayne. I didn’t look at it that way, before. I think I’ll have to see it in person to tell if it’s really competitive, complementary, or a nonfactor.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  29. AndCounting

    [quote name=mb21]That sounds like something we could put together a survey for. A poll or series of polls would be difficult as it’s not really an all or nothing decision. I’m out for the afternoon, but I think it’s worth putting together. Thoughts?[/quote]I’m going to have to google the difference between poll and survey. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  30. Aisle424

    [quote name=Wayne Buckner]Like you folks wrote:

    With the exception of the iconic marquee, the beauty of Wrigley Field is entirely on the inside.  So this is why I don’t understand why people get upset when the Cubs try to improve the exterior.

    We agree with everything you wrote: The red marquee is a definite beaut, and they should improve the exterior. In fact, Ricketts has done plenty to help the outside these last two years. The point of our post is that these new message boards stand to take away from the iconic marquee. It is fiddling with the one thing all Wrigley Field fans agree shouldn’t be fiddled with.[/quote]
    I don’t think it fiddles with it at all. It won’t show up in any photos of the marquee and won’t be noticed in any wide shots of the entire front. It certainly isn’t uglier than the iron security gates they use in the entranceway.

    It just seems like an awfully small change that should make it easier for people new to the ballpark to find their way to where Will Call is or the difference between Day of Game and advanced sales (or whatever new ticket innovations they come up with next).

    I just don’t see how it changes the beauty of Wrigley at all. I’m not saying you are wrong to feel that way, but I just don’t get it.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  31. Berselius

    Something that usually gets overlooked in these tearing-down/renovating Wrigley discussions is that it’s not only shitty for the fans in the councourses etc, but the player facilities at Wrigley are an absolute joke compared to every other remotely modern ballpark. Moving all of the administrative offices over to the Triangle building would help, but I wonder about how much that would free up. Surely most of the team offices don’t have to be in the stadium itself – there’s plenty of office space in the city.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  32. Berselius

    [quote name=Rice Cube]Ryan Theriot —> no longer hitting .300[/quote]
    Is his RTAOPB below .300 yet?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  33. Rice Cube

    [quote name=Berselius]Is his RTAOPB below .300 yet?[/quote]
    Does that take TOOTBLANs into account? I’m not statfaggy enough to figure that out. He’s walked quite a bit though this season.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  34. Wayne Buckner

    [quote name=AndCounting]Interesting point, Wayne. I didn’t look at it that way, before. I think I’ll have to see it in person to tell if it’s really competitive, complementary, or a nonfactor.[/quote]
    Obviously you are a smart young man Mr. AndCounting

    Mr. Aisle 424.. not so sure.

    (just yankin your chain)

    I’ll head over this evening and see how she looks at night.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  35. WenningtonsGorillaCock

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]Then I would think Thunderdome rules would apply.[/quote]
    can’t we just get beyond thunderdome?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  36. jtsunami

    Idk if this would be possible, but could they extend some of the stadium as an overpass above waveland and sheffield? That would extend the bleachers and/or concession area.

    Also, I would like a jumbotron for replay purposes. No donut race on the screen. No sounds coming from the jumbotron unless it’s between inning music/organ. It would provide ad revenue as well. Finally, update the grandstands and concessions. Outside of hot dogs with grilled onions, there’s nothing worth eating.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  37. Berselius

    Doug Davis ——–> 6 2/3 IP, 0 R today at Daytona.

    I’m guessing he’ll be the new 5th starter next time it comes around

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  38. Rice Cube

    [quote name=Berselius]Doug Davis ——–> 6 2/3 IP, 0 R today at Daytona.

    I’m guessing he’ll be the new 5th starter next time it comes around[/quote]
    So it was a five-hour game?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  39. Berselius

    [quote name=jtsunami]Idk if this would be possible, but could they extend some of the stadium as an overpass above waveland and sheffield? That would extend the bleachers and/or concession area.
    [/quote]
    It depends how much money they’ll have to grease Tunney and Rahm with to force it through. If they rebuild the grandstand they’ll pretty much have to do that unless they plan on keeping the obstructed view terrace seats. I don’t have a problem with those seats though because what makes those seats suck for people under the grandstand is balanced out by how awesome the upper deck box seats are at Wrigley.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  40. Suburban kid

    [quote name=Berselius]Something that usually gets overlooked in these tearing-down/renovating Wrigley discussions is that it’s not only shitty for the fans in the councourses etc, but the player facilities at Wrigley are an absolute joke compared to every other remotely modern ballpark. Moving all of the administrative offices over to the Triangle building would help, but I wonder about how much that would free up. Surely most of the team offices don’t have to be in the stadium itself – there’s plenty of office space in the city.[/quote]I remember Al arguing that the publications department was too important to not be based at the park. Then a few months later the publications department got outsourced to Cincinnati. (dying laughing)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  41. Suburban kid

    Why would you want to do that?

    First, where would you find “nearby office space”? Second, that wouldn’t be adjacent to the park. Want to make the employees walk several blocks to the park? That wouldn’t work.

    “That’s my opinion and if you don’t like it, well, I have others.” ~ Groucho Marx
    by Al Yellon on Apr 6, 2009 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions

    .

    Many of those “back office functions”…

    … DO need access to the field. There’s no team that would put offices several blocks away.

    “That’s my opinion and if you don’t like it, well, I have others.” ~ Groucho Marx
    by Al Yellon on Apr 7, 2009 1:46 PM CDT up reply actions

    .

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  42. AndCounting

    Al is one of those guys who shows up on every committee and board he can possibly be a part of and manufactures a reason why everything but the previously established policy will never work.

    I hate those guys.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  43. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=AndCounting]Al is one of those guys who is a faget.

    I hate those guys.[/quote].

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  44. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=dylanj]http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/5/5/2155678/the-cubs-are-people-too#storyjump

    baseball players aren’t robots post 1,632[/quote]
    For that, I, personally, am grateful.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  45. Mucker

    Why can’t the Cubs just follow the Yankee stadium blueprint? Isn’t that stadium an almost exact replica to the original with more modernize construction? Why can’t they just build a new stadium with the marquee, ivy walls, scoreboard, etc. part of the new stadium?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  46. WenningtonsGorillaCock

    [quote name=Muck Muckintuck]Why can’t the Cubs just follow the Yankee stadium blueprint? Isn’t that stadium an almost exact replica to the original with more modernize construction? Why can’t they just build a new stadium with the marquee, ivy walls, scoreboard, etc. part of the new stadium?[/quote]
    New Yankee Stadium ——> $1.5 billion

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  47. Suburban kid

    [quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]New Yankee Stadium ——> $1.5 billion[/quote]That’s your opinion, and I don’t like it. Do you have others?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  48. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=dylanj]so i never did get a chance to talk much draft with you JG. Thoughts?[/quote]
    Aldon Smith — Like it a lot. He’s Robert Quinn with a higher floor and a lower ceiling that’s better suited to a base 3-4.

    Kaepernick — Love it. He’s exactly what Harbaugh described as his ideal QB. Showed a lot of progression at Senior Bowl practice.

    Culliver — Meh. I’ll defer to Fangio on this one. The measurables are there, but he seems like a FS to me.

    Hunter — Love it. He’s a top-5 RB in this class. Hard inside runner and good blocker.

    This is where it gets pretty WTF for me…

    Kilgore — Nasty OL without a lot of athleticism. Demarcus Love went a few picks later, and he’s the antithesis. Developmental OL.

    Ronald Johnson — Like it alot. Can be starting slot WR and punt returner from Day 1. He replaces Ginn.

    Colin Jones — Try-hard (seeing a theme here?) STer who might get on the field in dime situations.

    Bruce Miller — Consolation for missing out on Marecic. Could contribute on either side of the ball.

    Person — See Kilgore.

    UDFA — I expect them to pick up Louisville QB Abe Adam Froman and Stanford OLB Tomas Keiser. Probably a DL and a CB as well.

    Overall, I LOVED the first two days. Third day was meh for me. One thing I really like is that we’re establishing an identity and drafting accordingly. The great teams have a plan and execute it perfectly. SF is headed down that path.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  49. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]Aldon Smith — Like it a lot. He’s a Robert Quinn with a higher floor and a lower ceiling that’s better suited to a base 3-4.

    Kaepernick — Love it. He’s exactly what Harbaugh described as his ideal QB. Showed a lot of progression at Senior Bowl practice.

    Culliver — Meh. I’ll defer to Fangio on this one. The measurables are there, but he seems like a FS to me.

    Hunter — Love it. He’s a top-5 RB in this class. Hard inside runner and good blocker.

    This is where it gets pretty WTF for me…

    Kilgore — Nasty OL without a lot of athleticism. Demarcus Love went a few picks later, and he’s the antithesis. Developmental OL.

    Ronald Johnson — Like it alot. Can be starting slot WR and punt returner from Day 1. He replaces Ginn.

    Colin Jones — Try hard (seeing a theme here?) STer who might get on the field in dime situations.

    Bruce Miller — Consolation for missing out on Marecic. Could contribute on either side of the ball.

    Person — See Kilgore.

    UDFA — I expect them to pick up Louisville QB Abe Adam Froman and Stanford OLB Tomas Keiser. Probably a DL and a CB as well.

    Overall, I LOVED the first two days. Third day was meh for me. One thing I really like is that we’re establishing an identity and drafting accordingly. The great teams have a plan and execute it perfectly. SF is headed down that path.[/quote]
    It was good.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  50. Mucker

    [quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]New Yankee Stadium ——> $1.5 billion[/quote](dying laughing)
    I’m sure they can build it for a tad bit less than that. Nationals Park cost a little over $600 million and that’s a nice little park.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  51. Berselius

    [quote name=Muck Muckintuck](dying laughing)
    I’m sure they can build it for a tad bit less than that. Nationals Park cost a little over $600 million and that’s a nice little park.[/quote]
    IIRC they extorted a lot of money out of the city to build it. And I don’t think they had to demolish an old stadium on a tiny footprint in a residential neighborhood either.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  52. Mucker

    [quote name=Berselius]IIRC they extorted a lot of money out of the city to build it. And I don’t think they had to demolish an old stadium on a tiny footprint in a residential neighborhood either.[/quote]My uncle knows one of the head carpenters at Wrigley and I’ve been down in the little “construction office” under the stadium. That stadium is falling apart. The gigantic steel beams that hold the stadium together are literally falling apart. They are basically disintegrating. I don’t know how they modify those steel beams without demolishing the stadium.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  53. mb21

    [quote name=AndCounting]I’m going to have to google the difference between poll and survey. (dying laughing)[/quote](dying laughing) I guess my thought was that it would be easier to put together a survey. If you answer this, go here, etc. maybe not though.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  54. mb21

    I don’t want the Cubs to tear Wrigley down. I really don’t see any reason that it can’t stand for as long as possible. If they build a new stadium they just need to find an area of town to build one. Tearing it down would not only be silly, but add additional cost to the already costly process.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  55. Rice Cube

    [quote name=mb21]I don’t want the Cubs to tear Wrigley down. I really don’t see any reason that it can’t stand for as long as possible. If they build a new stadium they just need to find an area of town to build one. Tearing it down would not only be silly, but add additional cost to the already costly process.[/quote]
    They can’t move though because the people will freak out that the team is now in the suburbs or that the neighborhood would lose its value.

    I proposed turning it into a museum since that’s its charm anyway, is as a museum where MLB plays a game 81 times out of the year.

    I also thought that maybe they could find a plot of land near the lake around Navy Pier and just build a new one there while keeping the old one as a museum, such that the park is still in the city rather than the burbs. That’s probably even more unfeasible though.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  56. GW

    [quote name=Muck Muckintuck]My uncle knows one of the head carpenters at Wrigley and I’ve been down in the little “construction office” under the stadium. That stadium is falling apart. The gigantic steel beams that hold the stadium together are literally falling apart. They are basically disintegrating. I don’t know how they modify those steel beams without demolishing the stadium.[/quote]
    add cylon residue

    (while listening to pavement)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  57. Rice Cube

    [quote name=mb21]I really don’t see any reason that it can’t stand for as long as possible. [/quote]
    How long is that though? Even if they patch it together with duct tape and superglue, I don’t see how Wrigley can stand for more than another 35 years…it’s not like they built it as well as the Roman Colosseum.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  58. Berselius

    [quote name=GW]add cylon residue

    (while listening to pavement)[/quote]
    What happens when Wrigley becomes self-aware?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  59. GBTS

    Hosmer —–> Up
    Kila —–> Down

    Maybe the Cubs can trade Carlos Pena for Mitch Moreland, then flip him for Kila.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  60. Suburban kid

    Would I be a moron to trade Gallardo for David Ortiz in fake baseball, even if I’m desperate for HR and my rotation is doing OK?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  61. WenningtonsGorillaCock

    [quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]

    If you’re familiar with Malort, this is about right (dying laughing)[/quote]
    Damn that didn’t work. Let’s try this:

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  62. Berselius

    [quote name=Suburban Kid]Would I be a moron to trade Gallardo for David Ortiz in fake baseball, even if I’m desperate for HR and my rotation is doing OK?[/quote]
    My gut reaction is very much yes, keep Gallardo

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  63. Berselius

    [quote name=Suburban Kid]I didn’t realize the Pirates were in third place. Weird.[/quote]
    Or that the Marlins are 8 games over .500

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  64. Suburban kid

    Just one off-topic point before I’m out fuckfaces.

    People always say the marquee is the only nice thing about the outside of the stadium. I’m actually far more partial to the back side of the scoreboard. I have only every gone to Cubs game on the El travelling from the north, so it always a little breathtaking for me after going around that sharp bend at Sheridan and then bam, the Glorious Scoreboard (reverse side version) comes into view in the train window. It’s fucking awesome. And I loved passing it every day when I used to commute downtown.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  65. Rice Cube

    [quote name=mb21]It’s even better on a sunny Sunday afternoon, SK. Only Sundays though.[/quote]
    /Ari Kaplan’d?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  66. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=Muck Muckintuck]My uncle knows one of the head carpenters at Wrigley and I’ve been down in the little “construction office” under the stadium. That stadium is falling apart. The gigantic steel beams that hold the stadium together are literally falling apart. They are basically disintegrating. I don’t know how they modify those steel beams without demolishing the stadium.[/quote]You don’t Modify them. You encase them in concrete for the time being, gut the grandstand, shore up the facade, and replace them one by one as you remodel the inside of the stadium to be fit to accommodate human person, as opposed to the urine soaked WWI trenches they currently funnel us through.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  67. mb21

    [quote name=Rice Cube]/Ari Kaplan’d?[/quote]No, it was on this one web page someone had set up and he talked about the glorious scoreboard on a sunny Sunday afternoon. That was why the scoreboard was pictured on ACB and Bloguin did a fantastic job with the rays of light to make it even more glorious.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  68. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=mb21]No, it was on this one web page someone had set up and he talked about the glorious scoreboard on a sunny Sunday afternoon. That was why the scoreboard was pictured on ACB and Bloguin did a fantastic job with the rays of light to make it even more glorious.[/quote]IIRC, it was a comment at BCB, no?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  69. mb21

    [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]IIRC, it was a comment at BCB, no?[/quote]No, I think it was on that one guy from BCB who set up the page about how the Cubs mend his heart. I’m not positive, but I think that’s where it was from. If it wasn’t him, there’s a 99.9% chance he regularly visits BCB.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  70. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=mb21]No, I think it was on that one guy from BCB who set up the page about how the Cubs mend his heart. I’m not positive, but I think that’s where it was from. If it wasn’t him, there’s a 99.9% chance he regularly visits BCB.[/quote]Oh, he’s a regular. I think you’re right, now that I’m thinking about it. Can we wayback that site? That was an all-time classic.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  71. mb21

    I can’t remember the url of the site. Do you? I’m out for the evening after this comment, but google cache may work if you can remember the url of the site.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  72. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=mb21]http://www.canthecubsmendmyheart.com/

    It’s not up anymore though. Check out wayback machine or google cache.[/quote]No luck on either front

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  73. uncle dave

    [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]as opposed to the urine soaked WWI trenches they currently funnel us through.[/quote]
    It adds a certain thematic consistency with the product on the field.

    I really don’t know how you could do a massive facelift without either significantly reducing the number of seats or increasing the footprint — you’d hit code issues, the certain increase in revenue-generating concessions and boxes, and so on. Lower the diamond? Shrink the field? I’m not seeing it.

    I’m also not seeing a move to Schaumburg or the dunes, either. I think we’ve got Wrigley until the place falls down.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  74. Berselius

    [quote name=mb21]http://www.canthecubsmendmyheart.com/

    It’s not up anymore though. Check out wayback machine or google cache.[/quote]
    I thought it was just a fanpost, not a separate website

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  75. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=uncle dave]It adds a certain thematic consistency with the product on the field.

    I really don’t know how you could do a massive facelift without either significantly reducing the number of seats or increasing the footprint — you’d hit code issues, the certain increase in revenue-generating concessions and boxes, and so on. Lower the diamond? Shrink the field? I’m not seeing it.

    I’m also not seeing a move to Schaumburg or the dunes, either. I think we’ve got Wrigley until the place falls down.[/quote]They can expand commercially into the triangle area. That leaves space currently occupied by offices that can be expanded into for seats and concourses. Plus, they could always sink the locker rooms and concourses.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  76. Mercurial Outfielder

    [quote name=Berselius]I thought it was just a fanpost, not a separate website[/quote]No, it was a site. He put pictures of his ex on there and everything.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  77. Rice Cube

    [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]They can expand commercially into the triangle area. That leaves space currently occupied by offices that can be expanded into for seats and concourses. Plus, they could always sink the locker rooms and concourses.[/quote]
    How far down can they dig? I thought there was underground water that prevented them from doing that.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  78. uncle dave

    [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]They can expand commercially into the triangle area. That leaves space currently occupied by offices that can be expanded into for seats and concourses. Plus, they could always sink the locker rooms and concourses.[/quote]
    Yeah, they should do something with the triangle even if they don’t remodel — they’re idiots if they don’t. I’m surprised that they haven’t chased down that McDonald’s lot as well. I mean, if the neighborhood is making so much money off of the team, go buy the fucking neighborhood.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  79. Berselius

    [quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]No, it was a site. He put pictures of his ex on there and everything.[/quote]
    (dying motherfucking laughing). This is a meme we should have promoted more heavily over the years. No wonder all the other blogs continuously blast this one for being complete shit.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  80. GBTS

    No wonder all the other blogs continuously blast this one for being complete shit.

    That carried over from ACB too?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  81. Rice Cube

    The Cleveland Indians are tied with the Phillies for best record in the majors.

    Something seems amiss here.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  82. Berselius

    [quote name=Rice Cube]The Cleveland Indians are tied with the Phillies for best record in the majors.

    Something seems amiss here.[/quote]
    That’s just The Beauty of Short Hops, RC. All the other teams might as well fold.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  83. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=dylanj]they sure seemed to like potential/project players[/quote]
    I don’t think Aldon Smith is as much of a project as he’s made out to be. He might not be ready to start at OLB Week 1, but players who are are VERY rare.

    Kaepernick is also not that much of a project. He made a lot of improvement very quickly at Senior Bowl practice. I’m sure they’d like to give him a redshirt year while Alex Smith trys to earn himself a starting job somewhere else in the league.

    Kendall Hunter and Ronald Johnson are about as polished as you can get.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  84. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=GBTS]Hosmer —–> Up
    Kila —–> Down

    Maybe the Cubs can trade Carlos Pena for Mitch Moreland, then flip him for Kila.[/quote]
    I wonder if Alvin’s still jacking off to Kila’s minor league stats.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  85. WaLi2

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]I wonder if Alvin’s still jacking off to Kila’s minor league stats.[/quote]This blog, would be a lot better, if you guys stopped ripping Al so much, and stick to discussing what you guys know, like NFL, and lawyer talk,

    /random al knob slobber,

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  86. Suburban kid

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]I wonder if Alvin’s still jacking off to Kila’s minor league stats.[/quote]If he overheard someone say “Kila’s going down”, then yes.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  87. Dr. Aneus Taint

    And Burke looked VERY sharp today, striking out the first Rockies batter he faced (swinging), and then easily retiring the next two hitters on a fly out to LF and a 4-3 ground out.

    My immediate impression of Burke as a pitcher is that with his breaking ball being as good as it is, he should at the very least have a future as a lefty relief specialist. But he also has a quality fastball (he was throwing in the mid-90’s in bullpen sessions last month), and so if he can develop the stamina and endurance needed to throw 100 pitches in a game, he could possibly be a rotation starter. He just turned 23 last month, so he still has time on his side.
    — AZ Phil

    .

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  88. Berselius

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/5/5/2154847/kicking-more-offseason-tires-cj-wilson#66514711

    We’re done. Also, watch your attitude.

    I said we’re done.

    We’re done.

    Done…[/quote]
    (dying laughing) at the getting-the-last-word-off battle at the end of that thread

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  89. Berselius

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/06/andrew-luck-will-teach-jim-harbaughs-offense-to-colin-kaepernick/[/quote]
    It’s too bad the 49ers can’t pay Luck for his services here

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  90. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=Berselius]It’s too bad the 49ers can’t pay Luck for his services here[/quote]
    I’m sure they’re…reimbursing him somehow.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  91. GBTS

    I seriously don’t know why Al is so adamant with his dislike of James Russell. His stance is that any game that James Russell starts, the Cubs will lose no matter what.

    This is the guy who for years has desperately tried to find every ounce of optimism in the turd that is the Chicago Cubs, but James Russell is apparently too much? He seriously comes off as a scorned lover.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  92. Berselius

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]I’m sure they’re…reimbursing him somehow.[/quote]
    But, that would be illegal! No one can get away with these kinds of shenanigans in NCAA football!

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  93. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=GBTS]I seriously don’t know why Al is so adamant with his dislike of James Russell. His stance is that any game that James Russell starts, the Cubs will lose no matter what.

    This is the guy who for years has desperately tried to find every ounce of optimism in the turd that is the Chicago Cubs, but James Russell is apparently too much? He seriously comes off as a scorned lover.[/quote]
    You and your last word. Also, watch your attitude. Done. Remove negroes. Done. Shut your last word right up.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  94. Suburban kid

    [quote name=Jame Gumb]You and your last word. Also, watch your attitude. Done. Remove negroes. Done. Shut your last word right up.[/quote]Agree to disagree, but your opinion is wrong.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  95. AndCounting

    [quote name=Suburban Kid]Agree to disagree, but your opinion is wrong.[/quote]Didn’t I say I was done discussing this? Why did you not believe me when I said I wouldn’t respond? Done means done. That’s why I’m not saying anything else. Ever. Again. Done.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  96. Suburban kid

    [quote name=AndCounting]Didn’t I say I was done discussing this? Why did you not believe me when I said I wouldn’t respond? Done means done. That’s why I’m not saying anything else. Ever. Again. Done.[/quote]Incorrect.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  97. Rice Cube

    [quote name=AndCounting]Didn’t I say I was done discussing this? Why did you not believe me when I said I wouldn’t respond? Done means done. That’s why I’m not saying anything else. Ever. Again. Done.[/quote]
    False.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  98. AndCounting

    [quote name=Rice Cube]False.[/quote][quote name=Suburban Kid]Incorrect.[/quote]Watch your attitude, you two. I said I’m done. Clearly, you don’t, get that.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  99. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=AndCounting]Watch your attitude, you two. I said I’m done. Clearly, you don’t, get that.[/quote]
    You’re done.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  100. Dr. Aneus Taint

    I said I was done with this.
    by Al Yellon on May 6, 2011 9:32 AM CDT upreply

    It would hep if you meant it.
    by SenorGato on May 6, 2011 9:51 AM CDT upreply

    Done.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  101. Dr. Aneus Taint

    [quote name=GBTS]Bah, I was hoping it’d be bigger.[/quote]
    And you play pretty well for a blind whiteboy.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment