Update on Wrigley Field renovation plans

[Max Power]

Maybe so. But now they don't have to win and people come. Even on a down year they still outdrew the White Sox. And a lot of that is because of the park and the neighborhood. Yes, maybe if they constantly won the new park would be filled. Maybe! But now they know whatever they do the seats are sold at Wrigley. Even if the crowds are not there because of a bad team, they still have the tickets sold.

And they are also consistently one of the best road draws in baseball and have better tv ratings than the Sox. Two things have absoutely nothing to do with the so called Wrigley experience. Cubs fans watch the Cubs, it's what they do.

[DavidH]

David, I think you are kidding yourself here. If the Cubs played at US Cellular for example and the Sox played at Wrigley, my guess is the Sox would outdraw the Cubs. I realize true Cubs fans would go to the game. But there are a lot of non-fans at Cubs games. They are there for the "experience". And if the "experience" was changed by a different ballpark and different location, the Cubs would suffer. Like I said, I would love a new park. But I doubt that happens, ever.

Who said anything about the White Sox?

The White Sox's problem is that, in addition to being the 2nd most popular team in town, they play in a neighborhood that nobody wants to set foot in. Nobody is saying that it has to be one polar extreme or the other.

I didn't say the Cubs don't benefit from the neighborhood. I said that the neighborhood establishments rely on the Cubs FAR more than the Cubs rely on the neighborhood.

Mind you, I am not a proponent of a new stadium (nor am I necessarily opposed to the idea). I love the renovations and enjoy going out in that neighborhood. But to say that the Cubs need the neighborhood as much as the neighborhood needs them is just silly.

[TimbrH2001]

David, I think you are kidding yourself here. If the Cubs played at US Cellular for example and the Sox played at Wrigley, my guess is the Sox would outdraw the Cubs. I realize true Cubs fans would go to the game. But there are a lot of non-fans at Cubs games. They are there for the "experience". And if the "experience" was changed by a different ballpark and different location, the Cubs would suffer. Like I said, I would love a new park. But I doubt that happens, ever.

Without a doubt agree with this. If they took their talents to the suburbs, you would see White Sox-like attendance figures.

[TimbrH2001]

Who said anything about the White Sox?

The White Sox's problem is that, in addition to being the 2nd most popular team in town, they play in a neighborhood that nobody wants to set foot in. Nobody is saying that it has to be one polar extreme or the other.

I didn't say the Cubs don't benefit from the neighborhood. I said that the neighborhood establishments rely on the Cubs FAR more than the Cubs rely on the neighborhood.

Mind you, I am not a proponent of a new stadium (nor am I necessarily opposed to the idea). I love the renovations and enjoy going out in that neighborhood. But to say that the Cubs need the neighborhood as much as the neighborhood needs them is just silly.

If both the neighborhood and team were to part ways, both would survive but both would suffer financially. Thats why they need each other for both to maximize on their profits.

[DavidH]

If both the neighborhood and team were to part ways, both would survive but both would suffer financially. Thats why they need each other for both to maximize on their profits.

The neighborhood would not survive.

You'd see most of those establishments closing up shop within months, and the rooftops would obviously be instantly dead.

[TimbrH2001]

Look at areas like Lincoln Park and Wicker Park. Those are still hotspots of the city and neither have a baseball stadium there. The infrastructure of Wrigleyville has already been setup to support themselves if The Cubs ever left. The massive amounts of liquor licenses are still heavily consolidated there. Youve still got the Metro/Smart bar over there too. The nightlife would still be booming and Im sure Wrigley would still be used for events like concerts, football, soccer, hockey, etc... if landmark status prevents it from being demolished.

[TimbrH2001]

The neighborhood would not survive.

You'd see most of those establishments closing up shop within months, and the rooftops would obviously be instantly dead.

The neighborhood would absolutely survive, dont be foolish.

[Max Power]

There is one reason, and only one reason, that neighborhood is viable. And it ain't the whiney neighbors or the overpriced bars.

[TimbrH2001]

Wrigleyville has become yuppie central and is littered with young people every weekend. Its a thing, and the booming nightlife has very little to do with Wrigley Field being there. I spent 2 years living in Wrigleyville, most of the year there arent Cubs games going on yet the neighborhood is still very vibrant.

[TimbrH2001]

There is one reason, and only one reason, that neighborhood is viable. And it ain't the whiney neighbors or the overpriced bars.

Just not true. Will less money filter into the neighborhood? Absolutely, cannot deny that obvious fact. To say it would die? Thats just crazy talk.

[DavidH]

The neighborhood would absolutely survive, dont be foolish.

I guess that depends on how you define survival.

Obviously, a few of the bigger establishments are popular enough that they'd hold up without the Cubs around, but there are many, many more that absolutely need the Cubs gameday traffic in order to be viable businesses.

[TimbrH2001]

I guess that depends on how you define survival.

Obviously, a few of the bigger establishments are popular enough that they'd hold up without the Cubs around, but there are many, many more that absolutely need the Cubs gameday traffic in order to be viable businesses.

Murphy's Bleachers would die. No doubt about it. I was a regular there when I lived there so I know their traffic is entirely based on The Cubs. Establishments near the corner of Clark and Addison would continue to thrive. Wrigleyville is an upscale safer neighborhood, just like Lincoln Park. People are still going to be very attracted to living in that area. Plus, youve still got a redline stop right there which is a big draw for many who rely on public transportation. Plus, boys town is right there and thats also a pretty big draw for a large subculture of people living in or near Chicago.

[TimbrH2001]

Where else in Chicago is there a bigger concentration of liquor licenses than Wrigleyville? If you tap it, they will come.

Ultimately what Im saying is, with or without The Cubs, Wrigleyville still has a lot going for it. For that reason, it wouldnt die.

[petrey10]

David, I think you are kidding yourself here. If the Cubs played at US Cellular for example and the Sox played at Wrigley, my guess is the Sox would outdraw the Cubs. I realize true Cubs fans would go to the game. But there are a lot of non-fans at Cubs games. They are there for the "experience". And if the "experience" was changed by a different ballpark and different location, the Cubs would suffer. Like I said, I would love a new park. But I doubt that happens, ever.

shut up...........

[Rynoplasty]

Even if you just bring up moving the team as a negotiating ploy, how far do you go? Threaten a move to the suburbs to put a scare in the Wrigleyville neighborhood? Threaten a move to another city entirely to put a scare in Chicago politicians?