What am I missing? I've stated since the beginning I was talking about the street names and yet you kept saying that it only happened in the last 15 years.
MLB: Wrigley Field in "Brutal Shape?"
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
What am I missing? I've stated since the beginning I was talking about the street names and yet you kept saying that it only happened in the last 15 years.
I went to my first game at Busch Stadium last year. It's a beautiful stadium. That said, my seats were in the upper deck in left field and I COULDN'T SEE LEFT FIELD. What gives? There was 8 home runs in that game and I only saw 3 of them because of the terrible seating design.
I've never been to Wrigley Field. Hopefully I'll make it soon, just in case they do decide to replace it (which I doubt will happen).
Let's just look at their last two chances.....................none of your reasons fit, they just plain choked under the pressure
Am I arguing that?
I simply stated it puts the Cubs are at a disadvantage compared to just about every team in the league. I'm not using these reasons as excuses, I'm just pointing out the disadvantages. As I have stated before, those disadvantages can be overcome, but they are still disadvantages.
Are you really trying to tell me teams with ballparks that are just about always a hitters park or a pitchers park, teams with up to date facilities, and teams who play a vast majority of their games at one set time have no advantage over the Cubs?
Actually this sounds like the city of St. Louis, and while you are at it take the bulldozers to Milwaukee. Both of your second rate cities hate Chicago because it just reminds you how bad the city you live in is. Or do us a favor and stop driving in for the series where you have more than your share of fun in Wrigleyville.
Anyone here that is trying to convince Cubs fans to just bulldoze Wrigley and get on with life because the history is crap, just stop.
You aren't going to convince them otherwise, and you're wrong anyway. Just because you were a Twins fan and you hated the dome and were sad only the roof caved in and not the rest of the dump with it doesn't mean everyone else hates their stadium.
You aren't going to convince them otherwise, and you're wrong anyway. Just because you were a Twins fan and you hated the dome and were sad only the roof caved in and not the rest of the dump with it doesn't mean everyone else hates their stadium.
I actually like the idea for Wrigley that someone else brought up and I think its a good compromise.
Tear down the main sections and rebuild that into a state of the art grandstand. This way, you can leave the outfield sections/bleachers in tact, you keep the original brick wall and ivy, keep the scoreboard, but fix a lot of the big problems with crumbling concrete, obs view seats, crowdedness...but still maintain the site and some of the originals.
You don't really need to do anything to the bleachers, because honestly, if you want a good seat, good view, not crowded, you're not picking out a left center seat anyway.
And as for the scoreboard, WHO CARES. Keep the old one. If you want a big *** videoboard, fine, there are only about 37 other places they could put in videoboards.
Besides, in all the games I've ever gone to anywhere, I really truly only look at the board 2 or 3 times a game, if there was a spectacular play. I might miss it occasionally if it weren't there, but it's not like in my trips to Wrigley the only thing I could think was "god damn cubs and their no videoboard nonesense."
Of course, this would mean having to play a season at US Cellular, but if that's what it meant or eventually moving off the site, I think Cubs fans take that deal.
Tear down the main sections and rebuild that into a state of the art grandstand. This way, you can leave the outfield sections/bleachers in tact, you keep the original brick wall and ivy, keep the scoreboard, but fix a lot of the big problems with crumbling concrete, obs view seats, crowdedness...but still maintain the site and some of the originals.
You don't really need to do anything to the bleachers, because honestly, if you want a good seat, good view, not crowded, you're not picking out a left center seat anyway.
And as for the scoreboard, WHO CARES. Keep the old one. If you want a big *** videoboard, fine, there are only about 37 other places they could put in videoboards.
Besides, in all the games I've ever gone to anywhere, I really truly only look at the board 2 or 3 times a game, if there was a spectacular play. I might miss it occasionally if it weren't there, but it's not like in my trips to Wrigley the only thing I could think was "god damn cubs and their no videoboard nonesense."
Of course, this would mean having to play a season at US Cellular, but if that's what it meant or eventually moving off the site, I think Cubs fans take that deal.
Rebuilding the main grandstands sounds like a good solution to me. If you wanted to keep the exterior looking the same, you could do that no problem - Wrigley could look the same after the renovation on the exterior. Getting rid of the obstructed views, having modern amenities, and improving the structural integrity of the facility are all great things to do.
But then it comes down to cost effectiveness. It's a LOT more expensive to have to do controlled demo than to just implode it and start over. When it comes down to it, $500,000,000 for a new stadium vs $400,000,000 in renovation. Renovation comes with higher maintenance costs on sections of the stadium that aren't renovated and a new stadium comes with much lower maintenance.
And you cannot understand that this has no bearing at all on whether ideas have merit.
The Cubs are in a pretty dire situation right now. That's for sure. They are running a lot of specials just to get people to game now. Things I've never heard of in all my years living here. Cheap beer, cheap hot dogs and cheap tickets. And they still aren't getting the attendance they want. I don't blame the city and or state at all for not ponying up the money. I am not really all that convinced that the amount of money poured into these stadiums is ever seen again. That area has a lot going on as is. There's really no where to park and a lot of people already live there that don't go to Cubs games. I'm not saying it isn't a boost to the local economy, but a $500,000 boost?
I am certain without running the stats that,, within a 95% confidence interval, the cubs do not lose a higher percentage of home games than any other team -- your argument holds no merit.......... none.
Pretty sure last year they were tied for the worst home record in MLB. None the less, its still a disadvantage, no matter what way you look at it.
I live in Cedar Rapids and your right, it's a dump.Actually this sounds like the city of St. Louis, and while you are at it take the bulldozers to Milwaukee. Both of your second rate cities hate Chicago because it just reminds you how bad the city you live in is. Or do us a favor and stop driving in for the series where you have more than your share of fun in Wrigleyville.
Yep, with Seattle. Cubs have been in the bottom 5 of home win pct. 4 times in the last 10 seasons. They were even in the bottom half when they won the division in 2003.
2010: T-29th (35-46)
2009: 12th (46-34)
2008 (division winner): 3rd (55-26)
2007 (division winner): T-14th (44-37)
2006: 29th (36-45)
2005: 26th (38-43)
2004: 13th (45-37)
2003 (division winner): 18th (44-37)
2002: 26th (36-45)
2001: T-6th (48-33)
Let me also add the fact that the Cubs have too many players with blue eyes... Josh Hamilton's blue-eyed blues: A fan's reaction - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
