Outfield Walls To Feature Ginormous Ads (Pictures Added)

[J.R.]

Wrigley as it was in legend and memory has been dead and gone since the matrix boards went up in 2004. Since then, obnoxious corporate advertising has been as much a part of the park as the bricks and ivy.

 

This latest change does not bother me in the least; it's the least obtrusive of all the additions, as they've stuck to a basic white on green design. Call me when they start hacking ivy off the wall to make way for a Bud Select® crown.

 

The advertisements clutter the place but do not ruin it.

[Balsa]

Next we're gonna get a big jumbo-tron to "mimic" and replace the old "outdated scoreboard".

 

Oh, and it'll shoot out fireworks which rain candy onto the bleachers.

 

And the ivy will be replaced with "ivy-looking" billboards that also have company logos on them.

 

All in the name of "winning culture" and "fan experience".

[B]

I'd rather be a medium-sized payroll team than have to put up with eyesores in Wrigley.

 

WE HAVE NOT WON SINCE 1908

 

WE WILL STILL NOT WIN AND WE'LL HAVE A CRAPPY BALLPARK INSTEAD OF A NICE ONE AND SOME GUY WHO LIVES IN LAKE FOREST WILL HAVE STOCK THAT'S WORTH A LITTLE MORE. HOO-*******-RAY!

 

Well at least you can take solace in your assumed superior knowledge of all things Cub.

 

Well at least you can fail at your arguments and therefore resort to attacking me like the jackass we all know you are.

 

pot, meet kettle

 

 

 

 

 

 

goodbye everyone....this is the last post of mine you will ever see

[bhogg]

To me, Wrigley loses alot of luster at this point.

 

For me, it's 10+ hours to go to Chicago. I can see the Cubs in Houston (6 hours) or St Louis (7 hours). The desire to drive all the way to chicago is just about gone.

 

I guess it could be the first steps to doing away with Wrigley. I'd still be a Cub fan, no doubt about it. Maybe it's a step to a new stadium and thus a new organizational philosophy. Who knows.

 

You know what makes me sad? The fact that my son will not be able to see the true Wrigley Field. I don't think that should go into their thinking regarding ads and such, but it is still the truth and it still sucks to me.

[treebird]

I'd rather be a medium-sized payroll team than have to put up with eyesores in Wrigley.

 

WE HAVE NOT WON SINCE 1908

 

WE WILL STILL NOT WIN AND WE'LL HAVE A CRAPPY BALLPARK INSTEAD OF A NICE ONE AND SOME GUY WHO LIVES IN LAKE FOREST WILL HAVE STOCK THAT'S WORTH A LITTLE MORE. HOO-*******-RAY!

 

Well at least you can take solace in your assumed superior knowledge of all things Cub.

 

Well at least you can fail at your arguments and therefore resort to attacking me like the jackass we all know you are.

 

pot, meet kettle

 

 

 

 

 

 

goodbye everyone....this is the last post of mine you will ever see

 

hopefully someone else steps up and replaces the ungrammatical second B in nsbb

 

ps everyone take note of this and point it out if/when he comes back 3 days from now

[Laura]

Please more complaining (or not) about the Cubs and less about each other...

[JonnyRed]

Heck, I'm even in the advertising industry, and I don't like this move at all, but it is a necessary evil in today's marketplace. Heck, they needed something to pay for the $300 shopping spree. So far, the Cubs have adding subtle advertising in the ballpark---I just hope the best stadium in America doesn't become another shouting billboard like that dump on the Southside.

[radarluv1]

looks friggin huge in the pix. :( its going to look more and more like busch 3.

[Soriano12]

Seriously, just tell us the real reason.

 

On Comcast Sports Net they had an interview with one of the marketing guys, he said this revenue goes right back into payroll.

[Soriano12]

This really, really pisses me off.

 

Why?

[treebird]

Seriously, just tell us the real reason.

 

On Comcast Sports Net they had an interview with one of the marketing guys, he said this revenue goes right back into payroll.

 

im shocked that they would say that

[Monco]

Just saw Jay Blunk on Comcast.He said that the money goes to the payroll and it will help them put a championship style club on the field. He didn't explain how this is a championship style team though.

[Derwood]

You guys (some of you) are being REALLY elitist. Get over it.

How are we being elitist? They're tarnishing of the best ballparks in the nation, and the one which we love.

 

To win games you have to spend money. Regardless of your ranting about the Tribune having x amount of dollars - ADVERTISING brings in the money that is spent on talent.

How about spending money wisely? Are the Twins and A's high bankroll ball clubs? How about the Braves? The solution isn't just to "throw in good money after the bad".

 

you mean the Twins, A's and Braves that have stadiums full of ads?

[imb]

At first I read this as placing Gammons ads on the walls and i was just like :wtf:

 

And anyway, if it helps allow the Cubs to have payrolls north of $100 million consistently, bring. it. on. Hang up an ad of whatever you want.

[EricG]

worst part of article

Now, Soriano will have the company logo behind him -- if he's in right or left field.

I'm hoping he can play CF.

[Abe Frohman]

I still can't believe how one-sidedly against this marketing move the majority of you are.

 

I respect your opinions, and I also understand the purity that Wrigley Field should have. I just don't think this is a BIG change, and if it is - maybe it is worth it. If this helps put better players on the field for the Cubs, I am all for it.

 

Now if they started chopping down Ivy to put up signs, that is a whole different situation.

[Laura]

Cubs.com[/url]"]The Cubs have an impeccable track record of tastefully adding signage," Blunk said.

 

Well, that's certainly something to be proud of.

[Balsa]

you mean the Twins, A's and Braves that have stadiums full of ads?

The ones with small markets and fans who never show up to games?

 

That's the essence of Wrigley. That the ballpark was a pristine place where baseball was played, with very few changes over the years.

[Soriano12]

="BalsaWoodKeyBoard"]That's the essence of Wrigley. .

I thought the essence of Wrigley was the smell of piss?

[A New Era]

It doesn't look that bad. Hopefully it turns a page on a new era for the cubs. An era of winning, and putting forth huge efforts to win every year. It's funny, I'm awaiting a name change that describes this new era as we speak. :lol:

[Sammy Sofa]

If I had my way, I'd keep the ads off, but I guess they don't look that bad. I can live with them. I don't like it, but it's not the end of the world. I'll still love going to games and watching them on TV just as much as I did before.

[nilodnayr]

One of the reasons Wrigley is such a great place is that when you get to your seat, you just see baseball. No ads(signs by the bleacher entrance or behind home plate don't really affect this), no jumbotrons, just the field. Now they're making Wrigley a parody of itself. This sucks. At least it's just the simple logo painted on.

 

What about the cup holders?

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

If I had my way, I'd keep the ads off, but I guess they don't look that bad. I can live with them. I don't like it, but it's not the end of the world. I'll still love going to games and watching them on TV just as much as I did before.

The only thing that bothers me is that the "Bud Light Bleachers" may have been the start of a very gradual selling off of everything. Now they have ads in the outfield. What's next, "Chico's Bail Bonds presents Wrigley Field"?

[nilodnayr]

Seriously, just tell us the real reason.

 

On Comcast Sports Net they had an interview with one of the marketing guys, he said this revenue goes right back into payroll.

 

im shocked that they would say that

 

Why are you shocked? They said the same thing after announcing the bud light bleachers and backstop signage.

 

Although, I can't believe this will amount to any more than a fraction of a percent of our payroll.

[cbbryan]

I still can't believe how one-sidedly against this marketing move the majority of you are.

 

I respect your opinions, and I also understand the purity that Wrigley Field should have. I just don't think this is a BIG change, and if it is - maybe it is worth it. If this helps put better players on the field for the Cubs, I am all for it.

 

Now if they started chopping down Ivy to put up signs, that is a whole different situation.

 

And yet many of the same folks have no problem with Marquis wearing #21. Because it's just a number!

 

I can't believe I haven't heard, "It's just a ballpark!" yet!!!!!

 

/sarcasm