Zell will consider selling naming rights to Wrigley Field

[bukie]

Any bets on the "major, Chicago-based corporation?"

State Farm, Boeing, Sears, Walgreens, Motorola, Allstate, McDonald's, Sara Lee, Exelon...

[Vanilla Ice]

Motorola or Allstate

 

I'm guessing Allstate

[WrigleyField 22]

I'd rather have Sears Field without the significant signage than Wrigley Field with Sears signs all over the place.

[bukie]

Motorola or Allstate

 

I'm guessing Allstate

 

I would doubt Allstate actually, since Allstate already bought the naming rights to an arena in the Chicago area.

[apete6]

0% Chance its Walgreens

 

I work at corporate. It wont happen.

[CuseCubFan69]

NSBB presents the Chicago Cubs at Wrigley Field.

[justlikethecubs]

NSBB presents the Chicago Cubs at Wrigley Field.

 

That's a winner!

[Wu-Gambino]

I don't think that there is any way a new stadium would be built, except in the case of some large scale, unforseen disaster. Admitted, I have not from Chicago, but I have spent a good deal of time on the city and the Northside. I don't think that there is any possibility of moving the team to the suburbs. Almost all stadiums, including NFL stadiums, are built in central neighborhoods or downtown. I could not imagine how much controversy there would be moving the team outside of Chicago (especially to Schaumburg). Even if they would keep the team in the city, there's no way they would move the team south of Madison. Is there any land even avaliable on the Northside that is:

a). big enough to support a large ballpark

b). has viable public transportation (specifically a large capacity L stop)

The only option is for the Cubs to continue to do extensive renovations on Wrigley Field, which I imagine the club will do.

 

You haven't been paying attention to how the courts have redefined the concept of eminent domain, eh?

I highly doubt the Cubs would consider it. First of all, a new stadium plan would be unpopular for the Wrigleyville area and for what ever neighborhood they would consider building it in. I assume the Cubs would want a Northside location, and the Northside is notorious for neighborhood associations. Condo developers have enough problems getting certain projects built, could you imagine the Cubs? These are powerful associations that have a good population in terms of income that would be able to take the Cubs to court if necessary. The case could even Supreme Court since this issue was recently resolved (and usually the more recent the decision, the more recent the Court would look at a case involving the decision), and with a more conservative bench, the Cubs would probably lose the case. Even if this didn't happen, I can't see the Cubs risking so much negative PR just to build a new stadium while replacing the much-beloved Wrigley Field. Besides, what would become of the old stadium?

[Scotti]

Any bets on the "major, Chicago-based corporation?"

State Farm, Boeing, Sears, Walgreens, Motorola, Allstate, McDonald's, Sara Lee, Exelon...

 

Moo and Oink Field...

[CuseCubFan69]

Butterburger Field

[Mizzou]

0% Chance its Walgreens

 

I work at corporate. It wont happen.

Just out of curiosity, why do you say that?

[CubinNY]

In the vet's office today I was reading last summer's Forbes. It was the one with the 400 richest people in the US. William Wrigley, Jr or III (I can't remember which) has a fortune of $2.3 Billion. If the family still owns the company I think they could pay for the naming rights.

[Derwood]

0% Chance its Walgreens

 

I work at corporate. It wont happen.

Just out of curiosity, why do you say that?

 

my guess is that they aren't doing well enough financially to throw that kind of cash around

[apete6]

0% Chance its Walgreens

 

I work at corporate. It wont happen.

Just out of curiosity, why do you say that?

 

my guess is that they aren't doing well enough financially to throw that kind of cash around

 

Not a financial reason, really. But, CVS sponsors the Rhode Island University basketball court and our senior management has made a few wisecracks about that as well as the giant CVS sign on the green monster at Fenway.

 

We have a logo on the Comiskey outfield wall, but other than that, most of our sponsorships/advertising have an air of "generosity" or "giving" like sponsoring all of the Cubs walks for JDRF and the Bat Boy/Bat Girl thing that gives kids opportunities.

 

Also, our company is notoriously cheap on things at corporate, instead deciding to "put all of the money back into the stores". For a fortune 50 company, our corporate HQ are pretty barebones. No nice lobby, the executives offices are very small, no corporate gym/workout center, etc...

 

So, if they decided to spend $400 million on a sponsorship on Wrigley, every single employee would be surprised and most would be pretty angry.

[Bull]

0% Chance its Walgreens

 

I work at corporate. It wont happen.

Just out of curiosity, why do you say that?

 

my guess is that they aren't doing well enough financially to throw that kind of cash around

 

Gotta spend money to make money.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

I hate Gene Wojciechowski as much as the next guy, but this article sums up pretty much everything that we're discussing about this debate. Well worth the read.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3270817&sportCat=mlb

 

This could be the first article he's written in a long time that didn't make me want to jump through my computer and pummel him.

[NCCubFan]

I've edited the title in the thread in light of more recent comments that Zell is considering selling naming rights, but it's not a given.

[ctcf]

IL itself to try and buy Wrigley? One would hope.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/823835,CST-NWS-wrig04.article

[David]

IL itself to try and buy Wrigley? One would hope.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/823835,CST-NWS-wrig04.article

 

 

You hadn't heard of this before?

[erik316wttn]

Butterburger Field

 

Would you really want the Cubs named after something produced by a Wisconsin-based corporation?

[erik316wttn]

Found this tidbit on the Cubs Reporter blog...

 

aplan also spoke tonight with Chicago Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin. In the course of that conversation, Kaplan said his sources tell him that the Cubs are talking deal with a major, Chicago-based corporation which would pay less than the $40 million bandied about for naming rights. The company would be paying for “significant” signage all over the ballpark but would voluntarily forego renaming the park and in a selfless gesture of corporate goodness, allow the place to remain “Wrigley Field.”

 

Nice folks, those selfless, major Chicago corporate guys.

 

Not a bad compromise -- depending of course how the "significant signage" looks.

 

If they take down the ivy and cover the bricks with ads, I will publicly tar and feather their CEO in a public square.

[ctcf]

IL itself to try and buy Wrigley? One would hope.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/823835,CST-NWS-wrig04.article

 

 

You hadn't heard of this before?

 

No :oops:

[CubColtPacer]

Found this tidbit on the Cubs Reporter blog...

 

aplan also spoke tonight with Chicago Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin. In the course of that conversation, Kaplan said his sources tell him that the Cubs are talking deal with a major, Chicago-based corporation which would pay less than the $40 million bandied about for naming rights. The company would be paying for “significant” signage all over the ballpark but would voluntarily forego renaming the park and in a selfless gesture of corporate goodness, allow the place to remain “Wrigley Field.”

 

Nice folks, those selfless, major Chicago corporate guys.

 

Not a bad compromise -- depending of course how the "significant signage" looks.

 

If they take down the ivy and cover the bricks with ads, I will publicly tar and feather their CEO in a public square.

 

Don't worry too much about that. Taking down the ivy would be a lot harder to do than changing the name. The name isn't protected (although the marquee is) but the ivy is, and there's no way it's coming down.

[CubColtPacer]

IL itself to try and buy Wrigley? One would hope.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/823835,CST-NWS-wrig04.article

 

 

You hadn't heard of this before?

 

No :oops:

 

That's been the plan all along that has generated some controversy. Zell wants to sell the stadium separately from the team specifically to the state. Then the new owners would have to sign a lease with the state in order to continue to use the stadium. Several of the potential owners have balked at buying the team without the stadium because the potential profit is much less without the potential revenues that owning the stadium brings.

[CoBleacherBum]

Found this tidbit on the Cubs Reporter blog...

 

aplan also spoke tonight with Chicago Tribune architecture critic Blair Kamin. In the course of that conversation, Kaplan said his sources tell him that the Cubs are talking deal with a major, Chicago-based corporation which would pay less than the $40 million bandied about for naming rights. The company would be paying for “significant” signage all over the ballpark but would voluntarily forego renaming the park and in a selfless gesture of corporate goodness, allow the place to remain “Wrigley Field.”

 

Nice folks, those selfless, major Chicago corporate guys.

 

Not a bad compromise -- depending of course how the "significant signage" looks.

 

If they take down the ivy and cover the bricks with ads, I will publicly tar and feather their CEO in a public square.

 

That I would sure agree with. I'm thinking signs on the electronic scoreboards in the grandstands and maybe even a small one on the big scoreboard in center. Then of course all over the concourse.