Cubs to block Horshoe Casino Rooftop

[Derwood]

A name that's also the name of one of the most famous candy companies in the world. Which is where the money came from. Just because it's not explicitly named after the company (though it arguably is since William Wrigley was the damn company), it's ridiculous to act like there were no corporate connotations to the name "Wrigley."

 

On the one hand, yes, this is true. On the other, you do not see corporate logos and signage for the Wrigley corporation and all of it's products plastered all over the ballpark (like you do at every other corporate named sports facility). It's not really comparable.

[Sammy Sofa]

A name that's also the name of one of the most famous candy companies in the world. Which is where the money came from. Just because it's not explicitly named after the company (though it arguably is since William Wrigley was the damn company), it's ridiculous to act like there were no corporate connotations to the name "Wrigley."

 

On the one hand, yes, this is true. On the other, you do not see corporate logos and signage for the Wrigley corporation and all of it's products plastered all over the ballpark (like you do at every other corporate named sports facility). It's not really comparable.

 

Why would we see advertising for Wrigley when they haven't owned the park in some time?

[Derwood]

A name that's also the name of one of the most famous candy companies in the world. Which is where the money came from. Just because it's not explicitly named after the company (though it arguably is since William Wrigley was the damn company), it's ridiculous to act like there were no corporate connotations to the name "Wrigley."

 

On the one hand, yes, this is true. On the other, you do not see corporate logos and signage for the Wrigley corporation and all of it's products plastered all over the ballpark (like you do at every other corporate named sports facility). It's not really comparable.

 

Why would we see advertising for Wrigley when they haven't owned the park in some time?

 

We shouldn't. That's the point. My guess is that large majority of people who attend Wrigley Field aren't thinking about chewing gum. It may technically be named after a corporation, but it's not comparable to all of the parks that are nothing but a visual and aural onslaught of corporate advertising

[Sammy Sofa]

A name that's also the name of one of the most famous candy companies in the world. Which is where the money came from. Just because it's not explicitly named after the company (though it arguably is since William Wrigley was the damn company), it's ridiculous to act like there were no corporate connotations to the name "Wrigley."

 

On the one hand, yes, this is true. On the other, you do not see corporate logos and signage for the Wrigley corporation and all of it's products plastered all over the ballpark (like you do at every other corporate named sports facility). It's not really comparable.

 

Why would we see advertising for Wrigley when they haven't owned the park in some time?

 

We shouldn't. That's the point. My guess is that large majority of people who attend Wrigley Field aren't thinking about chewing gum. It may technically be named after a corporation, but it's not comparable to all of the parks that are nothing but a visual and aural onslaught of corporate advertising

 

My point wasn't that Wrigley now is representative of Wrigley the company. My point is that when it was named "Wrigley" it very much had corporate connotations. It a false point to act like Wrigley Field has forever been free of being a "corporate ballpark."

[J.R.]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

[daske17]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

 

if every sports arena in the nation save one has it, I wouldn't deem it obnoxious. I'm all for keeping the ivy, grandstand, marquee and scoreboard intact but the rest of the park is a dump. Just because the team sells out every home game doesn't mean the park shouldn't be modernized.

[Bote McBoteface]

I honestly don't understand the thought process of people who get upset about this. Build a damn jumbotron. Wrigley is a dump. A somewhat pretty dump, but still a dump. Update the hell out of it or build a new stadium. I know its a tired cliche, but I have to wonder at times how many people are Cubs fans as opposed to being Wrigley fans.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

[Derwood]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

Completely agree. Go to a White Sox game and enjoy a never ending barrage of advertisements over the PA system and corporate sponsored replays and shell games between every inning. Maybe someone will hit a HR into the Nissan Kids Fun Zone or over the Papa John's right center field wall!

[Fred Hornkohl]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

Completely agree. Go to a White Sox game and enjoy a never ending barrage of advertisements over the PA system and corporate sponsored replays and shell games between every inning. Maybe someone will hit a HR into the Nissan Kids Fun Zone or over the Papa John's right center field wall!

 

..... or into the Bud Light Bleachers ????

[erik316wttn]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

I would like to change my post to what TT said. He speaks for me on this issue.

[erik316wttn]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

Completely agree. Go to a White Sox game and enjoy a never ending barrage of advertisements over the PA system and corporate sponsored replays and shell games between every inning. Maybe someone will hit a HR into the Nissan Kids Fun Zone or over the Papa John's right center field wall!

 

And a 7:11 start time, courtesy of your friends at 7-11!

[imb]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

I would like to change my post to what TT said. He speaks for me on this issue.

 

how many times have you even been to wrigley?

[Derwood]

One of the things I personally enjoy the most about Wrigley is how little of an invasive presence advertising and other such antics have. Compared to all other ballparks, there is staggeringly little advertising when you look out over the field of play. Furthermore, games at Wrigley don't attempt to pack every second between innings or even pitches with side games, advertisements, and canned noise. I don't expect everyone to appreciate or enjoy that the same way I do, but to characterize me as someone who is a fan of Wrigley more than the team because I appreciate Wrigley's relative lack of intrusion on my baseball watching experience is way off base.

 

Completely agree. Go to a White Sox game and enjoy a never ending barrage of advertisements over the PA system and corporate sponsored replays and shell games between every inning. Maybe someone will hit a HR into the Nissan Kids Fun Zone or over the Papa John's right center field wall!

 

..... or into the Bud Light Bleachers ????

 

I knew that was coming

[cubsfan]

I honestly don't understand the thought process of people who get upset about this. Build a damn jumbotron. Wrigley is a dump. A somewhat pretty dump, but still a dump. Update the hell out of it or build a new stadium. I know its a tired cliche, but I have to wonder at times how many people are Cubs fans as opposed to being Wrigley fans.

Building a jumbotron would keep Wrigley from being a dump? Jumbotrons suck in every stadium. Once you get one you are one step away from playing Journey and Bon Jovi in between every inning.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can only assume you haven't been to a game at Wrigley in a while since they already do blast horrible music through their wretched excuse of a sound system between innings.

[cubsfan]

That's because they are a bunch of blithering idiots.

[J.R.]

The canned music is relatively restricted, though. Nothing like what you have at other parks.

 

At this hour, I can remember "YMCA" at first visitors' pitching change, "Livin' on a Prayer" at second visitors' pitching change, and then ... what else?

 

Oh, and I'll add that my gripe with the 'tron isn't so much the visual - it's the aural diarrhea that usually accompanies the segments.

[Sammy Sofa]

I've heard a variety of songs between innings in recent years. It's kind of hard to miss depending on where your seats are because if you're stuck near a speaker it's practically deafening. The season ticket package I bought into in 2007 and 2008 was right under a speaker and it was tough to talk to the person next to you with the music they'd blast. I've really not noticed anything "restricted" about a seemingly random assortment of pop and rock hits. Wrigley is just as bad as most other parks in that regard: they just have a much worse sound system.

[Derwood]

that must be fairly new, because I don't remember much (outside of "Jump") being played that wasn't on the organ. Then again, I haven't been to a game since the "Go, Cubs, Go!" nonsense started

[jersey cubs fan]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

 

if every sports arena in the nation save one has it, I wouldn't deem it obnoxious. I'm all for keeping the ivy, grandstand, marquee and scoreboard intact but the rest of the park is a dump. Just because the team sells out every home game doesn't mean the park shouldn't be modernized.

 

You modernize the park by making the seats, sight lines, concourses, food and bathrooms better. A jumbotron does not modernize a stadium. It adds absolutely nothing to a stadium except for a distraction.

[Sammys Boombox]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

 

This is exactly the conversation I am having with my brother right now. Who cares about the ads? They are just as much a part of baseball history as the rest of the park. We just don't want something that takes away from the game, like a jumbotron. I hate advertisements between innings, but Wrigley already has them on the small screen under the scoreboard.

[Guest]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

 

if every sports arena in the nation save one has it, I wouldn't deem it obnoxious. I'm all for keeping the ivy, grandstand, marquee and scoreboard intact but the rest of the park is a dump. Just because the team sells out every home game doesn't mean the park shouldn't be modernized.

 

You modernize the park by making the seats, sight lines, concourses, food and bathrooms better. A jumbotron does not modernize a stadium. It adds absolutely nothing to a stadium except for a distraction.

 

This is correct. If every team packed every stadium over the years, there really is no reason to have jumbotrons or any other non baseball activities to attract the fans. You already have them if you are sold out every day. That's probably how jumbotrons came into existence in the first place. As a way to draw the casual fan to be more than just a casual fan for teams who have been losing revenue on a yearly basis.

 

But, if the fans stop buying up the season tickets, I could see ownership looking at these same avenues for attracting people to a game. Ownership might also do it with the though process that it DOES improve the overall experience.

[AlwaysaCub]

The Doublemint Twins used to be parked on top of the scoreboard in what had to be the most elaborate ballpark advertising synergy of the day. Wrigley was ahead of his time.

 

Corporate presence at Wrigley isn't new or all that disturbing. A "jumbotron," however, is an obnoxious distraction that adds nothing to the game. Per MLB policy, no controversial replays can be shown, so what's the point?

 

if every sports arena in the nation save one has it, I wouldn't deem it obnoxious. I'm all for keeping the ivy, grandstand, marquee and scoreboard intact but the rest of the park is a dump. Just because the team sells out every home game doesn't mean the park shouldn't be modernized.

 

You modernize the park by making the seats, sight lines, concourses, food and bathrooms better. A jumbotron does not modernize a stadium. It adds absolutely nothing to a stadium except for a distraction.

 

This is correct. If every team packed every stadium over the years, there really is no reason to have jumbotrons or any other non baseball activities to attract the fans. You already have them if you are sold out every day. That's probably how jumbotrons came into existence in the first place. As a way to draw the casual fan to be more than just a casual fan for teams who have been losing revenue on a yearly basis.

 

But, if the fans stop buying up the season tickets, I could see ownership looking at these same avenues for attracting people to a game. Ownership might also do it with the though process that it DOES improve the overall experience.

 

Well, let's be honest, for certain fans it would improve the overall experience. The Tribune company may want to attract that group and so will see this as worthwhile.

 

Would people here honestly stop going to Cubs games if they put in a Jumbotron? I doubt it. So there is no downside from the Tribune's perspective.

[jersey cubs fan]

Well, let's be honest, for certain fans it would improve the overall experience. The Tribune company may want to attract that group and so will see this as worthwhile.

 

Would people here honestly stop going to Cubs games if they put in a Jumbotron? I doubt it. So there is no downside from the Tribune's perspective.

 

The Tribune doesn't own the Cubs. They did for over 20 years without adding a jumbotron, so I'm not sure why you'd think would, even though it's a moot point.

 

 

As for the earlier "why now" question. The new owner just bought the team. The reason "why now" is because he didn't have any authority to do anything before he bought the team.