5/31 Astros (Lyles) @ Cubs (Z!) 7:05pm CDT, CSN TV

[Irrelevant Dude]

Meanwhile, more losses and more empty seats to come.

It is going to be a very ugly summer attendance-wise. They should get a small bump with kids being out of school, but by August and September I expect games with fewer than 10,000 fans in the seats.

[Tarver]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Joe move in to protect his investment.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Much like people who came from nothing to get rich say that they could never go back to their old lifestyle, as a lifelong Cubs fan who lived through the 90's only to finally experience winning teams in '03, '07' and '08, and to a lesser extent, '04, I simply can't go back to the kind of crap teams I sat through in the 90's, and unless they do something big this offseason, that's the direction things could be headed.

[erik316wttn]

Much like people who came from nothing to get rich say that they could never go back to their old lifestyle, as a lifelong Cubs fan who lived through the 90's only to finally experience winning teams in '03, '07' and '08, and to a lesser extent, '04, I simply can't go back to the kind of crap teams I sat through in the 90's, and unless they do something big this offseason, that's the direction things could be headed.

 

The fanbase is getting itchy. They got a taste of winning, and I don't think they're content with "same old Cubs" anymore. They want a championship, and I don't think the Cubs will draw 3 million a year anymore with a piss-poor product on the field.

[Ballgame64]

Much like people who came from nothing to get rich say that they could never go back to their old lifestyle, as a lifelong Cubs fan who lived through the 90's only to finally experience winning teams in '03, '07' and '08, and to a lesser extent, '04, I simply can't go back to the kind of crap teams I sat through in the 90's, and unless they do something big this offseason, that's the direction things could be headed.

I am older than you and watched the teams of the 1970's. Those were awful teams but ownership showed very little interest in investing in the team to field a winner. But the point you make is right on the mark and I think is shared by most fans now.

 

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

Of course, I would have fired everyone the day I took over if I were him because I would have spent the endless months of the sales process to line up a new front office.

[Ballgame64]

Much like people who came from nothing to get rich say that they could never go back to their old lifestyle, as a lifelong Cubs fan who lived through the 90's only to finally experience winning teams in '03, '07' and '08, and to a lesser extent, '04, I simply can't go back to the kind of crap teams I sat through in the 90's, and unless they do something big this offseason, that's the direction things could be headed.

 

The fanbase is getting itchy. They got a taste of winning, and I don't think they're content with "same old Cubs" anymore. They want a championship, and I don't think the Cubs will draw 3 million a year anymore with a piss-poor product on the field.

They might not "draw" 2 million if this keeps up. They will sell more than 2 million tickets but I think people will just eat the cost of the ticket and not waste their time watching a miserable team.

[CubmanPi]

My trip to AT&T Park this August might get bumped up a couple weeks so I can see Philadelphia come to town instead.

[Sammy Sofa]

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

I really don't understand this kind of sentiment. Yes, I want the Ricketts to do what needs to be done, but it's not like they've let these stellar FA classes get by them in the time they've owned the team. Unless you were expecting them to command the FO to start trading the farm or blow even more bloated contracts on mid-level FA then there hasn't been much to do right now to dramatically change this team.

 

And Wrigley is a dump that's literally falling apart. It's a huge part of the investment for anyone that owns the team and it needs a ton of upgrades and work sooner rather than later.

[XZero771679666304]

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

I really don't understand this kind of sentiment. Yes, I want the Ricketts to do what needs to be done, but it's not like they've let these stellar FA classes get by them in the time they've owned the team. Unless you were expecting them to command the FO to start trading the farm or blow even more bloated contracts on mid-level FA then there hasn't been much to do right now to dramatically change this team.

 

And Wrigley is a dump that's literally falling apart. It's a huge part of the investment for anyone that owns the team and it needs a ton of upgrades and work sooner rather than later.

 

I think this offseason will be the first real indicator of their level of commitment to the product on the field.

[Sammy Sofa]

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

I really don't understand this kind of sentiment. Yes, I want the Ricketts to do what needs to be done, but it's not like they've let these stellar FA classes get by them in the time they've owned the team. Unless you were expecting them to command the FO to start trading the farm or blow even more bloated contracts on mid-level FA then there hasn't been much to do right now to dramatically change this team.

 

And Wrigley is a dump that's literally falling apart. It's a huge part of the investment for anyone that owns the team and it needs a ton of upgrades and work sooner rather than later.

 

I think this offseason will be the first real indicator of their level of commitment to the product on the field.

 

Right. This is when you're seeing their first real opportunity to make an immediate impact on the team itself. Obviously, I wish Hendry had been sent packing earlier, but beyond that there just hasn't been many options since they took over.

[Outshined_One]

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

I really don't understand this kind of sentiment. Yes, I want the Ricketts to do what needs to be done, but it's not like they've let these stellar FA classes get by them in the time they've owned the team. Unless you were expecting them to command the FO to start trading the farm or blow even more bloated contracts on mid-level FA then there hasn't been much to do right now to dramatically change this team.

 

And Wrigley is a dump that's literally falling apart. It's a huge part of the investment for anyone that owns the team and it needs a ton of upgrades and work sooner rather than later.

 

I think this offseason will be the first real indicator of their level of commitment to the product on the field.

 

In my opinion, the indicator will be what happens in the draft. Last year's draft ended up being somewhere in the middle of the road compared to other teams budget-wise, especially after the Cubs drove a dump truck full of money up to Matt Szczur's house. If the Cubs are willing to spend on their first round pick and also draft and sign guys who fall into later rounds because of signability concerns, that would tell me this team is going in the right direction.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think this offseason will be the first real indicator of their level of commitment to the product on the field.

 

We've already had plenty of time for indicators. He kept Hendry well past the point in time that anybody could have called for a fair shake. He's extremely cautious and conservative and prefers to let the old guard do things the old way. They dipped their toes ever so halfassedly into the statistical analysis pool, but remain as dull and unimaginative as any organization is the game.

[Ballgame64]

The problem as I see it is Tom Ricketts seems to be more worried about Wrigley Field than putting a winning product on the field. He thinks the park is the reason people come to the game because that is what he did. I can't believe that he, his siblings or any of his close advisors can't see the need for change.

 

I really don't understand this kind of sentiment. Yes, I want the Ricketts to do what needs to be done, but it's not like they've let these stellar FA classes get by them in the time they've owned the team. Unless you were expecting them to command the FO to start trading the farm or blow even more bloated contracts on mid-level FA then there hasn't been much to do right now to dramatically change this team.

 

And Wrigley is a dump that's literally falling apart. It's a huge part of the investment for anyone that owns the team and it needs a ton of upgrades and work sooner rather than later.

It is really simple to understand. You buy a team and you hire your people to run it. You don't allow the group that has failed to continue to fail. All that leads to is a disgruntled fan base. I think most fans would be a little more patient if Ricketts had cleaned house. At least there would be the appearance that losing will not be tolerated. While there would still be bad contracts on the books, at least the players would see that the era on no accountability is over. Would the results change? Who knows.

 

As for Wrigley, you go about making your changes/updates without talking about it. Instead, Ricketts blabs on endlessly about keeping it for the next generation of Cub fans. I wonder if he realizes the only tradition at Wrigley Field is losing. Personally, I would be looking at options for new stadiums. This spring shows the need for a retractable roof stadium. I wouldn't want the weather having such an impact on games.

[jersey cubs fan]

As for Wrigley, you go about making your changes/updates without talking about it. Instead, Ricketts blabs on endlessly about keeping it for the next generation of Cub fans. I wonder if he realizes the only tradition at Wrigley Field is losing. Personally, I would be looking at options for new stadiums. This spring shows the need for a retractable roof stadium. I wouldn't want the weather having such an impact on games.

 

Baseball has been played outdoors since it began. There is no such thing as a need for a retractable roof stadium.

[Ballgame64]

As for Wrigley, you go about making your changes/updates without talking about it. Instead, Ricketts blabs on endlessly about keeping it for the next generation of Cub fans. I wonder if he realizes the only tradition at Wrigley Field is losing. Personally, I would be looking at options for new stadiums. This spring shows the need for a retractable roof stadium. I wouldn't want the weather having such an impact on games.

 

Baseball has been played outdoors since it began. There is no such thing as a need for a retractable roof stadium.

If we lived by comparison, we'd all still be in caves.

 

When baseball became such a big business and expanded into late March and late October it sure did necessitate the need for these stadiums. As a fan, you would rather sit out in 40 degree, rainy weather? Not me.

 

Baseball has changed with the times to try to make the game better. From buses to trains to airlines to charter flights. Rooms in the finest hotels. Smarter meal choices in the clubhouse. Better training facilities, better medical treatment, etc has all been upgraded to make the game better. In my opinion, playing the game in a controlled weather environment makes the game better as well.

[SouthSideRyan]

Who's paying for this stadium?

 

Who's going to this stadium?

[jersey cubs fan]

As for Wrigley, you go about making your changes/updates without talking about it. Instead, Ricketts blabs on endlessly about keeping it for the next generation of Cub fans. I wonder if he realizes the only tradition at Wrigley Field is losing. Personally, I would be looking at options for new stadiums. This spring shows the need for a retractable roof stadium. I wouldn't want the weather having such an impact on games.

 

Baseball has been played outdoors since it began. There is no such thing as a need for a retractable roof stadium.

If we lived by comparison, we'd all still be in caves.

 

When baseball became such a big business and expanded into late March and late October it sure did necessitate the need for these stadiums. As a fan, you would rather sit out in 40 degree, rainy weather? Not me.

 

Baseball has changed with the times to try to make the game better. From buses to trains to airlines to charter flights. Rooms in the finest hotels. Smarter meal choices in the clubhouse. Better training facilities, better medical treatment, etc has all been upgraded to make the game better. In my opinion, playing the game in a controlled weather environment makes the game better as well.

 

That's a stupid opinion. I would love to sit in 40 degree temps to watch October baseball. Those days are still quite rare and this spring did nothing to change that.

[woodchip2153]

As for Wrigley, you go about making your changes/updates without talking about it. Instead, Ricketts blabs on endlessly about keeping it for the next generation of Cub fans. I wonder if he realizes the only tradition at Wrigley Field is losing. Personally, I would be looking at options for new stadiums. This spring shows the need for a retractable roof stadium. I wouldn't want the weather having such an impact on games.

 

Baseball has been played outdoors since it began. There is no such thing as a need for a retractable roof stadium.

If we lived by comparison, we'd all still be in caves.

 

When baseball became such a big business and expanded into late March and late October it sure did necessitate the need for these stadiums. As a fan, you would rather sit out in 40 degree, rainy weather? Not me.

 

Baseball has changed with the times to try to make the game better. From buses to trains to airlines to charter flights. Rooms in the finest hotels. Smarter meal choices in the clubhouse. Better training facilities, better medical treatment, etc has all been upgraded to make the game better. In my opinion, playing the game in a controlled weather environment makes the game better as well.

 

That's a stupid opinion. I would love to sit in 40 degree temps to watch October baseball. Those days are still quite rare and this spring did nothing to change that.

 

there's a reason why the open air stadiums are almost always at the top for best places to watch a game.

[erik316wttn]

If the Cubs are worth seeing the weather is of zero importance to me as a fan.

[XZero771679666304]

I don't think full climate control is necessary or even desirable, but I must admit some days I think every stadium (save maybe in SD) having a retractable roof would be a good idea (perhaps with open panels like Milwaukee). Unlike with football, inclement weather adds nothing to the baseball experience, save postponements, scheduling problems and disrupted games. Football in rain/snow/cold is fun, baseball in the same just flat out sucks.

 

And just because something has always been a certain way doesn't mean it should always be. That's just stupid.

[SouthSideRyan]

Imitating Milwaukee's stadium is about the worst idea I've ever heard. What an abomination.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't think full climate control is necessary or even desirable, but I must admit some days I think every stadium (save maybe in SD) having a retractable roof would be a good idea (perhaps with open panels like Milwaukee). Unlike with football, inclement weather adds nothing to the baseball experience, save postponements, scheduling problems and disrupted games. Football in rain/snow/cold is fun, baseball in the same just flat out sucks.

 

And just because something has always been a certain way doesn't mean it should always be. That's just stupid.

 

I've got news for you, but baseball generally isn't played in the snow. If the conditions aren't playable, they wait for it to pass or play another day. And over the course of 6 months there's really very little negative affect to a couple schedule changes.

[XZero771679666304]

Imitating Milwaukee's stadium is about the worst idea I've ever heard. What an abomination.

 

 

Yeah, because implementing one aspect of it is like cloning it.

[jersey cubs fan]

Imitating Milwaukee's stadium is about the worst idea I've ever heard. What an abomination.

 

 

Yeah, because implementing one aspect of it is like cloning it.

 

Implementing a bunch of random aspects of several is just going to make a monstrosity. Baseball is played in some great stadiums. None of them have roofs. All of the really enjoyable ones are open air. A couple uncomfortable games in April does not change the need for stadium design.

[XZero771679666304]

I don't think full climate control is necessary or even desirable, but I must admit some days I think every stadium (save maybe in SD) having a retractable roof would be a good idea (perhaps with open panels like Milwaukee). Unlike with football, inclement weather adds nothing to the baseball experience, save postponements, scheduling problems and disrupted games. Football in rain/snow/cold is fun, baseball in the same just flat out sucks.

 

And just because something has always been a certain way doesn't mean it should always be. That's just stupid.

 

I've got news for you, but baseball generally isn't played in the snow. If the conditions aren't playable, they wait for it to pass or play another day. And over the course of 6 months there's really very little negative affect to a couple schedule changes.

 

That is all true, but the game would be losing nothing by adopting more enclosed stadiums, particularly in more problematic climates. It wouldn't drastically improve the game, but it would improve it. I'm not saying it should be done, but it wouldn't be some sort of affront to the game's history or spirit or any such nonsense.