Cubs announce LED board and patio in RF bleachers for 2012

[CUBZ99]

Hopefully the revenue that the Cubs receive from this section will actually go into the team. I remember when the Toyota sign was put up and the Cubs claimed it was going to help increase payroll(Wasn't it something like $8MM?). I don't remember the payroll ever actually increasing.

[ConstableRabbit]

I like the patio idea but don't understand the point of the LED board if it's not showing video replay.

 

It looks like of ugly.

[UMFan83]

You don't understand the value of having another space for more statistics, and most importantly additional advertising in between innings?

[seanimal]

i like the guy being totally unable to reconcile the "architectural integrity" with the fact that the "architecture" in that particular part of the ballpark is like 6 years old.

[CubInOK]

I like the idea of adding value to the Cubs, even though there's a chance that not $1 of revenue from this could go to player payroll. I hope it works.

[MWV]

I like the patio idea but don't understand the point of the LED board if it's not showing video replay.

 

It looks like of ugly.

 

I don't mean to pick on you individually CR, but what do people really expect to see replayed on an in-stadium screen? MLB policy states:

Clubs must continue to use good judgment not to 'show up' the umpires, incite the crowd or distract players

 

Certain plays may not be shown:

Replays showing called balls or strikes from the current game or series; brushback pitches; or any instance where an umpire has clearly made an incorrect call.

 

The manner in which those that can be shown is limited:

Close plays can only be shown once and no close plays may be shown in slow motion or freeze frame.

 

In-stadium video screens are not for instant replay. They are for adverts and lame admonitions to "Make NOISE".

[rocket]

i love everything about this.

[Sammy Sofa]

i love everything about this.

 

Ditto.

[jersey cubs fan]

Let's hope they don't skimp on the construction the way they skimped on the renderings, that looks awful.

[J.R.]

The LED board itself will likely be the most expensive component. The rest is just concrete pours and decorative panels, similar to what the Reds did with a section of their club level.

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_a66YWasb0Bc/Sb7GouNEI_I/AAAAAAAADvc/naTWnw4LcmE/s400/ChampionsClub-02.jpg

[VicCub]

I remember CUBS- Citizens United for Baseball in the Sunshine

 

I was for lights then just as I am for modernizing improvements now but I do sympathize with OldCub69. Eventually Wrigley may come to a point where they've 'paved paradise and put up a parking lot.' The most attractive thing about the Chicago Cubs to me is the memories of going to Wrigley with my dad. Every year the park and club is that much different from those days. I want the Cubs to win the WS every year but I also want to recognize at least a few things from 'back in the day.' I think Theo understands this balance and I trust him to move forward with this understanding in mind.

[J.R.]

For comparison, here's the section as it is now.

 

http://mlblogssnaggingbaseballs.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/6_zack_bleacher_box-thumb-550x437-10771011.jpg?w=550&h=437

[Sammy Sofa]

Bricks, ivy, scoreboard, marquee sign; beyond those things I really have trouble understanding people who cling the rest of Wrigley. I mean, how can anyone not see that it's an outdated dump that's literally falling down?

[J.R.]

People often throw off on the grandstand as nothing special, but the close proximity of the upper deck is of prime importance to me. The support posts that people bitch about make this proximity possible, and I believe any rebuild that results in upper deck seating being in another ZIP code - like it is in just about every new ballpark with the notable exception of PNC Park - would effectively "ruin Wrigley."

 

Intimate seating, no annoying audio/visual elements - that's Wrigley to me.

[CubmanPi]

I hope it will show a race every game between a Big Mac, fries, and drink. Bonus for a kiss cam and fan trivia.

[Sammy Sofa]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck. Couple that with the obstructed views and how relatively few seats they have vs. how much they could actually fill and things have to change.

[C.C.]

Bricks, ivy, scoreboard, marquee sign; beyond those things I really have trouble understanding people who cling the rest of Wrigley. I mean, how can anyone not see that it's an outdated dump that's literally falling down?

 

I agree. Hell, take down the score board and replicate it digitally.

[J.R.]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck. Couple that with the obstructed views and how relatively few seats they have vs. how much they could actually fill and things have to change.

 

The lower deck is angled optimally as-is. I concede that the 400/500 seating farther down the lines leaves much to be desired, but that's exactly the kind of problem a thoughtful renovation can address.

 

No one builds 60,000 seat ballparks anymore. No one wants to pay a premium to sit a mile away from the action with the kind of in-home viewing options available today.

[C.C.]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck. Couple that with the obstructed views and how relatively few seats they have vs. how much they could actually fill and things have to change.

 

The lower deck is angled optimally as-is. I concede that the 400/500 seating farther down the lines leaves much to be desired, but that's exactly the kind of problem a thoughtful renovation can address.

 

No one builds 60,000 seat ballparks anymore. No one wants to pay a premium to sit a mile away from the action with the kind of in-home viewing options available today.

 

Except the Yankees.

[Sammy Sofa]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck. Couple that with the obstructed views and how relatively few seats they have vs. how much they could actually fill and things have to change.

 

The lower deck is angled optimally as-is. I concede that the 400/500 seating farther down the lines leaves much to be desired, but that's exactly the kind of problem a thoughtful renovation can address.

 

No one builds 60,000 seat ballparks anymore. No one wants to pay a premium to sit a mile away from the action with the kind of in-home viewing options available today.

 

There's a huge middle ground between 60,000 and squeezing in around 42,000.

[Derwood]

"tradition" is one of my least favorite words in sports

[seanimal]

People often throw off on the grandstand as nothing special, but the close proximity of the upper deck is of prime importance to me. The support posts that people bitch about make this proximity possible, and I believe any rebuild that results in upper deck seating being in another ZIP code - like it is in just about every new ballpark with the notable exception of PNC Park - would effectively "ruin Wrigley."

 

Intimate seating, no annoying audio/visual elements - that's Wrigley to me.

 

part of me agrees with this, but i do think that gums is correct about the obstructed views. sure you get the benefit of having the upper deck be uncharacteristically close to the action, however it doesn't come without significant compromise. almost as soon as you get under the deck in the grandstands, your view is obstructed for high fly balls, and the situation gets worse and worse the farther back you go. then there's those poles. as far as the seats being "uncomfortably" close, i don't really get that.

 

if i were king, i would tear down the upper deck and re-do the entire grandstand to modernize the main concourse running beneath the seats. i would then replicate the upper deck as close as possible to what it is, but cantilever it rather than supporting it with posts. this would be a compromise that would eliminate the obstructed views of the field, but, of course, fly balls would still need to be followed by watching the field/crowd rather than actually looking at the baseball. lastly, instead of plastering video screens everywhere, i would create a state-of-the-art mobile game presentation, allowing attendees to scan their tickets and gain access to an audio, video, and statistical presentation of the game unlike anything in the league. but i'm not king, and none of that will ever happen.

[Irrelevant Dude]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck.

If you think seats are crammed in at Wrigley, you should go to Fenway (if you haven't already). I had to tuck my legs back under my own seat because my knees wouldn't fit in front of me. After that experience, the seats at Wrigley feel quite spacious.

[Sammy Sofa]

"Intimate seating" can also be code for just how uncomfortably so many of the seats are positioned to cram in as many as possible, or even just how the seats themselves mostly suck.

If you think seats are crammed in at Wrigley, you should go to Fenway (if you haven't already). I had to tuck my legs back under my own seat because my knees wouldn't fit in front of me. After that experience, the seats at Wrigley feel quite spacious.

 

Wrigley should aspire to better than "oh, hey, we're a preferable option to the other old dump."

[Guest]

Bricks, ivy, scoreboard, marquee sign; beyond those things I really have trouble understanding people who cling the rest of Wrigley. I mean, how can anyone not see that it's an outdated dump that's literally falling down?

 

Yea, those are the main things for me too. The rest of it could all be torn down/gutted/rebuilt/whatever.