Wrigley Renovation Thread

[Guest]

This renovation should have started this year, to coincide with the talent nadir, to be ready when the team was approaching contention. But now, the Red Line renovation realistically makes hosting 140 baseball games in a season infeasible for the next 3-4 seasons. The Cubs could only renovate Wrigley a) after the Red Line reconstruction is completed b) if they play home games in some combination of Miller Park, Busch Stadium (that could be fun), and Principal Park (Iowa), or c) if they play somewhere kooky like Soldier Field or a temporary stadium or even the entire season on the road like the Port Ruppert Mundys.

 

We also have to remember that this renovation will take some time. The occasional chunk of the upper deck has been known to literally fall off - basically the upper deck will have to be completely rebuilt. This will also be done to maximize skybox potential (don't be surprised about a second level of skyboxes more or less where the roof is now). It will probably take 2 years, though past Cubs reconstruction projects have done remarkably in finishing on or ahead of schedule.

 

The plan hasn't necessarily been to actually play elsewhere. The most recent scenario had them working in phases over the offseason. They wanted the first phase to begin this offseason.

[J.R.]

This renovation should have started this year, to coincide with the talent nadir, to be ready when the team was approaching contention. But now, the Red Line renovation realistically makes hosting 140 baseball games in a season infeasible for the next 3-4 seasons. The Cubs could only renovate Wrigley a) after the Red Line reconstruction is completed b) if they play home games in some combination of Miller Park, Busch Stadium (that could be fun), and Principal Park (Iowa), or c) if they play somewhere kooky like Soldier Field or a temporary stadium or even the entire season on the road like the Port Ruppert Mundys.

 

We also have to remember that this renovation will take some time. The occasional chunk of the upper deck has been known to literally fall off - basically the upper deck will have to be completely rebuilt. This will also be done to maximize skybox potential (don't be surprised about a second level of skyboxes more or less where the roof is now). It will probably take 2 years, though past Cubs reconstruction projects have done remarkably in finishing on or ahead of schedule.

Yeah it's gonna take time. I don't think they are going to [expletive] around with just making sure concrete doesn't fall anymore and add some skyboxes. I think the plan is to virtually tear down the entire shell and re-build it. I doubt most of the original structure stays outside of the field/OF Walls/Bleachers/Possibly Scoreboard.

Every rendering that has been leaked thus far indicates that the existing steel skeleton will be augmented, not demolished. Complete removal/replacement of the concrete risers, addition of new exterior concession decks down the lines to match the one behind home plate, addition of fan services/amenities to spaces currently dedicated to offices/storage.

 

Of course, they could change their minds. A new lower bowl and upper deck could be built in the style of that used in Pittsburgh on the existing footprint and would give us a similar look, scale and seating quality as Wrigley offers now but with no poles and a modern physical plant. I personally think you need the huge roof given the number of day games we have, but the night ball rules could be up for change as well.

[AlwaysaCub]

This renovation should have started this year, to coincide with the talent nadir, to be ready when the team was approaching contention. But now, the Red Line renovation realistically makes hosting 140 baseball games in a season infeasible for the next 3-4 seasons. The Cubs could only renovate Wrigley a) after the Red Line reconstruction is completed b) if they play home games in some combination of Miller Park, Busch Stadium (that could be fun), and Principal Park (Iowa), or c) if they play somewhere kooky like Soldier Field or a temporary stadium or even the entire season on the road like the Port Ruppert Mundys.

 

We also have to remember that this renovation will take some time. The occasional chunk of the upper deck has been known to literally fall off - basically the upper deck will have to be completely rebuilt. This will also be done to maximize skybox potential (don't be surprised about a second level of skyboxes more or less where the roof is now). It will probably take 2 years, though past Cubs reconstruction projects have done remarkably in finishing on or ahead of schedule.

 

The plan hasn't necessarily been to actually play elsewhere. The most recent scenario had them working in phases over the offseason. They wanted the first phase to begin this offseason.

 

With the changes that are being talked about with regards to the grandstand IMO, even if construction is concentrated in the offseason the renovation will probably still require that, at some point, the Cubs play elsewhere.

[J.R.]

They replaced the upper deck risers over the course of one offseason in the early 1970s. If they are not doing a wholesale teardown, then the work could be completed in phases while leaving the place playable.

[davell]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

 

I wish. But there's just no way they'd be that gutsy and no one would take them seriously.

[davell]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

 

I wish. But there's just no way they'd be that gutsy and no one would take them seriously.

 

Without knowing anything about the inner workings of the city, how close could they conceivably build a stadium and escape the tax?

[jersey cubs fan]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

 

I wish. But there's just no way they'd be that gutsy and no one would take them seriously.

 

Without knowing anything about the inner workings of the city, how close could they conceivably build a stadium and escape the tax?

 

Huh? Are you asking a geography question?

[davell]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

 

I wish. But there's just no way they'd be that gutsy and no one would take them seriously.

 

Without knowing anything about the inner workings of the city, how close could they conceivably build a stadium and escape the tax?

 

Huh? Are you asking a geography question?

 

No, I'm asking is it possible to stay extremely close, but escape the tax? As in, if there's a place right outside the limits that could work and us escape the tax, yet keep the same fan base and all still able to see the games. I don't realy see how that wasn't understandable the first time.

[Garwilly]

http://t.co/QgS8twxf

 

If this happens, does it give the Cubs actual leverage to threaten a move?

 

I wish. But there's just no way they'd be that gutsy and no one would take them seriously.

 

Without knowing anything about the inner workings of the city, how close could they conceivably build a stadium and escape the tax?

 

Huh? Are you asking a geography question?

 

No, I'm asking is it possible to stay extremely close, but escape the tax? As in, if there's a place right outside the limits that could work and us escape the tax, yet keep the same fan base and all still able to see the games. I don't realy see how that wasn't understandable the first time.

 

So then your answer to his question is "yes".

[jersey cubs fan]

Huh? Are you asking a geography question?

 

No, I'm asking is it possible to stay extremely close, but escape the tax? As in, if there's a place right outside the limits that could work and us escape the tax, yet keep the same fan base and all still able to see the games. I don't realy see how that wasn't understandable the first time.

 

So you are asking a geography question. The answer is yes.

[davell]

Suburbs work?

[bukie]

I hear Bridgeview is the place to be for pro sports these days.

[jersey cubs fan]

Suburbs work?

Suburbs are not under the jurisdiction of the city. You want to get out of Chicago and cook county. Although in reality you probably want out of Illinois.

[apete6]

Build it on the Forest Preserve woods near the Blue Line Rosemont Stop.

 

Will never happen due to environmental protection, but close enough to the city via Metra and Blue Line and several major highways (90, 294) to be at least intriguing. Also, there's that new Rosemont entertainment district, outlet mall, and casino nearby...

[davell]

Is it likely attendance would be hurt at all by moving to any of those places?

[Guest]

Yes, moving to Rosemont would be very bad for attendance. The population density and ease of access just doesn't compare, even if it is near the highway and closer to the suburbs.

 

If they were to truly think about moving, the one spot I saw mentioned for the Fire once seems like a nice fit. Dearborn Park, east of the rail yard/river, between roosevelt and 18th. You could get a nice backdrop with the lake there, you're a mile or less from 90/94, Lake Shore Drive, and Union Station, and the Roosevelt station falls on 3 different lines. It doesn't help at all with their problems with the city though.

[Sammy Sofa]

There was never any chance of it happening, but I would have loved if they had dropped a new stadium onto the remnants of Cabrini Green.

[Derwood]

There was never any chance of it happening, but I would have loved if they had dropped a new stadium onto the remnants of Cabrini Green.

 

me too. In fact, I think I photoshopped the skyline view from cabrini at some point, but god knows where that is anymore.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It will never happen in a million years, but I'd be fascinated to see what Theo Epstein could up with in terms of intrinsic, long-term advantage if he got to design his own ballpark.

[davell]

Cool concept, but it'd come down to structuring a roster to fit it. Unless it's the typical horrible facilities for the opposition thing, right? Is there anything else even possible to do?

[treebird]

It will never happen in a million years, but I'd be fascinated to see what Theo Epstein could up with in terms of intrinsic, long-term advantage if he got to design his own ballpark.

 

i've always been really big on the idea of trying to build a stadium with a big enough left field and small enough center field that it would be optimal to put your best fielder in left.

[minnesotacubsfan]

It will never happen in a million years, but I'd be fascinated to see what Theo Epstein could up with in terms of intrinsic, long-term advantage if he got to design his own ballpark.

 

I think he would be horrible at it

[Named After Maddux]

It will never happen in a million years, but I'd be fascinated to see what Theo Epstein could up with in terms of intrinsic, long-term advantage if he got to design his own ballpark.

 

I think he would be horrible at it

 

I trust Theo and Co. to build the organizational structure. He is a solid executive in an MLB front office and his strength is player analysis.

He's not an architect. I'm sure he'd make some suggestions, but he can't just draw up a ballpark. I do however trust him to find the right person for the job and I'm interested to see what happens during the process.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I didn't mean he'd actually design the whole park. Just suggest unique features for the playing field that might be exploitable as a team-building strategy.