Wrigley Renovation Thread

[SouthSideRyan]

Wonder if the Cubs have any chance of landing a lesser Big 10/someone else bowl game.

 

Maybe...the number of cold weather outdoor bowl games is very limited. Boise has one and NYC has one, and I believe that's it. I feel like if there was a demand for a bowl game in Chicago, there would already be one at Soldier Field.

I would imagine they haven't planned one because the field would be in pretty bad shape in late December/early Jan.

 

And because nobody cares about Soldier Field.

[Guest]

Push for more night games this season might be in jeopardy

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-cubs-push-for-more-night-games-this-season-could-be-in-jeopardy-20130213,0,6788524.story

 

The team has asked Tunney, whose 44th ward encompasses Wrigley Field, to ease limits on night games, late Friday afternoon games, concerts and other non-game events that are part of a neighborhood protection ordinance. The Cubs want more flexibility in scheduling games and events to increase revenues as the owners of the team seek to embark on a $300 million renovation of Wrigley Field.

 

The Cubs currently schedule 27 night games and can add up to three more for national television purposes. The exact number of new night games the club seeks is unclear, but the team is eager to have more night games as soon as the upcoming season. The timetable depends on getting city approval as soon as possible so that Major League Baseball can adjust the 2013 schedule, which already has been unveiled.

 

The team had asked Tunney to introduce a measure amending the neighborhood protection ordinance at Wednesday’s meeting. But the alderman wants the Cubs to address parking, traffic and security issues in the Wrigleyville neighborhood.

 

The lack of a proposal today suggests Tunney is in no rush to give the Cubs what they want. Additional night games are just one of the changes the Cubs seek that are tied to Wrigley renovations. The team also wants the city to lift landmark restrictions on the stadium to allow for more advertising and change zoning around Wrigley to allow for pre-game street festivals.

[MSG T]

Push for more night games this season might be in jeopardy

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-cubs-push-for-more-night-games-this-season-could-be-in-jeopardy-20130213,0,6788524.story

 

The team has asked Tunney, whose 44th ward encompasses Wrigley Field, to ease limits on night games, late Friday afternoon games, concerts and other non-game events that are part of a neighborhood protection ordinance. The Cubs want more flexibility in scheduling games and events to increase revenues as the owners of the team seek to embark on a $300 million renovation of Wrigley Field.

 

The Cubs currently schedule 27 night games and can add up to three more for national television purposes. The exact number of new night games the club seeks is unclear, but the team is eager to have more night games as soon as the upcoming season. The timetable depends on getting city approval as soon as possible so that Major League Baseball can adjust the 2013 schedule, which already has been unveiled.

 

The team had asked Tunney to introduce a measure amending the neighborhood protection ordinance at Wednesday’s meeting. But the alderman wants the Cubs to address parking, traffic and security issues in the Wrigleyville neighborhood.

 

The lack of a proposal today suggests Tunney is in no rush to give the Cubs what they want. Additional night games are just one of the changes the Cubs seek that are tied to Wrigley renovations. The team also wants the city to lift landmark restrictions on the stadium to allow for more advertising and change zoning around Wrigley to allow for pre-game street festivals.

 

What a [expletive] self-important piece of [expletive].

[Guest]

Eh, it's already mid-February, I'm more concerned about maximizing night games for all future seasons than tacking on 5-10 more this year.

[Sammy Sofa]

Eh, it's already mid-February, I'm more concerned about maximizing night games for all future seasons than tacking on 5-10 more this year.

 

Yeah, I didn't even know more night games this year was a thing; I assumed all of the talk was post-2013.

[UMFan83]

Dammit Cubs, show some interest in a plot of land in Lombard already. Everyone knows the cubs will be bluffing, but hopefully enough bar and rooftop owners would [expletive] themselves so that Tunney can stop this charade.

[jersey cubs fan]

Eh, it's already mid-February, I'm more concerned about maximizing night games for all future seasons than tacking on 5-10 more this year.

 

same here. not sure 2013 matters at all for this subject.

[javy knows my name]

Eh, it's already mid-February, I'm more concerned about maximizing night games for all future seasons than tacking on 5-10 more this year.

 

same here. not sure 2013 matters at all for this subject.

 

I'm sure "denying" it this year is just to save face, until he gets railroaded next year by the people who matter.

[Pushfrog98]

Dammit Cubs, show some interest in a plot of land in Lombard already. Everyone knows the cubs will be bluffing, but hopefully enough bar and rooftop owners would [expletive] themselves so that Tunney can stop this charade.

This. And Tunney needs to go.

[UMFan83]

The Sun-Times reports Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) “dug in his heels” in response to the latest wrinkle to the Wrigley Field renovation proposed by the Ricketts family. The Rickettses proposed a plan for a 40,000 square-foot Chicago Athletic Club would anchor a Sheraton boutique hotel across the street from the Friendly Confines. CAC would invest $5 million in the project and lease two floors in the planned hotel.

Of course, the hotel and nearly every other aspect of the Cubs renovation plan hinges on whether the city will relax landmark status on Wrigley Field so the ballclub may finally leverage marketing and sponsorships to fund the plan without using city money. Everybody seems to be down with the plan except Tunney, who has long blocked any plan for the Cubs to erect signage inside the ballpark at the behest of the rooftop club owners who rely on their bird’s-eye views of Wrigley for their business.

The rooftop clubs have insisted they have a say in any negotiation regarding relaxing Wrigley Field’s landmark status and revealed a plan in January to erect digital billboards above their buildings that would $17.9 million annually, all of it to be controlled by the Cubs and the city. The Cubs countered by insisting signage inside the ballpark is more valuable to marketers and sponsors because it’s within range of television cameras.

Tunney told the Sun-Times an agreement to add two more summer concerts at Wrigley Field is all the Cubs will get for now and repeated his claim he hasn’t made a final decision on the renovation plan until the Cubs get him a “comprehensive sign package.”

[Cubswin11]

Tunney is playing a dangerous game here with Ricketts and his resources

[davell]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

[Derwood]

I'd love to sit down at a meeting between the Cubs' brass and the rooftop owners.

 

ME: So, please explain to me what you bring to the table

 

CUBS: We bring one of the most popular sports franchises in history. We have a historic landmark ballpark that draws millions of fans each summer. An entire neighborhood of businesses exist because of our presence in the neighborhood. Property values are high, the area is safe, and the area is among the most popular in the city. If we moved, businesses would shut down, property values would plummet, and Wrigleyville would become just another residential neighborhood.

 

ME: Ok, what do you bring, rooftop owners.

 

ROOFTOP OWNERS: Derp

[ConstableRabbit]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

Tunney would call that bluff. The Cubs aren't going anywhere.

 

Ricketts is better off reconciling with Rahm -- at least their interests are aligned and the Mayor has the ability to put real pressure on Tunney if he wants to.

[UMFan83]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

Tunney would call that bluff. The Cubs aren't going anywhere.

 

Ricketts is better off reconciling with Rahm -- at least their interests are aligned and the Mayor has the ability to put real pressure on Tunney if he wants to.

 

Maybe. It depends on how far the Cubs carry it out. If the rooftop and bar owners start to panic, Tunney would have to cave.

 

The wrigleyville businesses need Wrigley a lot more than the Cubs need Wrigleyville.

[Derwood]

I just don't see what leverage the rooftop owners have. They bring nothing to the table. If you razed those buildings tomorrow, literally nothing would change for the Cubs.

[ConstableRabbit]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

Tunney would call that bluff. The Cubs aren't going anywhere.

 

Ricketts is better off reconciling with Rahm -- at least their interests are aligned and the Mayor has the ability to put real pressure on Tunney if he wants to.

 

Maybe. It depends on how far the Cubs carry it out. If the rooftop and bar owners start to panic, Tunney would have to cave.

 

The wrigleyville businesses need Wrigley a lot more than the Cubs need Wrigleyville.

Can you imagine ESPN?

 

"New Cubs Owner Vows to Move From Wrigley"

 

It'd be a PR nightmare for the team, and a substantial portion of the fanbase would pick up pitchforks and torches.

[seanimal]

"full time troll, part time alderman tom tunney dies after being hit by a car after being flung from a tree he fell into after tumbling from a rooftop he was standing on when a gust of his own mouth flatulence cause him to lose balance" - chicago tribune

[Guest]

I'm sure Rahm will step in and tell Tunney to go [expletive] himself soon enough.

[BeerHere]

I've been saying this for years, dating back to days of the ESPN message board when I used to live in Wrigleyville.....the rooftop owners, bar owners, alderman Tunney are all corrupt, disgusting pigs that have been getting fat off the Cubs product for decades. The time has come to call their bluff and start looking for property elsewhere. There are many other areas and towns that would welcome the Cubs, including other areas in Chicago.

[BeerHere]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

Tunney would call that bluff. The Cubs aren't going anywhere.

 

Ricketts is better off reconciling with Rahm -- at least their interests are aligned and the Mayor has the ability to put real pressure on Tunney if he wants to.

 

Maybe. It depends on how far the Cubs carry it out. If the rooftop and bar owners start to panic, Tunney would have to cave.

 

The wrigleyville businesses need Wrigley a lot more than the Cubs need Wrigleyville.

Can you imagine ESPN?

 

"New Cubs Owner Vows to Move From Wrigley"

 

It'd be a PR nightmare for the team, and a substantial portion of the fanbase would pick up pitchforks and torches.

 

The PR nightware could easily be spun the other way. "To remain a viable baseball franchise and to compete with the growing revenues of other teams the Cubs need to make changes to their ballpark. The special interests, Tunney and those that have been stealing from them for decades have blocked those efforts leaving the Cubs no choice but to find a new venue. "

 

"Regrettably, it has come to this and they have forced our hand. If we are to build a winning organization and give the fans what they deserve, we have no choice but to leave our beloved Wrigley Field and find a new location." - Tom Rickettes

[ConstableRabbit]

Screw it. Time to threaten the move. Tell Tunney to kiss your ass, Tom.

Tunney would call that bluff. The Cubs aren't going anywhere.

 

Ricketts is better off reconciling with Rahm -- at least their interests are aligned and the Mayor has the ability to put real pressure on Tunney if he wants to.

 

Maybe. It depends on how far the Cubs carry it out. If the rooftop and bar owners start to panic, Tunney would have to cave.

 

The wrigleyville businesses need Wrigley a lot more than the Cubs need Wrigleyville.

Can you imagine ESPN?

 

"New Cubs Owner Vows to Move From Wrigley"

 

It'd be a PR nightmare for the team, and a substantial portion of the fanbase would pick up pitchforks and torches.

 

The PR nightware could easily be spun the other way. "To remain a viable baseball franchise and to compete with the growing revenues of other teams the Cubs need to make changes to their ballpark. The special interests, Tunney and those that have been stealing from them for decades have blocked those efforts leaving the Cubs no choice but to find a new venue. "

 

"Regrettably, it has come to this and they have forced our hand. If we are to build a winning organization and give the fans what they deserve, we have no choice but to leave our beloved Wrigley Field and find a new location." - Tom Rickettes

At the end of the day, the vast majority of Cubs fans love Wrigley and want to watch the Cubs at Wrigley. At this point, it's an inseparable component of the franchise's identity.

 

The fans would turn on Cubs ownership very quickly, especially when the statement you mentioned isn't even true. This isn't about financial viability -- it's about maximizing ad revenue. If the Cubs accepted the rooftop owners' proposal they'd still be ok.

 

I of course side the Cubs in this matter, but a threat to leave Wrigley would be really empty and might put the team in an even worse position.

[UMFan83]

I disagree...there would of course be angry fans venting frustration, but they would be the vocal minority. I think the majority of Cubs fans are smarter than they are made out to be, as evidenced by the response to stripping the team down and beginning a long term rebuilding plan.

 

Moving the Cubs away from Wrigley Field would not be the ideal solution for anyone, but the Cubs have the ability to manipulate the media and outline their side of things. Some people would see right through it and know that the Cubs arent actually going to leave Wrigley, some be opposed to leaving Wrigley but would understand why the Cubs feel like they need to explore other options, some would flip out and call the Score and bitch about it every day, but I don't think there would be riots at the Cubs offices or anything.

 

Now if the Cubs really did leave Wrigley, that might be a different story. But driving to Addison and looking at potential locations wouldnt be *that* big of a deal.

 

Edit: And I believe there is some sort of precident in the mid-90's when the Red Sox were exploring the possibility of building a new ballpark in South Boston. There was opposition but I don't recall anything dramatic, and this is Boston we're talking about. Could be wrong though, I just remember reading about it awhile ago.

[WrigleyField 22]

Are the fans who would revolt that different that the ones who are upset about ads, jumbotron or whatever else?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ConstableRabbit]

Are the fans who would revolt that different that the ones who are upset about ads, jumbotron or whatever else?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe I'm in the minority here -- I don't care that much about ads but would be sick if the Cubs left Wrigley.