I think the biggest change we would notice if the Cubs moved out of Wrigley would be the number of night games. Most teams schedule nearly all weekday games at night except the occasional afternoon get-away game. Not considering the effect of that on attendance revenue, but how much more television revenue could additional night games without any restrictions have on revenue. Admittedly, as someone who has significant time off during the summer months, I love that the Cubs play day baseball and that probably was a large factor in my becoming a Cubs fan rather than a Braves fan when I was a child. But, revenue wise, being able to schedule as many night games as they desire could be a huge benefit. How moving to Rosemont would affect attendance is also a big unknown. What I think would happen is that if the team were successful, there would hardly be a decrease at all, yet, if the team suffered lean years, the attendance would be much lower than it is in comparable seasons at Wrigley. Now, admittedly, I'm simply speculating. It's clear the best case scenario is for the Cubs to stay in a renovated Wrigley without restrictions on scheduling or how they generate revenue through advertising. However, depending on the limitations they have to live with, there may be a point where in the long run moving is the better option compared to staying with limitations imposed. I wouldn't begin to know where that point is, but I'm sure the Cubs have a general idea.