I almost wanted to make this a rant for the Pit but I figure it is better discussed here.
For those who may be unaware Sam Zell, the new owner of the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Cubs, wants to sell the Wrigley Field name where the Chicago Cubs play. This has stirred quite a series of rants and blogs on both sides of the fence.
For Zell’s part his feeling is he owns them and he can do as he pleases. He sees no reason to advertise Wrigley’s name for free when he can get someone else to pony up $400 million dollars for the benefit.
For those blogging and posting about this there seems to be a divergence. Those who do not care about the name feel that true Cubs fans care about winning and if Zell makes $400 million he can buy a better team. Those who do seem to care are more about the tradition and while wanting to see the Cubs win a series sort of go with the lovable loser meme of the Cubs.
Personally I see no need to draw a distinction. I want to see them win, I comfort myself with the lovable loser title and I think one of the charms of baseball overall is the tradition it embodies. And nowhere in professional baseball is the feel of what baseball used to be kept alive as well as it is at Wrigley Field.
As to Zell saying he owns the name and can do as he pleases I am not so sure at least from a moral sense. Certainly legally he does (although the Wrigley Field marquee over the front gate has historic landmark status so doubt he can touch that…scary to think of how they may try to sidestep that issue). I just do not see why if a structure cannot have landmark status why a name cannot? Would Parisians be ok if the Eiffel Tower name was sold to become the Yoplait Tower? Would US citizens be ok if the Statue of Liberty was re-named to the Depends Statue of Liberty? I think not (and yes I know those are owned by the government).
Like it or not the name Wrigley Field as become a part of the culture of Chicago. As much an identifier of the city as the Water Tower…perhaps more so. Whole generations have been born, lived long lives and died with the name Wrigley Field intact. So while it is a privately owned entity the citizens of Chicago have some legitimate claim to the name and what it means to the city (heck…you could extend this beyond Chicago to all baseball fans, many of whom identify the park as astandout and which players themselves vote as the best park). Again, we do this with structures no matter who owns it. If the government decides your house is worthy of being a landmark they will give it that status and your ability as the owner to do as you please largely disappears.
Finally, the notion that Zell will take $400 million dollars and buy a stellar team to win the World Series I find dubious at best. While he does not seem to want to gut the team neither has he indicated he will pour considerable resources in to them either. I think it far more likely he will pocket the $400 million. Certainly looking aroudn the league where they sold name rights we rarely if ever see the team prosper because that money was used to better the team. Besides, even if you told me the Cubs would win if the name was sold I am not so sure I would think it a good deal…well maybe…not sure…don’t tempt me.
Seriously though…just a good old fashioned money grab and while I can appreciate that $400 million is a lot of money Zell is a billionaire and hardly needs it (not that he doesn’t appreciate that figure too)
So Cubs fans want the new owner not to utilize a $400 million asset for sentimental reasons? Gotcha. And you can guess my view.
If these people feel so strongly about it, let them start a fund and buy the naming rights to the field and name it Wrigley Field. If they aren’t willing to pay money to keep the name, what right to they have to ask the new owner to make a financial sacrifice to keep the name? Make the whiners put their money where their mouth is.
Last I heard, Marshall Fi— I mean Macy’s is still losing money in the Chicago area. Maybe Zell should learn the lesson Macy’s seems to be blind to. Just because you can screw with Chicago institutions doesn’t mean it’s a good idea and the folks around here are slow to forget an insult.
Can’t we just compromise: He’ll change the name, put up ugly signs, and everyone who isn’t actually required to use the name as a condition of their employment will continue to call it Wrigley Field, just as everyone continues to call Candlestick park by its real name, and not by whatever foolish corporate moniker it’s been branded with this year.
Zell is not going to buy a better team. As noted in the article, he acquired the Cubs when he bought the Tribune Company and has said from the beginning that he plans to sell the team. If he gets his way, he’ll sell the team to one group and the stadium to someone else, so I don’t think the name of the stadium would bring the Cubs any money in that situation. Sounds like it would be $400 million for Sam Zell. Which he’s entitled to do if he wants. But it won’t put a better team on the field.
Meant to add: I’m not a Cubs fan, but I’d rather they leave the name alone. I know Wrigley is a sponsor too, but that’s been the name for a long time, and changing things like this makes fans feel they are losing touch with their teams. I know I would rather see the Yankees at Yankee Stadium than at U.S. Steel Park Presented by Exxon, a Division of Exxon Mobil.
I do not think anyone should be able to pay for control of the name. As I mentioned I think some things become a part of the culture at large. As such the people have a stake in what happens to the name even if they never paid a dime for it. Maybe you think it is cruddy and anyone who owns a thing should be allowed to do anything they feel like with it. This is why we have landmark status for some buildings…the feeling being that the structure has an importance to the society as a whole and should be protected.
To zap the name to put money into a billionaire’s pockets I do not find compelling. Certainly not enough to trump a name so well identified not only by the people of Chicago but by baseball fans worldwide (heck, when I was in Europe and people asked where I lived I could tell them, “near Wrigley Field” and a surprising number got it even if the precise geographical location within the city was lost on them).
I side with the fans. I oppose the onslaught of crass corporatism on general principles, but this would be particularly egregious because Wrigley Field is an American landmark.
Actually the park was named after the owner William Wrigley Jr. His company also happened to be the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company but note the park was not named the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company Field. Just Wrigley field for the man. Like Comiskey Park was named after a person as were many other parks.
A subtle distinction perhaps but one I will go with. Although since it is so well identified now with the stadium I would not support it becoming Zell Field either…the name should not change at all at this point.
The Chicago response should be to totally boycott any company that puts its name on the field. Let Zell try to sell it then. Or the city could just pass an ordinance prohibiting anything Zell tries to do. It’s Chicago, fer Christsakes! Illegal acts by crooked politicians are required by law, aren’t they?
Dunno where it originated. It came out around the time they were discussing putting lights on Wrigley Field and has been made into posters (nice ones) since then.
That’s fine, but then Chicago should have passes a law forbidding renaming the field–and then been prepared to defend itself against a lawsuit from a pissed-off owner who just saw the value of his property depreciated by $400 million by a law passed by the city. You can’t let the guy buy an asset, and then tell him he can’t use it in a particular way. And like I said before, I notice that these fans are very keen to demand the owner forego $400 million, but not so keen to start a fund to buy the naming rights themselves. It’s so easy to spend somebody else’s money, not so easy to spend your own.
It would be one thing if the Tribune had already sold the rights for $400 million, sold to Zell with that wrapped in the purchase price and then the government undoes all that.
In this case his property is not being “depreciated”. It never had that $400 million attached to it. Zell is trying to magic up $400 million that was not there before.
Additionally the Cubs are a profitable franchise and always have been. This is not a case where someone will be bankrupted if not allowed to go ahead with their plans.
A fair compromise would be to burn that piss-smelling shithole to the ground and build a stadium with decent sight lines. They can then sell the ashes as the “Ashes of Wrigley Field” and allow the owners to name the new stadium.
