Wrigley has been the epitome of old school baseball parks. Afternoon games, local neighborhood, etc.
Why is there a need to renovate and put that monstrosity out in right field? Have they received feedback from fans that they want video updates about things at the ball park?
One of the great things about my trips to Chicago was seeing a baseball game at Wrigley without the nonsense chatter from the videotron and kisscams and stupid graphics…just baseball. Who is the person that needs drawn and quartered for doing this?
Can we suspend the constitutional prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishments as applied to Mr. Ricketts? I vote in favor of it.
But seriously, why the need for a video screen? Did fans respond to a poll or something saying that they stayed away from Wrigley because of it? Why did something think this was needed?
Wrigley Field was my favorite place I ever saw a baseball game.
I have been to a LOT of ballparks, including many that no longer exist. (God, I am old). I am sad to say, the Wrigley that I knew and loved is gone. (The old Comisky Park, OTOH was a shithole, and I was not sad to see it go.)
And yes, it’s all about the big bucks. It always is.
And it is also true that people now have the attention span of the average goldfish, so flashing pictures every second a ball isn’t in play is thought to be necessary for today’s fan.
I wish it wasn’t there too, but at least at the one game I was at, there was no kiss cam, and not much other silliness . Ricketts made it clear he needed additional income from the jumbo tron as well as all the other wrigleyville amenities. I’ll take a jumbo tron over an ad filled monstrosity out in Rosemont.
So far, it’s not so bad. I’ve been to one game, and it was a bit disconcerting, I will admit. Wrigley is one of my favorite ballparks (along with Fenway) and I wish some spaces would just be left alone and remain a throwback to another time. That said, the real insult there is the price of beer. $8.25 for the cheap shit, and $9 for Goose Island. (Might as well get the Goose at that point.) Holy crap.
The only problem is that someone owns those spaces, because they’re trying to earn money. Asking things to remain a throwback really means that we want the owners to forego millions of dollars of earnings in order to please us.
OTOH, affordable beer is a boon for mankind, and he should give up millions of dollars to ensure it’s available.
Oh, I understand the economics of it all, and I know time can’t stand still just for me. Hence the “wish” bit. I’m just a bit wistful about it. I’m not going to be surprised if Wrigley is demolished in my lifetime, either. I figure it’s going to happen at some point because, well, money. Still not going to be too happy about it.
Wasn’t there some lawsuit about improving Wrigley since its an old field and lots of surrounding businesses have rooftop seats to watch the games? I guess they lost that one.
There are ongoing lawsuits - some rulings have come down in favor of the team owners but not all. The rooftop seats crowd has been a thorn in the side of the owners for some time.
The rooftop owners are as disliked as syphillis throughout Chicago. They’ll continue to file lawsuits but Rahm (Mayor) Tunney (Alderman) and Ricketts are calling the shots
And I wouldn’t say they’re disliked. It’s more of a “Who gives a rats ass?” thing. Some are nice people, some are assholes, just like everyone else in this world. And it’s not just bars. Only one deck is actually on a bar. The others are on buildings owned by various private enterprises, some of which are partnered with other bars, I believe. But I don’t really pay all that much attention to the whole thing, because I don’t really care about baseball, much less the Cubs. But even many Cubs fans I’ve talked to, think the whole thing is rather ridiculous because it’s a fight over seats that cost more than most people really want to pony up the cost of anyway.
The Chicago Tribune worked out a deal back in the day to charge a percentage of rooftop seat sales to the companies because they were sick of litigating the theft of their product. When the Tribune sold the Cubs as part of their bankruptcy reorganization, the solidity of the contracts (since from what I can tell, the issue of contract transfer wasn’t that well spelled out in the original contracts) and how far the new owners had to honor them became a new issue of litigation. The whole thing comes down to money. And not just for the rooftop tickets, but the fact that impaired views drive down the property value of the buildings which were initially sold at inflated prices due to the “gold mine” of the rooftop decks.
But really, outside of Wrigleyville, most people don’t care.
