Just a fact...

[beckdawg]

The Cardinals themselves as an organization are rich with history. The old Busch Stadium was not and was a cookie cutter, astro-turf POS that had little to no ventilation.

Oddly enough, the Cardinals built a newer stadium with an "older flare" to it with natural grass.

A lot of stadiums want to mimic the older parks such as Fenway and Wrigley except with modern facilities and a family atmosphere outside the park for entertainment purposes.

Wrigley Field will always be rich in history and that's why you renovate and don't move away from there. The best thing they can do is try to have the Cubs organization rich with a history of winning versus a history of losing. That in itself will take many, many years, but it has to start with one thing.........and that's a World Series. :yep:

I honestly don't care that much either way where they play. However, I do think the reliance on wrigley for "history" is kind of silly. I mean is camden yards historic now that it was opened in the early 90's and was the first of the post cookie cutter multi-purpose stadiums? If you renovate the stadium you may end up just building a new stadium around where the old one was in essence. To and extent that's what happened at soldier field and many now complain about it. In the end to me its about providing the best experience for fans. Maybe that's wrigley but maybe not. You can make a new stadium that's still a great experience is all I'm saying.

 

[chibears55]

I honestly don't care that much either way where they play. However, I do think the reliance on wrigley for "history" is kind of silly. I mean is camden yards historic now that it was opened in the early 90's and was the first of the post cookie cutter multi-purpose stadiums? If you renovate the stadium you may end up just building a new stadium around where the old one was in essence. To and extent that's what happened at soldier field and many now complain about it. In the end to me its about providing the best experience for fans. Maybe that's wrigley but maybe not. You can make a new stadium that's still a great experience is all I'm saying.

people just dont realize how many cubs fans there are, especially in the W and NW burbs.. if they were to build in Rosemont, that place would be packed every game but like most teams in order to draw , you need a good product on the field..


I think if they polled 15 - 25 YO fans if theyd prefer an updated state of art stadium in Rosemont or WF, the majority would choose Rosemont only because most younger generation fans dont really have a history at WF growing up and only go by what they read and see now and that WF is old and falling apart, and people are tired of the BS with the neighborhood, rooftops, and politics..

If they can fix up WF and update it, then it would be great but with all the political BS they have to go through to get anything done, its not worth it because I think as someone mentioned above about soldiers field. They will end up doing patch work here n there and it will look stupid and still be outdated..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T217A using Tapatalk

 

[TL1961]

Nobody said to build around him, but way to throw a sippie cup and have a temper tantrum.

It wasn't a temper tantrum.

I was laughing as I poked fun at your post. You will continue to say the Cubs should keep 38 year old guys who have no future. Makes no sense. The Cubs are not one bit closer to contention with Soriano. Thye may win a game or two more - though there are a whole lot of baseball people who will argue you don't win more with Soriano - but even if they win a few more, that gains them nothing.

They need to move the guys about to retire and make room for youngsters.

Do I think Lake has a bright future? No. But I certainly can't support keeping him on the bench behind a $20 million geezer. Yes, we still had to pay most of it. That was a given the day Hendry gave him that contract.

 

[TL1961]

*cough* 38 *cough*

sent from Jimmer range using Tapatalk

Really??

Try to keep up.

 

[nwfisch]

It wasn't a temper tantrum.

I was laughing as I poked fun at your post. You will continue to say the Cubs should keep 38 year old guys who have no future. Makes no sense. The Cubs are not one bit closer to contention with Soriano. Thye may win a game or two more - though there are a whole lot of baseball people who will argue you don't win more with Soriano - but even if they win a few more, that gains them nothing.

They need to move the guys about to retire and make room for youngsters.

Do I think Lake has a bright future? No. But I certainly can't support keeping him on the bench behind a $20 million geezer. Yes, we still had to pay most of it. That was a given the day Hendry gave him that contract.

Yeah thank God the youngsters like Junior Lake are playing so well! Oh wait........................

And Corey Black is doing so well at the MLB level...............Oh wait.