Peter Gammons: "it's a dump, Wrigley Field."

[FirstTimer]

Nope, I didn't bother to read it.

I'm no longer shocked when reading this at this site.

 

[TheCubfather]

...........Did you not read the entire article or something?

Gammon's is right. Wrigley is a dump. So was Fenway. Gammon's was saying it then and mentioned it again in this article.

Cubs fans getting all defensive about Wrigley is hilarious, an calling Rickett's a "jew" because he wants the state to help out after he just BOUGHT THE CUBS, is also hilarious.

Wrigley being in that neighborhood is awesome IMO and whoever said Fenway is by a highway is about 5% right. Fenway is still located in a neighborhood and the turnpike isn't THAT close to it.

Pointing out the Red Sox were on steroids when they won their WS is also laughable because if the Cubs had won in 2003 2/3'rds of their OF was roided to the gills and on top of that no Red Sox failed any tests in any of the seasons they won.

gammons didn't mention that Fenway is a dump in the article. he alluded that it was in similar condition to Wrigley, but never used the word "dump".

just because he wants the state to help doesn't mean it's ridiculous. Fenway was renovated with some state funding.

Agree that Fenway and Wrigley both being in a neighborhood is awesome.

the red sox were definitely roided. the MLB's so-called "steroid testing" is what's laughable. Boston had many steroid-users, but it was the "steroid era" so what can you do.

Wrigley and Fenway are baseball cathedrals, like many have said before and should be kept as long as possible.

 

[Rice Cube]

the yanks with their amazing history built new, the cubs for sure can. this whole wrigley thing is dumb

I actually think it'd be a great idea to turn Wrigley Field into a museum if the Cubs fans and the city want it preserved so much. I'm not actually sure what the appeal is...I like watching baseball games, but you can't be objective and not think that new parks like AT&T Park, Target Field, Coors Field, or even renovated parks like Kauffman Stadium in KC are better overall. I do enjoy going to Wrigley because it's where my favorite team plays and it's easily accessible, but they could just as easily annex another plot of land next to one of the "El" lines and build a new place while keeping old Wrigley as a museum.

The conservatism by the fans and city and landmark status preventing major improvements on the park are really handcuffing the Ricketts and the Cubs in my opinion. I would much rather see the Cubs play in a sandlot and win multiple championships than to stay in a place where they've never won anything.

 

[nickofypres]

One would think the OPPOSITE of what you said. He just bought a baseball team so he may not have as much laying around as before.

Who would invest all their fortunes into one investment? Seems pretty stupid. I realize MLB teams are a for-sure payout, but having that be your only asset is pretty irresponsible. Look at the Wilpons.

 

[TheCubfather]

I actually think it'd be a great idea to turn Wrigley Field into a museum if the Cubs fans and the city want it preserved so much. I'm not actually sure what the appeal is...I like watching baseball games, but you can't be objective and not think that new parks like AT&T Park, Target Field, Coors Field, or even renovated parks like Kauffman Stadium in KC are better overall. I do enjoy going to Wrigley because it's where my favorite team plays and it's easily accessible, but they could just as easily annex another plot of land next to one of the "El" lines and build a new place while keeping old Wrigley as a museum.

The conservatism by the fans and city and landmark status preventing major improvements on the park are really handcuffing the Ricketts and the Cubs in my opinion. I would much rather see the Cubs play in a sandlot and win multiple championships than to stay in a place where they've never won anything.

I guess I'm greedy because I want them to stay in Wrigley and win multiple titles at the Friendly Confines.

 

[nickofypres]

The Yankees also had public/government funding.

If any MLB ownership didn't need money to build a stadium, its the fucking Yankees.

:smh:

Public built sports facilities are biggest **** you to sports fans.

 

[FirstTimer]

gammons didn't mention that Fenway is a dump in the article. he alluded that it was in similar condition to Wrigley,

Are you serious?

Gammons: Wrigley is a dump and Fenway was similar before it was renovated.

Any reasonable person would infer that Gammons felt Fenway was a dump before it was renovated.

This isn't some Doug Thonus esque leap.

the red sox were definitely roided.

Proof?

Show me the failed tests for those seasons.

And....go!

Not to mention how many WS winners do you think were "roided" pre testing? Yet two post testing teams win the WS with no positive tests in those seasons yet they are branded "roided" simply so some sad sack Cubs fans feel better about NOT winning?

 

[Rice Cube]

I guess I'm greedy because I want them to stay in Wrigley and win multiple titles at the Friendly Confines.

First the Cubs need a better long-term plan. Then they can try to win before Wrigley crumbles under its own age.

 

[FirstTimer]

Who would invest all their fortunes into one investment?

I'm pretty sure Rickett's has other investments outside the Cubs as well. It's NOT just the Cubs. So your "point" in rebuttle to mine means even less. Ricketts has already sunk millions of his fortune into the Cubs and has to protect his other interests and maintain a lifestyle. So why should he sink even MORE into the Cubs with no public help?

 

[nickofypres]

Ricketts has already sunk millions of his fortune into the Cubs and has to protect his other interests and maintain a lifestyle. So why should he sink even MORE into the Cubs with no public help?

Because its HIS investment. Why should tax payers pay for a stadium for him, for him to keep, and get richer on. If he wants a new stadium, he can build it himself.

Sorry I don't sympathize for the poor broke little millionaires.

 

[DewsSox79]

I actually think it'd be a great idea to turn Wrigley Field into a museum if the Cubs fans and the city want it preserved so much. I'm not actually sure what the appeal is...I like watching baseball games, but you can't be objective and not think that new parks like AT&T Park, Target Field, Coors Field, or even renovated parks like Kauffman Stadium in KC are better overall. I do enjoy going to Wrigley because it's where my favorite team plays and it's easily accessible, but they could just as easily annex another plot of land next to one of the "El" lines and build a new place while keeping old Wrigley as a museum.

The conservatism by the fans and city and landmark status preventing major improvements on the park are really handcuffing the Ricketts and the Cubs in my opinion. I would much rather see the Cubs play in a sandlot and win multiple championships than to stay in a place where they've never won anything.

well said!

 

[bleacherbum54]

I've been to Wrigley many times and it's great to watch baseball there but it's time for a new stadium. It's too old and I hate the fact that it's in the middle of a neighborhood.

It's time to get a state of the art facility. It'll never happen though, Wrigley is a cash cow and the Cubs will play there until it's no longer possible.

I concur

 

[TheCubfather]

Are you serious?

Gammons: Wrigley is a dump and Fenway was similar before it was renovated.

Any reasonable person would infer that Gammons felt Fenway was a dump before it was renovated.

This isn't some Doug Thonus esque leap.





Proof?

Show me the failed tests for those seasons.

And....go!

Not to mention how many WS winners do you think were "roided" pre testing? Yet two post testing teams win the WS with no positive tests in those seasons yet they are branded "roided" simply so some sad sack Cubs fans feel better about NOT winning?

Proof? lol...manny and ortiz confessed to using them. :lmao:

I don't do anything to "feel better" about not winning, it's pretty obvious that the red sox among other teams were roidboys. I wouldn't be too happy if a team I supported won by using that shit.

anyway, not sure why so many people are so quick to argue on a message board. chill out.

 

[Rice Cube]

Because its HIS investment. Why should tax payers pay for a stadium for him, for him to keep, and get richer on. If he wants a new stadium, he can build it himself.

Sorry I don't sympathize for the poor broke little millionaires.

That's probably why he didn't get the public aid when he asked for it a few months back. That and the part where the state is flat broke hehe.

If he wants revenue, he has to A) save some money; B) build a better product on the field; and C) find more ways to advertise within Wrigley Field. Then he can have the funds to spackle and superglue Wrigley Field some more, or to figure out how to set up a new stadium.

Think about it, by the time he's sunk all that money into buttressing Wrigley for another 10 years or whatever, he might as well have built a new stadium.

 

[nickofypres]

That's probably why he didn't get the public aid when he asked for it a few months back. That and the part where the state is flat broke hehe.

If he wants revenue, he has to A) save some money; B) build a better product on the field; and C) find more ways to advertise within Wrigley Field. Then he can have the funds to spackle and superglue Wrigley Field some more, or to figure out how to set up a new stadium.

Think about it, by the time he's sunk all that money into buttressing Wrigley for another 10 years or whatever, he might as well have built a new stadium.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Thank you.

 

[FirstTimer]

Because its HIS investment. Why should tax payers pay for a stadium for him, for him to keep, and get richer on.

If they want Wrigley to remain..they HAVE to. New York tax payers funded the new Yankee Stadium and that's "Steinbrenner's investment".

Rickett's just spent $900 million dollars to purchase the club. It's ridiculous to paint him as "cheap" because he doesn't want to pony up the $250 million for a new stadium/massive renovations.

If he wants a new stadium, he can build it himself.

He obviously can't....................

Sorry I don't sympathize for the poor broke little millionaires.

Give me a break. New Comisky was funded with public money...Did you disagree with that? Should Reinsdorf have paid for it himself?

 

[EnjoyYourTiger]

Exactly. sorry didnt mean the playing surface, meant the dimensions of the park, and that also cant be changed unless its torn down. dimensions in correlation to their bein no foul grounds or modern day bullpens, shits too small and close together,down the left field, right field walls. Eckstein homered in back to back games there.

Oh, gotcha. Yeah, it's tiny in comparison to other parks.

...........Did you not read the entire article or something?

Gammon's is right. Wrigley is a dump. So was Fenway. Gammon's was saying it then and mentioned it again in this article.

Cubs fans getting all defensive about Wrigley is hilarious, an calling Rickett's a "jew" because he wants the state to help out after he just BOUGHT THE CUBS, is also hilarious.

Wrigley being in that neighborhood is awesome IMO and whoever said Fenway is by a highway is about 5% right. Fenway is still located in a neighborhood and the turnpike isn't THAT close to it.

Pointing out the Red Sox were on steroids when they won their WS is also laughable because if the Cubs had won in 2003 2/3'rds of their OF was roided to the gills and on top of that no Red Sox failed any tests in any of the seasons they won.

The reason the White Sox got state aid is because U.S. Cellular is owned by the state (which totally sucks because Cubs fans' taxes went to the renovation).

He shouldn't have bought the Cubs if he didn't have the money to provide renovations to Wrigley. Sorry for calling it like it is. I don't think the state should pay half to fix up Wrigley. Illinois is broke as it.

Granted, I don't think the Cell should be owned by the state, but that's not exactly the point I'm trying to make here, even though it is a little hypocritical in some ways.

at referring to $250 million as "change"

Seriously?

One would think the OPPOSITE of what you said. He just bought a baseball team so he may not have as much laying around as before.

See above response.

Because its HIS investment. Why should tax payers pay for a stadium for him, for him to keep, and get richer on. If he wants a new stadium, he can build it himself.

Exxxaaaactlllllyyyyyy.

 

[FirstTimer]

Proof? lol...manny and ortiz confessed to using them. :lmao:

In 2004 and 2007? Odd. They didn't fail a test in either of those years. Why would they admit to using them?

 

[DewsSox79]

toms dad is the one floating the bill boys.

 

[nickofypres]

If they want Wrigley to remain..they HAVE to. New York tax payers funded the new Yankee Stadium and that's "Steinbrenner's investment".

And its wrong for the tax payers to pay for NYS. Didn't I already express that?

Rickett's just spent $900 million dollars to purchase the club. It's ridiculous to paint him as "cheap" because he doesn't want to pony up the $250 million for a new stadium/massive renovations.

He obviously can't....................

Then I guess they don't get a new stadium. Dude can afford an MLB team he can afford to build a stadium. The dudes loaded, cut the crap.

Give me a break. New Comisky was funded with public money...Did you disagree with that? Should Reinsdorf have paid for it himself?

Yes, he should of. Threatening to move the team to St. Petersburgh/Tampa Bay was a very underhanded thing to do.