HuskyCaucasian

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 03:15 PM) I think they don't need to move at all right now. But if they did in the future, I'd agree with you that closer is better, though the same location really is fine - just point it NE instead of SE next time. i 100% agree. (Selfishly, i want them in AH or Schaumburg. lol)

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 02:58 PM) Go to any weeknight game at The Cell. Huge portion of the crowd is people who worked during the day downtown - those people aren't trucking out to Orland Park, at least not nearly as often. And further, that business crowd is a big chunk of the suite/club/scout seat holders, where they make the big bucks. So that's problem number one. Number two, moving to the south suburbs would be great for one area, and terrible for the other 80% of the Metro area, as far as getting in and out. They'd go a lot less often. The city is central, it can draw from all over much more easily, and its south of downtown so you already get big south suburban draw. You gain little, and lose a lot. Third, you lose a significant chunk of the tourist crowd. I know its popular to point out the Cubs fan base being a bunch of people from Iowa, but fact is the Sox get some of those two. If the stadium is out there on the fringe, a lot fewer of those people will go. The Sox need to move closer to the Loop, not further away from it.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 01:04 PM) First team to the suburbs owns Chicagoland baseball. Something along 53, probably Schaumburg. I was trying to find it because the quote made me laugh. Some Cubs fan was saying that there was no way he'd go to a ballpark named after some business. When it was pointed out that Wrigley was the chewgum company, he left the conversation. Dumbass Cub fan. There's a couple of possible locations along 53, but not as much as you would think. There are two huge plots of land in Elk Grove and Schaumburg along 53, but they currently hold the radio transmitter towers for WBBM and WGN respectively. We also have a huge tract of land where our softball and soccer fields are located. I've said for YEARS that would be a prime spot. The best place along 53 is actually the current location of Arlington Park. You could build TWO or THREE stadiums with all the parking on all the land that Arlington occupies (Cubs and Bears?). I am sure AH would bring in a LOT more money by building one or two stadiums and a few hotels then they currently make with horse racing. Maybe the best place is along 90. I believe there is some land in Schaumburg, Hoffman Estates, and South Barrington that could be a possibility if they were able to buy it. The problem with urban sprawl is that a sports teams ability to get enough land to build a ballpark and all the parking is going to get harder and harder. By the way, i know for a FACT that the Busse farm in Elk Grove (where the Bears wanted to move) would be available for sale, but Elk Grove will kill that plan, and there's PLENTY of room for a stadium and the same amount of parking as there is at US Cellular.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 12:47 PM) If they tore it down and built a new Wrigley on the exact same spot, wouldn't that take years upon years? They'd have to knock it down, clear out all that debris, get the land all ready and build a new park again?? With Chicago weather delays? Wow. If they already have renovation designs, they need to renovate right there. Don't you think the city has to help out some? Moving the Cubs to some other location to build a new park like somebody said would be a disaster. The park and the experience is a the whole Cub experience isn't it? They'd be out of Wrigley for 2-3 years.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 12:49 PM) There are a ton of terrible seats in that place with obstructed views. I was refering to the views of the lake, the building. Yes, there are some bad seats. I've sat in one.

QUOTE (Brian @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 01:40 PM) Saw it made 24 mil at midnight showings. Wow. I'm going tonight. Me too AMC 30 in Barrington.

If you're gonna be touching my junk, I demand a happy ending.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) Here's the area everyone is worried about.... To the left of the "bend" there is room, and to the right there is room. It's primarily this part that everyone is worried about. Here's a better image, it's a lot closer than I thought...

Back in the old days, the field ran down the left field line, why is it now down the right field line?

Great Tweet: U.S. Cellular bought the naming rights at $68 million over 20 years

Here's the area everyone is worried about.... To the left of the "bend" there is room, and to the right there is room. It's primarily this part that everyone is worried about.

I'm really torn on this because I am trying to look at it as a baseball fan, a baseball team owner, and someone who appreciates history. As a sports fan: The park, as it stands today, is a dump. It's a load of crap. The views are great, the ambiance is great, but the parks amenities and overall seating space is pathetic. There is NO parking, but public transit is good, but not everyone has easy access to public transit to Wrigley. As an owner: I know that Wrigley is "the draw", not the team. Yes, people come to see the Cubs play, but Wrigley is one of the few parks that is filled no matter how bad the team is. Pittsburgh doesnt sell out and they have a ncie new park. Neither does Cincy. What's the difference? Wrigley. So, moving to a new park in the burbs or elsewhere in the city destroys your ability to draw fans when the team is down. However, a nice new ballpark gives you options to new revenue (parking, luxury boxes, more places for advertising) History: Wrigley is a classic. So is Fenway. But so was Yankee Stadium, Ebbets Field, Polo Grounds, Boston Gardens, and Chicago Stadium What do they all have in common? They're all gone. They all had great histories, but for a variety of reasons, they are all gone. You cant cling to history as a crutch. Do you want to be know as the Yankees (not "that team that plays in Yankee Stadium) or the Cubs ("that team that plays in Wrigley")? I do believe that Wrigley can be saved. They plans they showed are pretty impressive. But at what cost? Is it really work $400 million to try and rehab something old? The Yankees tried it, and 40 years later they built a new stadium.

There's plenty of room at US Cellular

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 19, 2010 -> 10:41 AM) http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/news/story?id=5824661 They will only use one end zone at Wrigley tommorrow. Whenever a team has the ball on offense, they will be driving towards the west end zone, towards home plate. They won't use the end zone in the outfield by the ivy. Thank god my seats are on the right goalline. Well, this was a rather embarrassing failure.

ok, who went to Potter at midnight?

This site has me laughing for hours: DamnYouAutoCorrect.com

Here we go again, Palin from her new book America by Heart:

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:11 PM) "Albert Haynseworth just fell down!" I all fairness, he might have gotten his feet tripped up. But he never mad an effort to get back up and into the play.

Raise your hand if you thought the Bulls would have a better record than the Heat....

My local AMC theater only has their "IMAX" movie times listed for Harry Potter 7:Part 1. Come on AMC! I need to know all your show times. I have to get a baby sitter.

Do you think deep down that Kate Middleton would like to strip down to a bikini and do Jägerbombs?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 11:39 AM) I can see why you'd say that...but really, the wikileaks work hasn't really seemed to make a big impact on anything. Oh I agree. But his story came from no where and was a pretty major story... even if the end result wasnt much of anything.

Julian Assange should be the person of the year.

A machine gun??? Did they think Al-Qaeda broke into the house? SHEESH!

it has to be the miners