Playoff appearances since 1990:

 

Bulls = 18

Bears = 7

 

Neither of the teams has any competition in the city in their respective sports, so your comparison doesn't really hold much weight.

 

For whatever reason, Sox fans are the only ones in Chicago who seem to hold the logic that not showing up makes them better fans. As long as that mentality exists, there is no REAL comparison between Sox fans and anyone else in Chicago, because they are the ones who are different. It isn't neighborhood, or safety, or bars, seat color, the direction the stadium faces, or anything else. I will never get why people take such personal offense to that, when it is White Sox fans who say stuff like that.

 

And to go back full circle to the begining of the recent discussion, when you don't go to games, or take in games, FOR WHATEVER REASON, the media isn't going to cover you as much either, because they know they will make more views, clicks, ratings, attendance, phone calls, etc off of Cubs fans. Pretty much the only thing Sox fans respond to these days is to be offended about something.

If only the White Sox had only taken a 20% after their title years.

 

Then even when the team was awful, the attendance started going up again. They gained fans after a .366 and .280 winning percentage. The White Sox lost fans after winning a division title. But, let's hear about all of things that make it different for the White Sox again.

Curry and Chandler were exciting times. Many fans thought if that went right, we would have another dynasty on our hands. It was even looking like that potential in 05 when they made the playoffs and Curry made major strides. Then Curry had the heart issue and signed his mega deal to New York. Bulls took short step back and then got Rose and were right back into being extremely competitive. Bulls had only a few teams that were horrifically uninteresting (and those were the very early years post-Jordan where we whiffed on some major free agents). I can't compare the two. If Sox had a NY Yankee like run and then stunk for 5 years, attendance would take a hit, but the attendance wouldn't be where it is today and it wouldn't have peaked where it did in 05/06.

Even when the Bulls were a perpetual laughing stock, they were amongst the NBA's attendance leaders.

This has little to nothing to do with why people don't go to the Cell. The Bulls transcended the sport of basketball for nearly a decade and built an enormous residual season ticket waiting list to show for it. That's a season ticket list for 41 games at a 21,000 stadium, both HALF of what the Sox have to fill. Considering the differences in sport, stadium, location, indoor/outdoor/weather factor, number of games, stadium capacity, team success history, and that residual season ticket waiting list, I really don't think you can draw many comparisons from that to the plight of Sox and the Cell.

For whatever reason, Sox fans are the only ones in Chicago who seem to hold the logic that not showing up makes them better fans.

 

What an odd and incorrect generalization

This has little to nothing to do with why people don't go to the Cell. The Bulls transcended the sport of basketball for nearly a decade and built an enormous residual season ticket waiting list to show for it. That's a season ticket list for 41 games at a 21,000 stadium, both HALF of what the Sox have to fill. Considering the differences in sport, stadium, location, indoor/outdoor/weather factor, number of games, stadium capacity, team success history, and that residual season ticket waiting list, I really don't think you can draw many comparisons from that to the plight of Sox and the Cell.

 

You can't be telling me that the United Center is a better location and neighborhood then USCF.

If only the White Sox had only taken a 20% after their title years.

 

Then even when the team was awful, the attendance started going up again. They gained fans after a .366 and .280 winning percentage. The White Sox lost fans after winning a division title. But, let's hear about all of things that make it different for the White Sox again.

 

They had a line of people 10,000 miles long ready to see the team from the Jordan years. Go figure, having a dynasty builds the fanbase.

 

You can't be telling me that the United Center is a better location and neighborhood then USCF.

 

You can walk to anywhere on Randolph, Madison, Lake, Grand, etc. A lot of nice spots are walking distance away.

Ah, love walking on Lake. Lovely walk.

For whatever reason, Sox fans are the only ones in Chicago who seem to hold the logic that not showing up makes them better fans. As long as that mentality exists, there is no REAL comparison between Sox fans and anyone else in Chicago, because they are the ones who are different. It isn't neighborhood, or safety, or bars, seat color, the direction the stadium faces, or anything else. I will never get why people take such personal offense to that, when it is White Sox fans who say stuff like that.

 

And to go back full circle to the begining of the recent discussion, when you don't go to games, or take in games, FOR WHATEVER REASON, the media isn't going to cover you as much either, because they know they will make more views, clicks, ratings, attendance, phone calls, etc off of Cubs fans. Pretty much the only thing Sox fans respond to these days is to be offended about something.

I don't think anybody here is making this point. We're just given the real and logical reasons why people don't go to the Cell, and the factors other stadiums/teams have in their favor.

If only the White Sox had only taken a 20% after their title years.

 

Then even when the team was awful, the attendance started going up again. They gained fans after a .366 and .280 winning percentage. The White Sox lost fans after winning a division title. But, let's hear about all of things that make it different for the White Sox again.

 

1) MJ

2) MJ

3) MJ

4) MJ

5) 6 titles vs. 1

6) Numerous playoff appearances versus a roughly 14% chance of even getting to the post-season.

7) Coaches fired for having one of the five all-time best winning percentages when our current regime has one of the most pedestrian records in team history

8) No compelling or exciting personalities...(Rodman vs. everyone in Chicago other than Bo and MJ when they were with the Sox)

9) Marketing, marketing, marketing

10) Complete lack of excitement...product is inferior...fans always will flock to something that's cool/trendy/popular/hip....to be "part of something" bigger, but they certainly don't want to be part of 10-12,000 fans unless they're huge baseball addicts

11) If you asked 1000 casual baseball fans outside of Chicago who was the best player for the Sox over the last 15 years or so, maybe 3-5% could come up with the name Paul Konerko.

I don't understand this thread. Isn't it bad enough to watch a team whom you have no control over its success or failures? Why add on to that the anxiety about how many people will enjoy that same product? Do I have to feel doubley bad when we lose 2-1 and only 17k show up? Should I pass out flyers? What is the point of this.

11) If you asked 1000 casual baseball fans outside of Chicago who was the best player for the Sox over the last 15 years or so, maybe 3-5% could come up with the name Paul Konerko.

 

I bet him and Frank are the only players anyone would name.

I don't think anybody here is making this point. We're just given the real and logical reasons why people don't go to the Cell, and the factors other stadiums/teams have in their favor.

I really don't care about any factor other then performance. Yes, cubs have benefited for whatever reason, but most teams are going to struggle with performance when they haven't had a lot of sustained success and post-season appearances. That is just the reality and more recently we have had some pretty awful teams to watch and as I've alluded to this team this year is probably the worst of the bunch to watch play (even more so then last years team that was horrifically frustrating to watch). When the product on the field stinks and the cost to go to games is their, what incentive does a person have to go pay. You don't get some huge discount on tickets when product sucks. Not much incentive to walk up and in 81 game season and with stadium capacity ~40K, that is a lot of potential seats to fill each and every night. Add in worse defense on the planet, cost, and poor fundamentals and I don't see why you'd watch.

 

Do you pay 10 bucks to see a great movie, sure, lots of people do. Do you pay 10 bucks to see Gigli, hell no (or at least I hope not...that would be a bannable offense). Yes, the 2015 White Sox are the theatric version of Gigle.

I bet him and Frank are the only players anyone would name.

Buehrle might get some love.

1) MJ

2) MJ

3) MJ

4) MJ

5) 6 titles vs. 1

6) Numerous playoff appearances versus a roughly 14% chance of even getting to the post-season.

7) Coaches fired for having one of the five all-time best winning percentages when our current regime has one of the most pedestrian records in team history

8) No compelling or exciting personalities...(Rodman vs. everyone in Chicago other than Bo and MJ when they were with the Sox)

9) Marketing, marketing, marketing

10) Complete lack of excitement...product is inferior...fans always will flock to something that's cool/trendy/popular/hip....to be "part of something" bigger, but they certainly don't want to be part of 10-12,000 fans unless they're huge baseball addicts

11) If you asked 1000 casual baseball fans outside of Chicago who was the best player for the Sox over the last 15 years or so, maybe 3-5% could come up with the name Paul Konerko.

 

It is funny that Sox fans will point to only the last 10 seasons to talk about how bad they have had it, but are willing to go back to the 1990's to talk about how good the Bulls have it.

For whatever reason, Sox fans are the only ones in Chicago who seem to hold the logic that not showing up makes them better fans. As long as that mentality exists, there is no REAL comparison between Sox fans and anyone else in Chicago, because they are the ones who are different. It isn't neighborhood, or safety, or bars, seat color, the direction the stadium faces, or anything else. I will never get why people take such personal offense to that, when it is White Sox fans who say stuff like that.

 

And to go back full circle to the begining of the recent discussion, when you don't go to games, or take in games, FOR WHATEVER REASON, the media isn't going to cover you as much either, because they know they will make more views, clicks, ratings, attendance, phone calls, etc off of Cubs fans. Pretty much the only thing Sox fans respond to these days is to be offended about something.

 

How is that any different in Oakland, Citi Field or Anaheim (who are bleeding thousands of fans this year despite a playoff appearance last year and the presence of Mike Trout, the best young player in the game, along with Harper)?

 

Where are these fans who show up season after season and support consistently losing teams, other than the Cubs (and they had big drop offs too over the last 2-3 seasons)?

 

Please don't try to argue the Giants in the seasons between their World Series appearances....or HUGE market teams with historical parks like the Red Sox, who've still enjoyed 3 World Series titles basically in the last decade.

 

Which team that has enjoyed LESS success on the field than the White Sox in the past decade (starting in 2006) has much better fan support/more loyal fans?

You can't be telling me that the United Center is a better location and neighborhood then USCF.

That was one of eight factors I mentioned that are different between the two stadiums. The UC may be easier to get to than the Cell for many, and the West Side has certainly been built up greatly since the '80s, but that's not the main point to take away from my post at all.

Ah, love walking on Lake. Lovely walk.

 

I'd gladly walk to Bottom Lounge before ever going to Cork & Kerry again

1) MJ

2) MJ

3) MJ

4) MJ

5) 6 titles vs. 1

6) Numerous playoff appearances versus a roughly 14% chance of even getting to the post-season.

7) Coaches fired for having one of the five all-time best winning percentages when our current regime has one of the most pedestrian records in team history

8) No compelling or exciting personalities...(Rodman vs. everyone in Chicago other than Bo and MJ when they were with the Sox)

9) Marketing, marketing, marketing

10) Complete lack of excitement...product is inferior...fans always will flock to something that's cool/trendy/popular/hip....to be "part of something" bigger, but they certainly don't want to be part of 10-12,000 fans unless they're huge baseball addicts

11) If you asked 1000 casual baseball fans outside of Chicago who was the best player for the Sox over the last 15 years or so, maybe 3-5% could come up with the name Paul Konerko.

 

 

It is funny that Sox fans will point to only the last 10 seasons to talk about how bad they have had it, but are willing to go back to the 1990's to talk about how good the Bulls have it.

 

 

How is that any different in Oakland, Citi Field or Anaheim (who are bleeding thousands of fans this year despite a playoff appearance last year and the presence of Mike Trout, the best young player in the game, along with Harper)?

 

Where are these fans who show up season after season and support consistently losing teams, other than the Cubs (and they had big drop offs too over the last 2-3 seasons)?

 

Please don't try to argue the Giants in the seasons between their World Series appearances....or HUGE market teams with historical parks like the Red Sox, who've still enjoyed 3 World Series titles basically in the last decade.

 

Which team that has enjoyed LESS success on the field than the White Sox in the past decade (starting in 2006) has much better fan support/more loyal fans?

 

Right on cue. Thanks.

The only reason I have ever cared about attendance is the possible impact it could have on payroll. If this was like the NBA or NFL, I wouldn't even pay attention to it.

Do you pay 10 bucks to see a great movie, sure, lots of people do. Do you pay 10 bucks to see Gigli, hell no (or at least I hope not...that would be a bannable offense). Yes, the 2015 White Sox are the theatric version of Gigle.

:lol:

It is funny that Sox fans will point to only the last 10 seasons to talk about how bad they have had it, but are willing to go back to the 1990's to talk about how good the Bulls have it.

What are you talking about dude? You're the one who brought up the Bulls.

The only reason I have ever cared about attendance is the possible impact it could have on payroll. If this was like the NBA or NFL, I wouldn't even pay attention to it.

 

That is the only reason people should even look at attendance honestly. I'll never get the idea of taking attendance personally, even when the numbers are right there.

The bulls the last decade have been in the playoffs almost every year. The white sox...have not.

That is the only reason people should even look at attendance honestly. I'll never get the idea of taking attendance personally, even when the numbers are right there.

 

And obviously I don't think anyone of us would ever like to see the Sox move out of Illinois, so 5,000 fans a night would probably eventually result in that.