Thank you for attending this press conference on short notice.
Owning the Cubs has been an absolute dream come true. After spending so many summer afternoons and evenings in the bleachers, I never could have imagined running the team I followed growing up. When I bought the Cubs form Tribune Co., I told Cubs fans worldwide my goak is a World Series championship, and for the Cubs to be a perennial National League power. Little did I know how difficult this challenge would turn out to be. I have decided to do whatever is necessary and possible to bring home aWorld Series championship. The night-game comproise, agreed to by the previous ownership group, is absolutely unworkable if the Cubs are to compete for a championship with any frequency. I have asked my friend Ald. Tom Tunney to submit to the full City council a bill rescnding the night-game limit, effective with the start of the 2011 season.
I have also asked the alderman to give fast-track approval to the extensive construction and renovation plans we have for the main grandstand, which will begin as soon as the Cubs play their final home game of the season. We hope to complete the renovation by Opening Day, 2011. We are confident that visiting Wrigley Field will be a much more enjoyable experience for Cubs fans once the main grandstand and concourses are rebuilt. It's absolutely essential that we have tom's full cooperation as we change the Cubs' 20th Century malaise to a 21st Century powerhouse. We will be unable to field a competitive team here in Lakeview without Tom's assistance.
As for the Cubs' on-field struggles this season, make no mistake: a tradition of losing is no longer acceptable here. When we arrived before the start of this season, we took on some very bad long-term contracts. We will no longer permit those contracts to interefer with our pursuit of a World Series championship. Players whom we believe are not contributing to our goals will be traded or released. There will be no exceptions.
We said at the beginning that this was Year One, not Year 102. Nothing has changed. Next year is a new opportunity, and we intend to take full advantage. Thank you very much.
Showing posts with label Ald. Tom Tunney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ald. Tom Tunney. Show all posts
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Wrigley costs the Cubs wins, Mr. Ricketts
Let me first note how gracious it was of Mr. Ricketts to respond personally to my letter. As Mr. Ricketts noted in his response, there are many demands on his time due to his position as owner of a Major League Baseball club.
My first point was to suggest a major renovation of Wrigley Field's main grandstand, which I believe has fallen into disrepair. Mr. Ricketts assured me it is perfectly safe. I'm sure he is right. But that solves barely half the problem. The Cubs currently charge top-tier prices (highest in the National League) for a third-rate fan experience. Any baseball fan fortunate enough to visit one of the 24 Major League ballparks built in the last 20 years notices significant differences right away: wide concourses, ample concessions and gift shoppes, clear sight-lines, and fan-friendly scoreboards and video boards. Also, from the owner's standpoint, Wrigley Field cannot produce revenue streams from luxury suites, club levels and VIP seating that other clubs enjoy. Wrigley looks and feels like a 96-year-old ballpark ill-equipped to handle large crowds 81 times a year. Only a major renovation with a rebuilt grandstand, I believe, will bring the Cubs to their rivals' level. Mr. Ricketts seems to think otherwise.
My second point is more serious and more pressing because I believe it affects the Cubs' on-field performance. I humbly suggested to Mr. Ricketts that he lobby the Cubs' alderman for more night games. Bigger crowds, higher television ratings, more television revenue, and fans being able to see games without leaving work early are all benefits of an expanded night-game schedule. The Cubs are also at a competitive disadvantage from playing 45 percent fewer home night games than their rivals. Whether it's five consecutive matinée starts (June 30 - July 4, 2010) or too many night games followed by day games, the players' rhythm is thrown off by their matinée-heavy home schedule. If the shortage of home night games costs the Cubs five wins a year, that's too many. I think it's a lot more. The new ownership group should be doing everything within its power to bring a World Series championship to Wrigley Field. I understand Mr. Ricketts wants to be a "good neighbor," as he put it. But that should not be his first priority. His first priority should be a World Series championship.
Furthermore, it seems the alderman and Hizzoner Da Mare have raised the community concerns regarding night games to mythological levels. Is the whole community against night games? Or is it the Little Old Lady at Addison and Southport? I would love to see a poll of the community; the Cubs might be pleasantly surprised. I attended a community meeting in November, 2003 regarding a proposed increase in night games. Despite the opposition's strong organization--by then it had been functioning for more than 20 years--attendees were overwhelmingly in favor of more night games. "Why stop at 30?" one man asked to resounding cheers. The Cubs have been in the neighborhood since 1916 and have hosted night games since 1988. A whole generation of children--the usual reason given for night-game restrictions--has grown up with night baseball in Lakeview. The Cubs' owners in the 1980's made a grave mistake agreeing to night game limits, and that is now restraining the Cubs' ability to win games.
Forcing fans, especially season ticket-holders, to miss work to attend games is elitist. The White Sox play three games during the business day this season (other than Opening Day, a traditional matinée). The Cubs play 27. Would a fan making a game-day decision prefer a game in the afternoon heat or an evening start with a breeze blowing in off the lake? Through 27 home dates (June 12), the Chicago Tribune reports Cubs' attendance is down 1233 fans from 2009, which the Tribune estimates is a $1.2 million hit to the Cubs' bottom line. That's serious cash, especially when one considers the Cubs are holding the three worst contracts in Major League Baseball: Carlos Zambrano, Aramis Ramirez and Alfonso Soriano. The Cubs cannot afford to wait for the current 30 night-game agreement to expire after the 2018 season. Despite Mr. Ricketts' desire to be "good neighbors," the Cubs need to act sooner rather than later. The one constant difference between the Cubs and the 26 teams that have won pennants since 1945 is night baseball. Yes, the Cubs' ownership was cheap and negligent for decades. Yes, the Cubs have had terrible luck. But the Cubs always play with a significant disadvantage because when other teams were busy installing lights and moving to a majority night-game schedule, the Wrigleys stuck it out. Cubs fans are still paying for that 65-year-old mistake.
Remember that banner some Cubs fans paraded through Wrigley Field in 1984? "39 Years of Suffering is Over," it said, referring to the pennant drought.
No, it isn't. And now it's 65 years. 102 years if one is counting championships.
My first point was to suggest a major renovation of Wrigley Field's main grandstand, which I believe has fallen into disrepair. Mr. Ricketts assured me it is perfectly safe. I'm sure he is right. But that solves barely half the problem. The Cubs currently charge top-tier prices (highest in the National League) for a third-rate fan experience. Any baseball fan fortunate enough to visit one of the 24 Major League ballparks built in the last 20 years notices significant differences right away: wide concourses, ample concessions and gift shoppes, clear sight-lines, and fan-friendly scoreboards and video boards. Also, from the owner's standpoint, Wrigley Field cannot produce revenue streams from luxury suites, club levels and VIP seating that other clubs enjoy. Wrigley looks and feels like a 96-year-old ballpark ill-equipped to handle large crowds 81 times a year. Only a major renovation with a rebuilt grandstand, I believe, will bring the Cubs to their rivals' level. Mr. Ricketts seems to think otherwise.
My second point is more serious and more pressing because I believe it affects the Cubs' on-field performance. I humbly suggested to Mr. Ricketts that he lobby the Cubs' alderman for more night games. Bigger crowds, higher television ratings, more television revenue, and fans being able to see games without leaving work early are all benefits of an expanded night-game schedule. The Cubs are also at a competitive disadvantage from playing 45 percent fewer home night games than their rivals. Whether it's five consecutive matinée starts (June 30 - July 4, 2010) or too many night games followed by day games, the players' rhythm is thrown off by their matinée-heavy home schedule. If the shortage of home night games costs the Cubs five wins a year, that's too many. I think it's a lot more. The new ownership group should be doing everything within its power to bring a World Series championship to Wrigley Field. I understand Mr. Ricketts wants to be a "good neighbor," as he put it. But that should not be his first priority. His first priority should be a World Series championship.
Furthermore, it seems the alderman and Hizzoner Da Mare have raised the community concerns regarding night games to mythological levels. Is the whole community against night games? Or is it the Little Old Lady at Addison and Southport? I would love to see a poll of the community; the Cubs might be pleasantly surprised. I attended a community meeting in November, 2003 regarding a proposed increase in night games. Despite the opposition's strong organization--by then it had been functioning for more than 20 years--attendees were overwhelmingly in favor of more night games. "Why stop at 30?" one man asked to resounding cheers. The Cubs have been in the neighborhood since 1916 and have hosted night games since 1988. A whole generation of children--the usual reason given for night-game restrictions--has grown up with night baseball in Lakeview. The Cubs' owners in the 1980's made a grave mistake agreeing to night game limits, and that is now restraining the Cubs' ability to win games.
Forcing fans, especially season ticket-holders, to miss work to attend games is elitist. The White Sox play three games during the business day this season (other than Opening Day, a traditional matinée). The Cubs play 27. Would a fan making a game-day decision prefer a game in the afternoon heat or an evening start with a breeze blowing in off the lake? Through 27 home dates (June 12), the Chicago Tribune reports Cubs' attendance is down 1233 fans from 2009, which the Tribune estimates is a $1.2 million hit to the Cubs' bottom line. That's serious cash, especially when one considers the Cubs are holding the three worst contracts in Major League Baseball: Carlos Zambrano, Aramis Ramirez and Alfonso Soriano. The Cubs cannot afford to wait for the current 30 night-game agreement to expire after the 2018 season. Despite Mr. Ricketts' desire to be "good neighbors," the Cubs need to act sooner rather than later. The one constant difference between the Cubs and the 26 teams that have won pennants since 1945 is night baseball. Yes, the Cubs' ownership was cheap and negligent for decades. Yes, the Cubs have had terrible luck. But the Cubs always play with a significant disadvantage because when other teams were busy installing lights and moving to a majority night-game schedule, the Wrigleys stuck it out. Cubs fans are still paying for that 65-year-old mistake.
Remember that banner some Cubs fans paraded through Wrigley Field in 1984? "39 Years of Suffering is Over," it said, referring to the pennant drought.
No, it isn't. And now it's 65 years. 102 years if one is counting championships.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Open letter to Tom Ricketts, new Cubs owner
Mr. Tom Ricketts
Chicago Cubs
1060 W Addison St
Chicago IL 60613-4305
Dear Mr. Ricketts:
I read about the proposed upgrades to Wrigley Field in the newspaper on Feb. 10. If you take a walk around Wrigley Field and compare it to other ballparks, I’m sure you would come to the same conclusion I did: the entire grandstand needs to be razed and replaced with a new, modern edifice. The new seating areas would include a luxury box level behind home plate; a club level; first-class skyboxes; a spacious upper deck; plentiful concessions stands and wide concourses. The players would enjoy a modern clubhouse and indoor batting/workout area. I hope you will work with an architect that will guide you through these plans and bring them to fruition before the aging structure collapses and hurts someone.
Just as important to the Cubs’ future success is a night-game schedule that resembles those of the Cubs’ league rivals. If you speak to the manager, coaches and players, they would likely tell you how important it is to play 55 home games at night, like their rivals do. Wrigley’s Friday matinees are especially hard on players, as other teams play all 13 Friday home games at night. There are far too many weekday matinees—27 this year, excluding Opening Day and Labor Day—while other clubs play five or fewer. Fans should not be forced to take days off to see the Cubs. Television revenue also suffers.
All that stands between the Cubs and a regular night-game schedule is Ald. Tom Tunney. He helped the Cubs revise their night-game agreement with the city in
2003. If you demonstrate to the alderman your commitment to revitalizing the neighborhood and bringing home a World Series championship, he would surely listen to your scheduling concerns.
Thank you very much for your attention to these important matters. Go Cubs!
Sincerely,
Chicago Cubs
1060 W Addison St
Chicago IL 60613-4305
Dear Mr. Ricketts:
I read about the proposed upgrades to Wrigley Field in the newspaper on Feb. 10. If you take a walk around Wrigley Field and compare it to other ballparks, I’m sure you would come to the same conclusion I did: the entire grandstand needs to be razed and replaced with a new, modern edifice. The new seating areas would include a luxury box level behind home plate; a club level; first-class skyboxes; a spacious upper deck; plentiful concessions stands and wide concourses. The players would enjoy a modern clubhouse and indoor batting/workout area. I hope you will work with an architect that will guide you through these plans and bring them to fruition before the aging structure collapses and hurts someone.
Just as important to the Cubs’ future success is a night-game schedule that resembles those of the Cubs’ league rivals. If you speak to the manager, coaches and players, they would likely tell you how important it is to play 55 home games at night, like their rivals do. Wrigley’s Friday matinees are especially hard on players, as other teams play all 13 Friday home games at night. There are far too many weekday matinees—27 this year, excluding Opening Day and Labor Day—while other clubs play five or fewer. Fans should not be forced to take days off to see the Cubs. Television revenue also suffers.
All that stands between the Cubs and a regular night-game schedule is Ald. Tom Tunney. He helped the Cubs revise their night-game agreement with the city in
2003. If you demonstrate to the alderman your commitment to revitalizing the neighborhood and bringing home a World Series championship, he would surely listen to your scheduling concerns.
Thank you very much for your attention to these important matters. Go Cubs!
Sincerely,
Thursday, February 11, 2010
A potential solution lurks in the Wrigley Field night-game saga
I'm disappointed it took me so long to come up with this.
The Cubs need more night games--eventually up to 55 home games at night per season, up from their current limit of 30. The Cubs' neighbors who forced through the city ordinance banning night games at Wrigley Field, with the help of former Ald. Bernie Hansen, want the Cubs to stay in the neighborhood. (The Cubs receive permission from the city to play a limited number of night games per season, but the ordinance does ban night games at Wrigley Field. That limited number stands at 30.) So the Cubs call Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) for a friendly meeting. Then the Cubs, in a respectful, polite way, will tell the alderman: If we don't start playing as many night games as we want, whenever we want (including Fridays and Saturdays), beginning with the 2011 season, we won't play a full schedule in Wrigley Field anymore.
With a little planning, the Cubs could probably implement this plan this season. Owner Tom Ricketts places a call to his crosstown colleague, White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf. Would it be all right if we used your ballpark for a few games? Uncle Jerry would be delighted. The decision wouldn't really be up to him; it would be up to the government agency that runs the taxpayer-financed and -owned ballpark. It would also need MLB commissioner Bud Selig's rubber stamp. But I'm sure everyone would be agreeable. Reinsdorf would love to show off his ballpark to a fresh audience of Cubs fans, most of whom would only venture to Bridgeport to see the Cubs anyway. With the current interleague schedule of just three Cubs games per season at U.S. Cellular Field, very few Cubs fans have ever visited the South Side ballpark because those tickets are in such high demand. Reinsdorf and the White Sox would enjoy additional revenue from Cubs games, which they would share with the Cubs.
Happily, several White Sox road trips and Cubs homestands coincide in the heat of the summer this season. Here's a sample itinerary:
Thurs. July 15 - Sun. July 25: the Cubs add another two night games to their schedule.
Tues. Aug. 2 - Mon. Aug. 9: the Cubs add another two night games to their schedule.
Mon. Aug. 16 - Mon. Aug. 23: the Cubs add another three night games to their schedule.
In three stretches, that's an increase of 7 night games--23 percent over the Cubs' permitted limit of just 30 night games in that dump Wrigley Field. But moving these games 8.1 miles south poses serious consequences for Wrigley's Lakeview neighborhood, commonly known as Wrigleyville. Moving so many games in the heat of the summer--which is the whole point, to give the players respite from the brutal sunshine. This is also the most profitable time of year for businesses that depend on Cubs fans spending time and money in the neighborhood. If the Cubs aren't home for this critical period, that would be devastating for numerous bars and restaurants.
And I think the Cubs should go right ahead and do it. The night-game limit is keeping the Cubs from their goal of bringing a World Series championship to Wrigley Field. If the Cubs convince their Wrigley neighbors the night-game limit makes it impossible for them to be competitive, and that they will seriously consider and act upon alternatives, the neighbors will knock down Ald. Tunney's door, demanding that he give the Cubs the night games they want.
Working this out with the fans is really a minor issue. The Cubs could provide bus service to U.S. Cellular Field from Wrigley Field and the Wrigley night parking lot (Lane Technical High School). Fans could convert their Wrigley seats to U.S. Cellular seats at the Cubs' website. Once Cubs fans visit Sox Park for the first time and enjoy the wide concourses, plentiful concessions, plentiful on-site parking, and unobstructed views of the action, they may not want to go back to Wrigley Field.
Then Uncle Jerry would have the last laugh.
The Cubs need more night games--eventually up to 55 home games at night per season, up from their current limit of 30. The Cubs' neighbors who forced through the city ordinance banning night games at Wrigley Field, with the help of former Ald. Bernie Hansen, want the Cubs to stay in the neighborhood. (The Cubs receive permission from the city to play a limited number of night games per season, but the ordinance does ban night games at Wrigley Field. That limited number stands at 30.) So the Cubs call Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) for a friendly meeting. Then the Cubs, in a respectful, polite way, will tell the alderman: If we don't start playing as many night games as we want, whenever we want (including Fridays and Saturdays), beginning with the 2011 season, we won't play a full schedule in Wrigley Field anymore.
With a little planning, the Cubs could probably implement this plan this season. Owner Tom Ricketts places a call to his crosstown colleague, White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf. Would it be all right if we used your ballpark for a few games? Uncle Jerry would be delighted. The decision wouldn't really be up to him; it would be up to the government agency that runs the taxpayer-financed and -owned ballpark. It would also need MLB commissioner Bud Selig's rubber stamp. But I'm sure everyone would be agreeable. Reinsdorf would love to show off his ballpark to a fresh audience of Cubs fans, most of whom would only venture to Bridgeport to see the Cubs anyway. With the current interleague schedule of just three Cubs games per season at U.S. Cellular Field, very few Cubs fans have ever visited the South Side ballpark because those tickets are in such high demand. Reinsdorf and the White Sox would enjoy additional revenue from Cubs games, which they would share with the Cubs.
Happily, several White Sox road trips and Cubs homestands coincide in the heat of the summer this season. Here's a sample itinerary:
Thurs. July 15 - Sun. July 25: the Cubs add another two night games to their schedule.
Tues. Aug. 2 - Mon. Aug. 9: the Cubs add another two night games to their schedule.
Mon. Aug. 16 - Mon. Aug. 23: the Cubs add another three night games to their schedule.
In three stretches, that's an increase of 7 night games--23 percent over the Cubs' permitted limit of just 30 night games in that dump Wrigley Field. But moving these games 8.1 miles south poses serious consequences for Wrigley's Lakeview neighborhood, commonly known as Wrigleyville. Moving so many games in the heat of the summer--which is the whole point, to give the players respite from the brutal sunshine. This is also the most profitable time of year for businesses that depend on Cubs fans spending time and money in the neighborhood. If the Cubs aren't home for this critical period, that would be devastating for numerous bars and restaurants.
And I think the Cubs should go right ahead and do it. The night-game limit is keeping the Cubs from their goal of bringing a World Series championship to Wrigley Field. If the Cubs convince their Wrigley neighbors the night-game limit makes it impossible for them to be competitive, and that they will seriously consider and act upon alternatives, the neighbors will knock down Ald. Tunney's door, demanding that he give the Cubs the night games they want.
Working this out with the fans is really a minor issue. The Cubs could provide bus service to U.S. Cellular Field from Wrigley Field and the Wrigley night parking lot (Lane Technical High School). Fans could convert their Wrigley seats to U.S. Cellular seats at the Cubs' website. Once Cubs fans visit Sox Park for the first time and enjoy the wide concourses, plentiful concessions, plentiful on-site parking, and unobstructed views of the action, they may not want to go back to Wrigley Field.
Then Uncle Jerry would have the last laugh.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Wanted: a Cubs owner who cares
Could the Chicago Cubs buy a decent owner?
The Wrigley family managed to field competitive teams in the 1930’s and 1940’s, winning the National League pennant several times. But the Wrigleys didn’t have the passion or the finances to compete with the big boys in New York or Los Angeles. Gee, they couldn’t even compete with the little boys in St. Louis or Cincinnati. The Cardinals and Reds have won 13 World Series championships between them since the Cubs won a pair in 1907 and 1908. The small-market river towns 275 and 300 miles away? How embarrassing.
It’s probably better that the Tribune Co. didn’t build a new ballpark in the early 1980’s after its 1981 purchase because that ballpark would now be obsolete. Still, failing to insist on a full night-game schedule is costing the Cubs dearly, in my opinion, both at the box office and on the field. The ballpark is worse than ever. (Seriously.) The Cubs were never financially competitive, and the team’s popularity with the fans may have induced laziness on the part of the ownership to be aggressive with front office and on-field talent. Some Cubs teams in the 1990’s and 2000’s were quite awful.
Now we have a new ownership, and after some initial optimism, I fear more of the same. I was excited that the Ricketts family wanted to renovate Wrigley Field extensively in preparation for its centennial year and the 2014 All-Star Game. Then I read the men’s restrooms will continue to be a public health hazard—no renovations are planned. I also read the Ricketts want to play 50 night games a year, up from the current schedule, limited by Chicago law, to 30 night games and none on Friday or Saturday. (Other teams typically play 55 night games at home.) But the Ricketts have not held meetings with Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) or with neighborhood groups to discuss the issue. Despite the standing law (which expires after the 2018 season, I believe), Ald. Tunney could amend the law to allow more night games. He would probably receive City Council approval since Council protocol is to allow aldermen to set policy in their own wards.
The Ricketts’ inaction at baseball’s recent winter meetings in Indianapolis was a serious tactical error. The Cubs missed out on upgrading any number of positions where they are desperately vulnerable. Milton Bradley will probably be playing Monopoly or Uno on the Cubs’ bench this season since the Cubs’ general manager was unable to deal him.
The biggest shock to Cubs fans, especially those who have seen the Cubs play in March, is the Ricketts may move the Cubs’ spring training facility from Mesa, Ariz. to Naples, Fla. Everything I have read about spring training in Florida (the Grapefruit League) is that it is crowded and kitschy with awful traffic. Add the arrogant Yankees and Red Sox fans to the mix, and it makes for misery in Alligator Alley. The Cubs and their fans were right at home in Arizona’s Cactus League, which now includes the White Sox (who moved from Sarasota) and the Dodgers (from Dodgertown/Vero Beach, duh) sharing space in Glendale.
The late Ron Luciano was the American League’s most famous umpire in the 1970’s. He was a fan favorite and wrote a best-selling book, which is a great snapshot of the era: The Umpire Strikes Back. He wrote that every off-season, he would beg his American League bosses to send him to Florida for spring training. Every year, they would send him to Arizona—which was exactly what he wanted. Ha! Very smart man.
As an aside, a Cubs move to Southwest Florida would fundamentally change the relationship Chicagoans have with Arizona. The Grand Canyon State becomes less desirable as a winter destination. The second-home market and spring-break vacations in the Phoenix area would never be the same without the Cubs in town. Unlike replacing Wrigley Field (great idea), leaving Arizona would be a sad end to a great tradition.
The Wrigley family managed to field competitive teams in the 1930’s and 1940’s, winning the National League pennant several times. But the Wrigleys didn’t have the passion or the finances to compete with the big boys in New York or Los Angeles. Gee, they couldn’t even compete with the little boys in St. Louis or Cincinnati. The Cardinals and Reds have won 13 World Series championships between them since the Cubs won a pair in 1907 and 1908. The small-market river towns 275 and 300 miles away? How embarrassing.
It’s probably better that the Tribune Co. didn’t build a new ballpark in the early 1980’s after its 1981 purchase because that ballpark would now be obsolete. Still, failing to insist on a full night-game schedule is costing the Cubs dearly, in my opinion, both at the box office and on the field. The ballpark is worse than ever. (Seriously.) The Cubs were never financially competitive, and the team’s popularity with the fans may have induced laziness on the part of the ownership to be aggressive with front office and on-field talent. Some Cubs teams in the 1990’s and 2000’s were quite awful.
Now we have a new ownership, and after some initial optimism, I fear more of the same. I was excited that the Ricketts family wanted to renovate Wrigley Field extensively in preparation for its centennial year and the 2014 All-Star Game. Then I read the men’s restrooms will continue to be a public health hazard—no renovations are planned. I also read the Ricketts want to play 50 night games a year, up from the current schedule, limited by Chicago law, to 30 night games and none on Friday or Saturday. (Other teams typically play 55 night games at home.) But the Ricketts have not held meetings with Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) or with neighborhood groups to discuss the issue. Despite the standing law (which expires after the 2018 season, I believe), Ald. Tunney could amend the law to allow more night games. He would probably receive City Council approval since Council protocol is to allow aldermen to set policy in their own wards.
The Ricketts’ inaction at baseball’s recent winter meetings in Indianapolis was a serious tactical error. The Cubs missed out on upgrading any number of positions where they are desperately vulnerable. Milton Bradley will probably be playing Monopoly or Uno on the Cubs’ bench this season since the Cubs’ general manager was unable to deal him.
The biggest shock to Cubs fans, especially those who have seen the Cubs play in March, is the Ricketts may move the Cubs’ spring training facility from Mesa, Ariz. to Naples, Fla. Everything I have read about spring training in Florida (the Grapefruit League) is that it is crowded and kitschy with awful traffic. Add the arrogant Yankees and Red Sox fans to the mix, and it makes for misery in Alligator Alley. The Cubs and their fans were right at home in Arizona’s Cactus League, which now includes the White Sox (who moved from Sarasota) and the Dodgers (from Dodgertown/Vero Beach, duh) sharing space in Glendale.
The late Ron Luciano was the American League’s most famous umpire in the 1970’s. He was a fan favorite and wrote a best-selling book, which is a great snapshot of the era: The Umpire Strikes Back. He wrote that every off-season, he would beg his American League bosses to send him to Florida for spring training. Every year, they would send him to Arizona—which was exactly what he wanted. Ha! Very smart man.
As an aside, a Cubs move to Southwest Florida would fundamentally change the relationship Chicagoans have with Arizona. The Grand Canyon State becomes less desirable as a winter destination. The second-home market and spring-break vacations in the Phoenix area would never be the same without the Cubs in town. Unlike replacing Wrigley Field (great idea), leaving Arizona would be a sad end to a great tradition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
