Stop the Renaming of Wrigley Field
I was EMailed recently about a petition to prevent the renaming of Wrigley Field, which I have conveniently linked for any of those who would like to go there and fill out their names.
It's actually kind of ironic, because I';m planning on initiating a petition to encourage the Cubs to sell Wrigley Field to the last brick in order to have more money to build a championship team. It's the Win at All Costs petition.
I've said it before - and probably said it better the first time - and I'll say it again. I don't care if the Cubs are playing baseball in the Budweiser Presents the Sears Center at Wrigley Field on the Best Buy Grounds in Chicago.
Considering that Wrigley Field was named after a chewing gum company where they sold Wrigley chewing gum during games, I can't really complain if they rename the park and it helps the Cubs buy another front-line ace to help deliver them a World Championship.
So, although I disagree with it, I have posted a link for petition.
Incidentally, I do believe that online petitions count for naught. I think the Tribune - or whomever - will be more inclined to consider a hand-signed petition, and nothing more.
correction
Wrigley field was named after P. K. Wrigley who was owner of the team.
Good Point
About the paper petitions vis-a-vis online petitions.
I also think the whole idea of protesting the Cubs selling the naming a stupid and half-baked sentiment. As you point out, Kurt, the park is ALREADY named after a company (or, more specifically, the man behind the company, but still). Aside from that, though, fans who are more interested in the ballpark than the team are the type of fans have been a boil on my ass long enough.
Not about using a company name
It's not about naming it after a company or not. It's about keeping something (in this case the name of a national landmark) that has been a tradition for decades. Would you be ok with renaming soldier field to Mcdonalds field? I would bet that wouldn't sit well with most Chicagoans.
Yes
To answer your question, yes, I would be okay with that. Put it to you this way. If the St. Louis Cardinals offered the Cubs say, 50 million a year to rename Wrigley Field the Cubs Suck Cardinals Rule Field, I'd support it because that's 50 million dollars more in their coffers that they can use to acquire some of the best free agents on the market - and to retain their current top talent from leaving.
I'm all for it.
Gotta agree
Although I would much rather they leave the name alone if renaming it brings in a crapload of money that the Cubs can use to build a better team then go for it. Regardless of what they call it it's still gonna be Wrigley to all of us and that's what we'll all call it anyway.
I remember here in Denver a few years back when the Broncos changed their uniforms and people were pissed. Then either that year they changed or the year after they won the first of their two Super Bowls and suddenly no one gave a shit about the uniforms anymore. Winning is all that really matters in the end.
Who says the team gets the money?
I guess I'm confused. Wasn't this whole thing brought by Zell as a possibility to help pay off some of the Tribune's debt? I didn't read anything that suggests the money from selling the naming rights would go to buying better players.
http://thundermatt.com
Consider this... every time
Consider this... every time the Cubs have sold naming rights, or increased advertising, or increased ticket prices, they've also increased the payroll. At this point, it's a safe bet that they wouldn't pocket the money.
This is ridiculous
How can u say that the tribune wouldn't pocket the money, for someone who grew up in chicago let alone my mother worked in the clubhouse at wrigley field through the first 7 1/2 yrs of my life....this is incredibally bogus how would you ever want wrigley field to lose its prestige even if it is through name...why dont you just rip down the ivy, level the cubby bear, and build a black goat farm outside the stadium after zell sells this...people and cubs fans alike need to really reject this idea, plus what do u want more money for...are we the new look yankees and were just gonna buy a championship...whatever happened to being competitive, i thought that was what baseball was about, I cant believe that we have derek lee, ramierez, soriano, zambrano, young emerging players with speed something (chicago has been missing), a trade for brain roberts in the works (who still is a top 2nd baseman), and one of the deeper pitching staffs in the league...the only thing that may be in question is a closer....but for now i'm content takin my chances with kerry wood and/or carlos marmol (who by the way had a WHIP just over 1 last yr)...and we have one of the highest profile coaches know to the game...so what do u need this est. 50 million or whatever it may be...cuz right now it just seems the only thing the cubs need to buy right now is apparently more support from there fans
Wow, good rant
I'm sure you made some great points in there, but I found it to be literally unreadable. (And, in this case, I'm using the word "literally" correctly.)
I think, though, that the gist of what you're saying is that, I dunno, it would be evil to sell the naming rights because of the tradition of Wrigley Field, or something.
Maybe I'm starting to see where Mike was going when he wrote about people caring less about the Cubs and more about the institution of Cubs baseball, which makes me lose faith in humanity.
Saying "what, do you want to be like the Yankees" is as weak as saying "sure, Clinton balanced the budget, but he was a filthy DEMOCRAT."
...uh ... great point there, Beavis.